Will ASEAN's hedging strategy work? Tommy Koh and Tang China
-
Will ASEAN's hedging strategy work?
As the new 'Great Game' between the US and China unfolds, grouping runs risk of being trampled underfoot
04:46 AM Jan 14, 2012
The Philippine foreign ministry this week protested to the Chinese embassy over the latest intrusion by Chinese vessels into Philippine waters in the South China Sea.
In Beijing, a foreign ministry spokesman reacted by calling for joint development of disputed areas in the Spratlys but reiterated that "outside forces" should not meddle in regional disputes - an oblique but standard reference to the United States.
Claims and counter-claims between China and several South-east Asian states over disputed parts of the South China Sea will continue into the new year, as they have been for years, without any resolution. The difference now is that China will increasingly insist that outside parties - meaning the US - stay out of the region's maritime disputes.
Chinese rhetoric defining the "internal" nature of the South China Sea disputes is expected to become more frequent as the US steps up its "return to Asia". This is only to be expected as Washington has only recently unveiled its "pivot" to the region - a consequence of its grand realignment following a strategic disengagement from Iraq and Afghanistan.
The growing US presence in Asia, especially East Asia, is bound to provoke a response from China. Beijing, however, seems unsure of how to react to Mr Obama's pivot strategy, resulting in ambiguity in its position.
On the one hand, some officials have tended to shrug off the pivot as a non-issue, saying the US has never left Asia to begin with. Yet, the media in Beijing, reflecting a more nationalistic view, have reacted with some alarm, seeing the pivot as directed at containing China's rise. This latter reaction is likely to be China's true feelings.
China's muted official line, however, suggests Beijing's fear of being cast as an aggressive rising power, though China's anxiety over the American pivot is likely to grow in intensity as the US steps up its re-engagement in East Asia.
Besides the South China Sea, North Korea, under a new Beijing-supported regime, will also test US-China relations. In turn, the US can be expected to further ramp up its strategic thrust into Asia.
This response and counter-response is giving an East Asian twist to what the commentariat is increasingly referring to as the "new Great Game". As it unfolds further, South-east Asia - as a bloc of the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) - will find its diplomatic skills increasingly tested.
In the old great game during the Cold War, the protagonists were the US and the Soviet Union. In the new great game, while the US remains the established power, China is the new emerging giant. There is one difference, though: In the new great game, analysts concur, ASEAN has emerged as a significant facilitator - hedging and balancing itself between the two powers.
Significantly, the US pivot to Asia was unveiled by President Barack Obama in Australia just before he attended the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Bali on Nov 18 last year. That Bali EAS was itself historic due to the unprecedented participation of an American president. By his presence, Mr Obama underscored US seriousness with its pivot-to-Asia strategy - much to the quiet satisfaction of ASEAN, of course. But will, and can, the US sustain it?
The US return to Asia through the EAS lends importance to ASEAN as a central player in the East Asian region. Indeed, the emergence of the EAS is yet another manifestation of ASEAN's role as shaper and builder of the regional strategic architecture.
In this, ASEAN has generated for itself influence far beyond what each member state could wield individually. Yet it is a delicate game not without risks. The biggest risk of balancing and hedging is the loss of balance and of being trampled underfoot as the elephants fight for their turf.
How China reacts to ASEAN's hedging depends on how Beijing perceives ASEAN in the context of the larger US pivot. Is ASEAN seen as the extended arm of the US to contain China?
ASEAN is highly sensitive to how it is viewed by a rising China. It does not want to be dragged into China's fight with the US - and ASEAN has a long historical memory.
At the close of 2011, prominent Singapore strategic thinker Tommy Koh turned to history to speculate which dynasty from old China would surface in modern form to confront a future ASEAN: Would it be a Ming China, a Tang China or a Qing China?
A Tang China, he said, would be benign. A Ming China would, on the contrary, be imperialistic. A Qing China would not be much different from a Ming China. Given the contrasting historical precedents, Prof Koh told a regional conference co-organised by the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies in December, there is today in South-east Asia some latent uncertainty about China.
He said: "Will China become a power that would expect others in the region to be subservient to it, as the Mings did? We want China to be like the Tang Dynasty - open, respectful of others, not like the Mings. We need to hedge our bets in case the China of the future is not China of the Tang dynasty, but China of the Qing dynasty or the Ming Dynasty." Prof Koh's parting shot: "Our hope is that China will continue to be a benign power."
In as much as ASEAN sees China to be more benign than threatening, said Prof Koh, China should not see the US re-engagement in Asia as an attempt to contain it. ASEAN's fundamental desire is to be friends of both and enemy of neither. It is this desire that has given birth to "ASEAN centrality" - a doctrine and mantra that was absent in the past but which is in essence a balancing and hedging strategy.
The regional security architecture that ASEAN is constructing, brick-by-brick, is, however, still fragile. If it is seen as evolving, it is precisely because the region is in a state of flux. Regardless, it is clear which powers will determine its final shape.
Yang Razali Kassim is a senior fellow with the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University.http://www.todayonline.com/Commentary/EDC120114-0000001/Will-ASEANs-hedging-strategy-work
-
At the close of 2011, prominent Singapore strategic thinker Tommy Koh turned to history to speculate which dynasty from old China would surface in modern form to confront a future ASEAN: Would it be a Ming China, a Tang China or a Qing China?
A Tang China, he said, would be benign.How come Tang China is benign? They also fought many wars and killed buddhists wah?
Wars involving Tang Dynasty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wars_involving_Tang_Dynasty
In 845, Taoist Emperor Wuzong of the Tang Dynasty initiated the "Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution" in an effort to appropriate war funds by stripping Buddhism of its financial wealth and to drive "foreign" influences from China. Wuzong forced all Buddhist clergy into lay life or into hiding and confiscated their property.
During this time, followers ofChristianity, Islam, Judaism,[3]Manichaeanism and Zoroastrianism [4] were persecuted as well. The persecution lasted for twenty months before Emperor Xuanzongascended the throne and put forth a policy of tolerance in 846.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Buddhist_Persecutions_in_China#Third
Tommy Koh wants PRC to be like Tang China? He senile or what?
The Tang Dynasty (618-907) represents another high point for the Middle Kingdom in terms of its military might, conquest and establishment of vassals and tributaries, foreign trade, and its central political position and preeminent cultural status in East Asia.
One of the most ambitious rulers of the dynasty was Emperor Taizong of Tang (r. 626-649). He initiated several significant war campaigns in Chinese history, most of them against powerful Turkic groups ofCentral Asia. This includes campaigns against Eastern Tujue, Tuyuhun,Tufan, the Xiyu states of the Tarim Basin, and the Xueyantuo.
In a formidable alliance with the Korean Silla Kingdom, a combined Tang-Silla fleet made a decisive victory over the Korean Baekje Kingdomand her Yamato Japanese allies in the naval Battle of Baekgang in 663. Emperor Taizong also invaded northern Korea in an effort to help theirSilla Kingdom ally crush its rival kingdom of Goguryeo to the north.
Taizong's other intention in invading northern Korea was to secure territory of an old Chinese commandery in northern Korea that had been lost since the Goguryeo Kingdom captured it from the Jin Dynasty in the 4th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Imperial_China#Tang_Dynasty
-
China now completely surrounded by US allies/puppet-states...............
East - Japan, SKorea, Taiwan
West - US bases in Central Asia
South - Pakistan, India, S'pore
-
If U.S economy cannot recover its growth, I don't think they can succeed in retarding and containing China's growth and influence.
I support the strengthening of China in order to destroy the U.S dominated western centric world order.
Brzezinski has similar views:
The book is full of sharp advice: the US should prod Europe to bring both Russia and Turkey into an enlarged west.America should hedge against China’s rise, without explicitly attempting to contain it.
Most important, the US should revitalise its domestic economy if it wants to stave off further decline. On all counts, Brzezinski seems pessimistic about the likelihood that Washington’s elites will start to act strategically again. “If the US doesn’t revitalise at home, it will fail internationally,” he says. “If it does, we may not necessarily fail internationally – but we will have to be intelligent to succeed.
But if we continue to fail domestically, we will have no chance internationally, even if we do the right things.”
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/4d03c5f6-3ac1-11e1-a756-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1jQqcV79c
If U.S continues to weaken and cannot recover, the balance of world power will shift forcefully to asia. I support that.
-
Originally posted by Susanteo2011:
China now completely surrounded by US allies/puppet-states...............
East - Japan, SKorea, Taiwan
West - US bases in Central Asia
South - Pakistan, India, S'pore
Maybe time to destroy China then. Nothing against China, but with friends like Dalfarce, they end up looking very bad. Sometimes, the best policy is to just shut up before making you and your "friends" look worse, though I've a very strong suspicion that the Central Commitee would repudate all knowledge of Dal's existence. With reason. -
Originally posted by Underpaid:
Maybe time to destroy China then.I think if China is destroyed, the balance of world power will swing decisively to the U.S and the west and U.S will be left even more unchecked. They will attack more countries and kill more people.
U.S imperialism will increase in intensity and be more widespread.
After USSR collapsed, U.S power was left unchecked and they increased their wars and rampage in the southern developing states.
That was also the period of U.S hegemony and they began their project of world dominance and imposing of the neoliberal economic order on the entire world aka globalisation.
Do you want that?
You know my position regarding U.S imperialism and U.S hegemony.
-
YAY TO MASS MURDER AND WW III!!! YAY!! KILL EVERYONE USA!! Start with Dalfarce and you'll get a 2nd Nobel Prize Obama! :P Pick up your game USA, it's been 15 years since you were the solo superpower, and you still havn't conquered the world or used nukes or chemical weapons yet, poor showing!! In case some of you missed it, that was sarcasm. Obviously Dalforce has been brainwashed or indoctrinated into being anti-US, the mono-mania one topic focus is a dead giveaway. If this is what China does to it's people, I'll be happily anti-China. My mind's my own, hands off please. Though I suspect it's more self-delusion/indoctrination.
-
Originally posted by Underpaid:
Pick up your game USA, it’s been 15 years since you were the solo superpower, and you still havn’t conquered the world or used nukes or chemical weapons yet, poor showing!!
What about depleted uranium in Iraq?
Two decades of uncontrolled contamination
It is 20 years since the first major use of depleted uranium munitions in the 1991 Gulf War, which resulted in significant contamination in areas of Iraq and Kuwait. Two decades on and in spite of a global outcry against their use, the controversial armour-piercing weapons, fired from armoured vehicles and aircraft, are still employed or stockpiled by around 20 states.
Depleted uranium weapons in Iraq, drastic birth defects in Fallujah
http://sfbayview.com/2009/depleted-uranium-weapons-in-iraq-drastic-birth-defects-in-fallujah/
If this is what China does to it’s people, I’ll be happily anti-China.Why you so anti-China? China did not attack other countries and kill their people or contaminate them with depleted uranium.
China fought in the cause of anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, anti-neocolonialism and anti-racism.
China supported communist uprisings all over the world in the past, but it has ended that policy and it now does not impose its own political system on others.
China has its flaws and it must reform its autocratic system but on the whole I still support China.
A strong China is necessary for the balance of world power, that is my belief.
-
I'm anti-China because you are pro-China. See what I mean about destroying your own cause? You made yourself enough of a pest to make me turn against you AND your friends that I don't directly know. Bad politics. And that DU article is bullshit. No DU is heavily radioactive, otherwise it won't be called " DEPLETED" duh... As a medical professional I tell you DIRECTLY, that the problems with DU come from metal toxicity, not radiation, and "large areas" is a serious exaggeration as any NS boy can tell you how small shell fragments or rounds are compared with a large plot of land. Quit looking at those sites that only say what you want it to say, there is a saying for this kind of phenomenom. A self-licking ice cream cone.
-
Looked through the photos, you know what hydrocephellation is? It's not a genetic disorder, it's "water in the head", a physical problem. Someone's been selling you a false bill of goods.
-
Originally posted by Underpaid:
I’m anti-China because you are pro-China.
So I pro-U.S you anti-U.S?
I anti-China, you pro-China?
How dumb is that?
Someone’s been selling you a false bill of goods.
I don't believe.
Battlefields contaminated with depleted uranium bred cancer plague
In Iraq, many doctors believe that the radiation leaked from old weapons used by foreign forces in 1991 and 2003 are continuing to have a deadly impact.
-
I'm from the medical profession. What do YOU do for a living? "So I pro-U.S you anti-U.S? I anti-China, you pro-China? How dumb is that?" About as dumb as "I anti-US, you must be anti-US too". If you had come here rapsodizing about the US of A, I would have deflated you too. I believe in objective truth without emo. You're just way too emo.
-
Originally posted by Underpaid:
I’m from the medical profession. What do YOU do for a living?
So? You expert on effects of depleted uranium?
Two reports, one by the US army and the other by the World Health Organization, warned about the dangers of depleted uranium before the 2003 war.
-
On metal toxicity. And I did physics. And genetics. You may not know it, but international organizations are also very big liberal platforms, so their reports have a slight slant you have to correct for. For example "wow new forms of cancer blah blah" is bullshit, that was not due to more radiation anywhere, all forms of cancer have already occured naturally in one form or another, a springoff of Murphy's Law of Statistics. Why there are new "CLASSES" of cancer is due to the rise of genetic marking tools to better differentiate existing cancers. So you see the trick they tried to pull on you? A rise in cancer "classification" is not equal to "new types of cancer". There are only so many organs in your body to screw up.
-
WHO ‘suppressed’ scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears in Iraq
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5749.htm
Documentary – The Doctor, the Depleted Uranium, and the Dying Children
SYNOPSIS: An award winning documentary film produced for German television by Freider Wagner and Valentin Thurn. The film exposes the use and impact of radioactive weapons during the current war against Iraq. The story is told by citizens of many nations.
It opens with comments by two British veterans, Kenny Duncan and Jenny Moore, describing their exposure to radioactive, so-called depleted uranium (DU), weapons and the congenital abnormalities of their children.
Dr. Siegwart-Horst Gunther, a former colleague of Albert Schweitzer, and Tedd Weyman of the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) traveled to Iraq, from Germany and Canada respectively, to assess uranium contamination in Iraq.
-
BTW, one thing you may not know and we medical staff really detest about media. They're not medical trained, yet they talk like they know what they're talking about. Push them a bit, and they fall apart. Most of the tiime, they also simplify to the point of misrepresentation, sometimes because they don't know, others because of deliberate agendas. My lecturer was once involved in a lawsuit by media using her name to publish crap, and I know of 2 more cases like that personally. Media not = medical.
-
Comment on your link. "Johnathen permalink April 19, 2011 17:16 This movie is the biggest load of BS, false propaganda I have ever seen in my life. The idea of using depleted urinaium bombs by americans struck me as rather counter-intuitive but i thought id give the film a chance. Immediately we were introduced to a man who was president (or whatever) of the “Uranium Research Medical Center�. Well upon further investigation, I found that not only does this ‘center’ have a fake website and address with no information, but the address it posts is an abandoned church, and the phone number is un-assigned. – Dont believe me? Look it up yourself. Thus immediately you see a movie using an ‘expert’ in which they try and give credit as being the head of some organization, except it is a completely fake organization. The point being the movie begins with a complete lie and made up story and continues with unadulterated false hoods. Sad and pathetic piece of anti-american propaganda and anyone who reads into this film with out verifying everything said needs to think again"
-
You got PUNKED Dalforce!! lol
-
This is not the appropriate forum for Dalforce's posts.
I hope the mods can remove these posts.