The United States and the ASEAN group of nations have further strengthened political, economic and security ties, after their second full-scale summit in New York.

President Barack Obama said the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which groups ten countries, had the potential for true world leadership. President Obama also made it clear that he saw Asia as a vital plank of US foreign policy.

DR EMMERSON: In the run-up to the summit, there was a big question. Would the partnership be declared as being strategic in nature? That was a key word in the discussion and what happened was the leaders basically finessed the issue. It's not hard to suspect that they worried that if they declared a strategic partnership with the United States, this would cause alarm in Beijing. Because let's remember in the run-up to this summit, we've had a lot of activity - the split between China and Japan over the disputed islands, one could continue with some evidence of a more muscular Chinese foreign policy, its commitment to its claim to possess basically the entire South China Sea, escalating that to the level of a core interest, presumably equivalent to their interest in recovering Taiwan. I could go on, but in many case, it was understandable that the subtext of the meeting was what will China think? So basically what the summit did was to finesse the issue. They decided to pass on the question of raising the partnership to quote - a strategic level - unquote, to the ASEAN US Eminent Persons Group, presumably expert advisors that would be convened and would make recommendations down the road.

And one of the most remarkable things about the statement was how much ground it covered. I mean, among the topics and issues that the leaders committed themselves to do something about, were 14 as I count them, 14 different subjects. Human rights, educational change, trade and investment, science, technology, climate change, interfaith dialogue, disaster management, illicit trafficking, international terrorism, I could go on. So it is clear to me that one of the tasks that ASEAN and the US will have to face in the coming months, is to try to insert some sense of priority.

LAM: On that issue of priority, the US President, Barack Obama, of course, postponed a couple of visits to Indonesia due to pressing domestic demands. Did he in anyway express American commitment to the ASEAN region?

DR EMMERSON: Yes, this was particularly kind of, I suppose you could say, evident in the fact that the meeting occurred at all, finally it was organized. It lasted two hours. He was apparently quite engaged and engaging during that period of time. And I think there is no question that the United States under his administration is committed to South East Asia as a region, indeed has agreed with the leaders of ASEAN, that ASEAN should play a central role in the process of building regional cooperation in East Asia.

LAM: And, of course, one of the topics that came up as well was the South China Sea, that entire region, given the competing maritime and territorial claims vis-à-vis the Spratley and Paracel Island groups. Do you think China is watching the US relationship with ASEAN, this growing relationship - do you think Beijing might be watching it with unease?

DR EMMERSON: Yes, absolutely. I am confident that they are watching it with considerable unease and I note that the statement that the leaders made, made no reference whatsoever to the South China Sea, presumably because of sensitivity with regard to Beijing's possible reaction. The topic was implicitly mentioned, but not explicitly.

LAM: And what about within ASEAN, the grouping itself? The UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, on the weekend said that the ASEAN nations' credibility might suffer if they did not take a tougher line with Burma and this is in view of the upcoming elections in November. This is presumably directed at specifically China and India, but it could also be referenced to ASEAN could it not, because Burma is a member of ASEAN. Do you see that changing anytime soon with ASEAN, that ASEAN countries, leading members like Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, that they might take a stronger stand with the military junta in Rangoon?

DR EMMERSON: The election in Myanmar, if I can call it an election, since it will be highly compromised and manipulated will take place, at least is scheduled to take place November 7th. Indonesia does not take over the chairmanship of ASEAN until the 1st January. So the question is, since Indonesia is a democratic country, arguably, the most democratic of any country in South East Asia, will it use its opportunity to try to put pressure on Burma in the year 2011? My own view is that ASEAN will probably not fulfill Ban Ki-moon's hope, will not exercise significant pressure on the junta. Instead, we could get the opposite situation in which so long as there is not major violence associated with the election, it will essentially be received by ASEAN as a kind of minimally-acceptable basis for assuring the Burmese junta that ASEAN still treats them as a full member. In other words, it's quite possible that the junta may get away with what I take to be a kind of facade effort to legitimate their rule.

In mid-September, honors students from the Interschool Honors Programs convened by FSI's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation traveled to Washington, D.C., with their faculty advisors for senior-level meetings and policy briefings. They met with senior U.S. government officials from the White House, State Department, Homeland Security, and the intelligence community, with representatives of international organizations such as the World Bank, and NGOs, think tanks and other policy forums engaged in international affairs.

In mid-September, honors students from the Interschool Honors Programs convened by FSI's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation traveled to Washington, D.C., with their faculty advisors for senior-level meetings and policy briefings. They met with senior U.S. government officials from the White House, State Department, Homeland Security, and the intelligence community, with representatives of international organizations such as the World Bank, and NGOs, think tanks and other policy forums engaged in international affairs.

CDDRL Policy Briefings

Led by CDDRL Director and FSI Senior Fellow Larry Diamond, Deputy Director and FSI Senior Fellow Kathryn Stoner, and FSI's %people5%, CDDRL students engaged in policy discussions with the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, the World Bank, the National Security Council, the Center for International Private Enterprise, the Inter-American Dialogue and the Millennium Challenge Corporation.  Sessions were held at the Open Society Institute founded by George Soros and the Community of Democracies.  Students met at the U.S. State Department with Policy Planning staff and the Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs for frank discussions of U.S. policy priorities, the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review and the transformative effects that emerging economic powers, such as China, India and Brazil are exerting on trade, credit, investment, innovation and governance of major and political and economic institutions.

During these sessions, CDDRL students delved into efforts to advance and secure democracy, economic development, good governance, rule of law, corruption control, civil society, and a free media. In the current environment, marked by repression in many countries, multi-pronged efforts to help ensure that the pluralistic institutions of a vibrant civil society are allowed to prosper took on  particular importance.  Another key issue was the role of information technologies, in building and supporting democracy, by creating a robust network of activists and promoting collective action.

“It was eye-opening to see the diverse mechanisms through which one can effect positive social change. I learned that it is possible to successfully bridge the two worlds of policy and academe. The meetings made me think about the many different routes to a possible career in the dynamic world of Washington politics.”
 Kamil Dada ’11, CDDRL

"A key objective of the Washington trip is to expose these talented students to the challenges of policy formulation, implementation, and assessment, as they prepare to write their honors theses this academic year," said Kathryn Stoner-Weiss. For some students, it was a first exposure to the policy process in Washington. Others had interned in policy positions in the nation's capital and overseas, and used their opportunities in September to report back on findings of their previous work, renew contacts and glean new insight and information on evolving issues.

"The discussions we held with senior officials were full, frank, and often, off-the-record to give the students a firsthand opportunity to engage in candid exchange on major issues and to pose probing questions," said Larry Diamond, CDDRL Director. "The players, issues, and dilemmas that arise in the policy process are not always evident from the outside."

CISAC: Focus on Security Issues

The students in CISAC's Interschool Honors Program in International Security Studies-led in Washington by Martha Crenshaw, FSI Senior Fellow and professor (by courtesy) in the Political Science Department; Lynn Eden, Senior Research Scholar and CISAC Associate Director for Research; and teaching assistant Michael Sulmeyer, a CISAC pre-doctoral fellow and third-year Stanford law student-focused on major national and international security issues, including nuclear weapons policy like the new START Treaty to reduce nuclear arms and the Nuclear Posture Review, and counter-terrorism issues such as intelligence gathering and regional analysis. CISAC students first met with four veteran national security reporters at The New York Times, and later with members of the intelligence community, including the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Michael Leiter, and the Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, Christopher Kojm.

“This was my first visit to Washington, and I could not have asked for a more comprehensive or enjoyable introduction to the nation’s capital. The broad array of institutions and people we experienced was a salient reminder of just how diverse this country truly is.” Devin Banerjee ’11, CISAC

Students also met with Paul Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs. Prior to his government service, Stockton had been a scholar at CISAC and had taught CISAC honors students for three years. CISAC students met with Antony Blinken, who serves as National Security Adviser to Vice President Biden. The students also were exposed to research and publication think-tanks like the Brookings Institution, RAND Corporation, the Center for a New American Security and the New America Foundation. At the end of CISAC's first week in the capital, the students met a dozen Washington-based alumni of the program over dinner, where alumni provided valuable research resources and job advice to their younger counterparts.

"The Washington component of CISAC's honors program provides an invaluable opportunity for our students to learn how the policy-making process works, explore the complexities of international security, and test their preliminary ideas about the topic they have chosen for their honors thesis," said Martha Crenshaw. "In turn, the officials we meet invariably wish to spend longer with our students, some even rearranging their schedules (or trying!) to continue a fascinating and candid conversation."

Highlight: The National Security Council

A major highlight of this year's trip, for both the CISAC and the CDDRL students, was a policy discussion at the National Security Council with two leading Stanford political scientists and foreign policy experts serving in the Obama administration. Political Science Professor Michael A. McFaul, former director of CDDRL and deputy director of FSI, is now Senior Director for Russia on the National Security Council and the president's top advisor on Russia, and Assistant Professor Jeremy M. Weinstein, an affiliated CISAC and CDDRL faculty member, serves as Director for Democracy on the National Security Staff.  Students engaged in a lively discussion of U.S. foreign policy priorities, U.S.-Russian relations, democracy, human rights and economic development.

"Our honors students are fortunate to have the chance to engage in high-level policy discussions, especially with Stanford faculty members serving in Washington," said Coit D. Blacker, Director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, who directs the CISAC honors program with Martha Crenshaw and who, under President Clinton, served as special assistant to the President and  Senior Director for Russian, Ukrainian, and Eurasian Affairs on the National Security Council. "Direct exposure to the policymaking process, with all its promise and pitfalls, will make them better scholars and future thought leaders."

"I was struck by the innovative ways in which certain agencies approach democracy promotion," said CDDRL honors student Ayeesha Lalji '11. "I think the struggle is often in packaging programs in the right way so that an impervious nation becomes more open to a vital component of social, political, or economic development."

"The discussions with prominent policy thinkers and current and former senior officials made a deep impression on our students," said Larry Diamond, CDDRL Director.  "These young people--who will go on themselves to be leaders in these fields-- got a vivid sense of how the policy process really works, and why service in government and public affairs is, despite the frequent frustrations, an exciting and noble mission."

"CISAC's ten days in Washington provide our students exceptional access to practitioners of various types and at all levels of the policy world, as well as inside knowledge of today's critical issues," said Martha Crenshaw. "The experience also establishes a solid foundation for a year-long intellectual experience in a weekly research seminar devoted to producing a thesis that makes an original contribution to the field of international security."

The Program on Arab Reform and Democracy is pleased to announce its seminar series for 2010-11, titled “Elections and Changing Political Dynamics in the Arab World”. The series kicks off with two seminars on October 7 and November 18, examining elections in Iraq and Jordan, respectivel.

Two more seminars will take place on January 13, 2011 (with Fred Lawson on the Bahraini elections) and March 10, 2011 (with Elias Muhanna on the Lebanese elections). This will be followed by a one-day conference on Friday April 29, 2011 titled “EDemocratic Transition in Egypt”.

The ‘fair society' motto has been the centerpiece in the second half of the Lee Administration.

-Gi-Wook Shin, director of Shorenstein APARC and KSP

On August 8, 2010, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak put into place the largest cabinet reorganization since he took office, nominating 48 year-old Kim Tae-ho as prime minister. However, after only 21 days, failing to pass a confirmation hearing of Parliament, Kim Tae-ho took the initiative to declare his resignation while waiting for Parliament to take action following the vote on his prime minister nomination. South Korea's prime minister [post] is without any real power; however, with a high parliamentary status, it is also in reality an important auxiliary to the president. Now into the second half of Lee Myung-bak's term, confronted with the dilemma of needing to identify a prime minister for a fourth time, one cannot help but raise the question: what is going on with South Korean politics?

The ruling Grand National Party hoped to pariah Kim Tae-ho, who in the prime of life, would have been able to give Li Myung-bak's government an infusion of "reform," "communication," and a "fresh" approach, but the opposition party also questioned Kim Tae-ho's political qualifications. From August 24-25, when the Parliament confirmation hearings convened, the Democratic Party also threw in several heavy accusations-Kim Tae-hoe's receiving bribes and illegal loans to raise campaign funds, having a public bus for his personal use, ordering full-time civil servants to do housework, and his wife accepting bribes and improperly managed properties-and strongly opposed Kim Tae-ho as Prime Minister. Gi-Wook Shin, director of Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, says: "These allegations are not new. Though the prosecution has cleared Kim of bribery charges, I think the fact that he lied about his ties with Park Yeon-cha, a convicted businessman at the center of a high-profile bribery scandal, was the last straw. A photo also surfaced after the hearing showing Kim standing next to Park at a date several months earlier than Kim testified to having made his first acquaintance with Park." Park Yeon-cha is the former chairman of Taekwang Industrial. By the end of 2008's "Park Yeon-cha Gate" [scandal], numerous South Korean political figures were involved in the bribery scandal,  and former President Roh Moo-hyun also committed suicide.

"Kim Tae-ho's ambiguous statements have also left the ruling party and the public feeling disappointed. Kim Tae-ho was not widely known outside of his South Gyeongsang Province office. President Li Myung-bak praised him to South Korean society for being young, for having strength and charisma, and for being an honest, reliable politician. Now voters naturally are questioning his integrity and this has become a barrier for Lee Myung-bak's administration," says Dr. Insung Lee, director of Yonsei University's East Asia International Studies Institute.

Kim Tae-ho believes there are some accusations that are not very fair. Dr. Shin suggests: "What Kim meant by "unfair" was the fact that his confirmation hearing focused in large part on making personal attacks on Kim, and throwing harsh criticism of the ruling party, rather than serving its purpose to prove he was unqualified for the PM position." This no doubt exposed the intense power struggle between South Korea's political factions, and even differences within the Grand National Party.

"Lee Myung-bak should not introduce the subject of Kim Tae-ho when talking about matters of the next presidential election," says Dr. Lee. In 2004, Kim was elected governor of South Gyeongsang Province, becoming the youngest governor. During the time that he was the provincial governor, he actively promoted the "South Coast Sunbelt" development plan as a national project. Through word of mouth, he easily won the 2008 local government re-elections. According to the Constitution, Lee Myung-bak is unable to run for president again. Because of this, public opinion holds that he had the intention to train Kim Tae-hoe for the 2012 presidential candidacy. "The opposition party members at the hearing increasingly attacked Kim Tae-ho, in part to prevent this kind of arrangement from taking place," says Dr. Lee.

Dr. Chung-In Moon, professor of political science at Yonsei University pointed out: "People believe that Lee Myung-bak selected Kim Tai-ho to compete in the 2012 general election against in-party rival Park Geun-hye. Since this card is obsolete, Lee Myung-bak now cannot help but stand with Park Geun-hye. I cannot decide for certain how long this will last-the Lee camp will certainly find their own candidate." The internal struggle between the Grand National Party's inner factions was exposed in the battle of the recent Sejong City construction plan amendment. Park Geun-hye, the daughter of the leading "Second Faction's" former president Park Chung-hee, publicly sang a different tune towards Lee Myung-bak, displaying a hope to follow up with the plan to promote the construction of Sejong City. At the time of Parliament's vote, 50 of the ruling party's 168 members voted against the pro-Park opposition party. After former Prime Minister Chung Un-chan announced he would resign, Park Geun-hye raised the issue, holding Lee Myung-bak to be the primary lead of the Sejong City amendment and the one who should bear the responsibility.

On the day that Kim Tae-ho made his declaration to resign the prime minister nomination, those nominated to be the Minister of Culture, Sports, and Tourism and Minister of Education and Economics, also took the initiative to resign because of the suspicion of having accepted bribes. After several days, Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan was also forced to resign due to the incident of his daughter's receiving "special admission" to become a senior civil servant. President Lee Myung-bak expressed: "I accept their resignation. I believe this will lead to the starting point of a fair society." Dr. Gi-Wook Shin believes: "The 'fair society' motto has been the centerpiece in the second half of the Lee Administration. As President Lee said in his liberation day speech in August 2010, 'A fair society is where each individual has to take responsibility for the outcome of his or her undertakings . . . A fair society constitutes the ethical and practical infrastructure for the advancement of the Republic.' To this effect, Lee reportedly instructed his secretariat to toughen the screening of ethical backgrounds of candidates for top government posts. Putting emphasis on higher ethical and moral standards can be seen as a positive sign of Korea's democratic advancement. It is not the only measure, but it is also an important measure for the betterment of South Korean politics."    

Translation by Sarah Lin Bhatia