Nearly a quarter-century has elapsed since the Khmer Rouge held power in Cambodia (1975-78). Yet Cambodians still are shadowed by that catastrophic experience, and by conflicting legacies from other parts of their country's past. Cambodians continue to struggle to come to terms with what the Pol Pot era meant, and with what has happened to them since. After centuries of relative isolation, they must also contend with changes in Cambodia's identity in what seems to be an ever faster moving world. Views of Cambodia's history and destiny, formed in colonial and Cold War times, no longer seem to fit. But new interpretations have not yet taken hold. Epitomizing this confusion is the issue of bringing surviving Khmer Rouge leaders to justice. Over the last decade or so, efforts toward this end have inched forward and bogged down, beset by clashing political priorities and notions of justice and culpability. Cambodians ask themselves: Should we insist on remembering, or allow forgetting? Why? And with what implications for the future? David Chandler is the leading English-language historian of Cambodia. He holds degrees from Harvard College, Yale University, and the University of Michigan. From l972 to l997 he taught Southeast Asian history at Monash University in Australia. Since then he has held appointments at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the University of Oregon, and Cornell University. His books include A History of Cambodia (3rd ed., 2000), Brother Number One: A Political Biography of Pol Pot (2nd ed., 1999), and Voices from S 21: Terror and History in Pol Pot's Secret Prison (l999). His many other writings include coauthorship of the classic history text, In Search of Southeast Asia (1971), the 3rd revised edition of which should appear next year.

The prevailing view in international relations that security alliances are inevitably sustained by mutually perceived threats can be challenged in the present post-Cold War context. It will be argued in this presentation that 'alliance mutuality' can better explain ongoing U.S. security ties with Australia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand than traditional explanations for alliance politics. Dr. William T. Tow has been teaching with the University of Queensland's Department of Government since 1991. He was previously an Assistant Professor with the University of Southern California's School of International Relations. He has authored or edited ten books and numerous working papers, journal articles and book chapters on East Asian security problems and is completing a book on this issue as it relates to the 'realist/liberal' debate in international relations. He is a member of the Australian Foreign Minister's Foreign Affairs Council, the Australian Members Board of the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific (CSCAP), and the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). In 1995, he co-authored a major study on US security policies in Asia for the IISS and he has consulted for several government agencies in both the United States and Australia. He is a dual Australian/US citizen.

After a brief description of historical legacies, Dr. Katahara looks at changes and continuities in the patterns and contents of civil-military relations through an exploration of the jurisdictional boundaries in the two areas: the structure of political domination; and national security policy making. This study is part of East-West Center's project on the State and the Soldier in Asia, directed by Muthiah Alagappa. Dr. Eiichi Katahara teaches Japan's diplomatic history and international relations in Asia and the Pacific in the Faculty of Law at Kobe Gakuin University, Japan (1992~). He held a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of California's Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (1991-1992) and at the Australian National University (1989-1991), lectured in Japanese Politics in the Department of Political Science and was a research fellow in the Australia-Japan Research Center. He has published articles on topics related to Japan's security policy, and security affairs in the Asia-Pacific region. His recent publications include "Japan's Plutonium Policy: Consequences for Nonproliferation" (The Nonproliferation Review, Vol.5, No.1, 1997); "Japan's Concept of Comprehensive Security in the Post-Cold War World" (in S. Shirk & C. Twomey eds. Power and Prosperity: Economic and Security Linkages in Asia-Pacific, 1996). He has also written background chapters on Japan for Asia Pacific Security Outlook 1998 and Asia Pacific Security Outlook 1999 (forthcoming) (edited by Charles Morrison).

This presentation will focus on the effects of the economic crisis on poverty in Southeast Asia illustrated by a case study of Indonesia. Particular attention will be paid to the government responses with social safety net programs and how these responses have been influenced by government perceptions of the role of rural-urban dynamics and the urban informal sector. This presentation is based upon research carried out over the last sixteen months in Indonesia. The final part of the talk deals with the issue of inserting social policy into development plans in the period of economic recovery in Indonesia. Terry Mc Gee has spent more than 40 years carrying out research in Southeast Asia. He has held appointments at the University of Malaysia, University of Hong Kong and the Research School of Pacific Studies, Australia National University (Canberra), as well as UBC since l978. He is the author of The Southeast Asian City (l967), Essays on Third World Urbanization ( l971) and co-editor of The Extended Metropolis in Asia (l991) and Mega-Urban Regions in Southeast Asia (l995) he has acted as a consultant for UNDP and CIDA on urban policy in Asia.

In 1975Ð76 the fall of Saigon was followed by national reunification and the establishment of the Socialist Republic. Access to the Mekong Delta was widely expected to facilitate rapid neo-Stalinist industrialization and the appearance of a powerful military threat to capitalist SEA. But this did not happen. By 1981 partial reforms had permitted all state enterprises to operate in markets and some degree of agricultural decollectivisation. In the second half of the 1980s there was a clear de-Stalinization of everyday life. And by 1989Ð90 a recognizable market economy had emerged. Since then the Vietnamese Communist Party has, with some success, negotiated a major opening-up of the country to foreign contacts. Vietnam has joined ASEAN, and has seen the emergence of land, labor, and capital markets, and the confused processes by which classes form. Fundamental economic and political change has therefore occurred. Growth has been rather fast and the use of state violence minimal. Politically, for the still-Leninist VCP, the shift from Plan to Market has been a great success. What is the political economy basis for this? Despite emergent capitalist classes and a market economy, the political economy of "post-transition" Vietnam is heavily marked by its recent history, and remains very different from other ASEAN members. Notwithstanding revolutionary change, dualities common to both the traditional and modern political economies have offered great potential for political restructuring. In this sense "development doctrines" are perhaps less exotic and more indigenous than elsewhere in SEA. This facilitates relatively harmonious political adaptation and is the key to understanding change. For example, wide rural land access, with a collective tinge in the most densely populated areas, has a strong and pervasive effect upon the macro political economy. "Voice and exit" are enhanced. Thus we see rather high levels of migration, and risk bearing be farmers. Rural GDP has grown fast through the 1990s. Also, real wages in urban areas tend to be higher and the labor regime less brittle. What are the political implications of such a land regime? At the end of the day, one reason for the lack of extensive state violence against the population seems to be that the party/state has sufficient sources of support and power for tense economic issues in the rural areas to be fought out without property rights needing violence to enforce them. These issues are fought out locally (within cooperatives and communes) and in macro contexts (access to world markets). But in the rural areas the state does not, apparently, need to support particular economic interests for its survival. One reason for this is that the "land issue" has been addressed through the adaptation of socialist models, so that large-scale land property is not (yet?) a major issue. Dominant groups in the rural areas do not depend upon land access for their incomes. Adam Fforde is a development economist. He holds an Oxford MA (Engineering Science and Economics), a London MSc (Economics) and a Cambridge PhD (Economics). He studied Vietnamese in Hanoi during 1978/79 and was a visiting scholar at the National Economics University (Hanoi) in 1985Ð86. He lived in Vietnam from 1987 to 1992 while working as an advisor to the Swedish aid program, and in Australia from 1992 to 1999, where he was a visiting fellow at the ANU and Chairman of Aduki Pty Ltd (Consultants). He is now senior fellow at the SEA Studies Programme, National University of Singapore. He has published on topics including the economic development of north Vietnam prior to 1975, agricultural cooperatives, and the transition from plan to market. He is currently working on class formation and the emergence of factor markets in the 1990s, industrial reform since the early 1960s, and Vietnamese development doctrine.

The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum completed its first ten years in 1999. It is appropriate to pause and look back at its evolution over this period, and look forward to assess its future role in the multilateral world of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This paper attempts both of these tasks from a New Zealand perspective. The factors and forces behind regionalism, its points of confluence and conflict with multilateralism, and its future role in a globalised international economy are all addressed in this paper. How the forces of regionalism are shaping up in the Asia-Pacific region, and how New Zealand - a small open economy - is linking itself into it are anlysed to put New Zealand's recent economic reforms in an international perspective. To what extent New Zealand and other countries in the Asia-Pacific area can learn and benefit from the experiences of one another is brought into sharper focus in the paper. Professor Srikanta Chatterjee is a professor of international economics at Massey University in New Zealand. A native of India, Professor Chatterjee studied economics at the Universities of Calcutta, India, and Surrey and London, England, receiving his Ph D from the London School of Economics. Besides New Zealand, Professor Chatterjee has been on the full time faculty in universities in India, U.K., Australia, Japan and Fiji. He has also been on the visiting faculty in Australia, Bangladesh, Botswana, China, Italy, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mauritius, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, South Africa, Swaziland and Vietnam. In 1997, Professor Chatterjee was a Japan Foundation Fellow at the Tokyo Keizai University, and, in 1998, he spent a semester at the Kyoto Ritsumeikan University as a New Zealand Asia 2000 Foundation Visiting Professor of Asia-Pacific Studies. Currently a Fulbright Travelling Fellow, Professor Chatterjee is visiting Berkeley, and attending a conference in San Diego before going on give lectures at the University of Colima in Mexico. Professor Chatterjee's teaching and research interests include international economics, international business, the Asia-Pacific economies, inequality and income distribution, and the economics of the household.

Professor Gomes will discuss the role of computer-mediated communication in the construction of diasporic identities among Goans. This is part of a broader project focused on the politics of culture among Goans, examining the trends and identity expressions that relate to the re-establishment of Indian "roots"and heritage. Professor Gomes is a Malaysian-born Australian of Goan Indian descent. He teaches anthropology at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia. He has researched and published extensively on Malaysia's indigenous peoples (Orang Asli), focusing on demographic patterns, ecological issues, and political economy. Apart from his Goa project, he is currently writing a book, partly autobiographical, on cultural politics in Malaysia.