Geopolitics of ASEAN+ region

[Viet]

@kalu_miah

I see so. Actually a Great Game is currently played by major players in the region, competing for influence or even hegemony.

On one corner is China, the dominant power. One the other side we see Japan, Australia and in some distance Russia.
America as a outside superpower wants to retain its leading position in the Asia/Pacific. It sees Beijing as a serious competitor, hence puts 60% of its naval assets to the region within a decade. Europe plays a minor role, so India.

And what´s about VN? The Sino-Vietnam relationship is complicated. To describe it comprehensively can fill book shelfs. In short we cooperate with China, while we look for ways to contain them. China does the same to Vietnam.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

I understand your reservations. But we are not talking about current situation or even a situation 10 years from now. We are talking about long term goals, perhaps 2-3 decades down the line.

Also consider, how different the EU states are from Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Finland to Ireland or from Cyprus to Portugal. But they have voluntarily chosen to be part of EU, with referendum votes. Premature introduction of common currency Euro, before more consolidation took place, caused the current crisis, but they are trying to find a way out and I am sure will succeed with ECB eventually guaranteeing all bonds originating in EU countries.

EU motto: United in diversity
Motto of the European Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ASEAN is already an existing regional entity and there is ongoing integration process as we speak, which I am sure you are well aware of, as Indonesia is a big part of ASEAN. What I tried to address here is a possible future vision for an expanded ASEAN that will include a few more states.

I explained in this thread why small states are always at a disadvantage when competing with large states:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164048-kalu_miahs-new-world-order-road-map-future.html

Because of the reasons explained above, big states always call the shots and small states have to follow. That is why USA still call the shots among Euro origin countries and that is why China will call the shots in Asia and in the world as well, later. India is big but its slow and has a lot of inertia, so its growth will take time. But even India at this stage is trying to be a regional hegemon, at least in South Asia and would like to extend its influence in nearby or other faraway regions.

I see EU as a natural effort by small states to team up, integrate and move towards creation of a larger state, even if it remains a rather loose confederation. I believe this is the wave of the future as explained here by well known academics on regional studies:
http://www.smp.fsv.cuni.cz/Hettne.pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...74HwCg&usg=AFQjCNGLagsUNEAJQuO0QrRa0owL0tGk4g

I will also post a later paper by the same author. It is long, but it covers New Regionalism with some level of detail.

Essentially I see a multipolar world emerging in the future with the world coalescing into about 7 final regional entities:

1. North America + EU (NATO bloc)
2. Latin American Union (UNASUR+Mexico)
3. African Union + GCC+ ( http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180771-geopolitics-gcc-region.html , http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180774-geopolitics-african-union.html )
4. Eurasia+ (Eurasian Union or former Soviet Union + Turkey + Iran + Pakistan + Afghanistan + Mongolia) ( http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region.html )
5. ASEAN+
6. China
7. India

Why people would choose these routes, because just like EU and NATO, people will try to maximize their power and influence by joining a bigger team when such option is made available to them.

You don't get it do you? We are just too different. We have Communist, Junta, Monarchy & Constitutional Monarchy, Socialist & Republic in the ASEAN. I'm not even counting the amount of Cultures we have. To unify under the same banner we need to share the same value. Which are of course is never going to happen.

 

[kalu_miah]

@kalu_miah

I see so. Actually a Great Game is currently played by major players in the region, competing for influence or even hegemony.

On one corner is China, the dominant power. One the other side we see Japan, Australia and in some distance Russia.
America as a outside superpower wants to retain its leading position in the Asia/Pacific. It sees Beijing as a serious competitor, hence puts 60% of its naval assets to the region within a decade. Europe plays a minor role, so India.

And what´s about VN? The Sino-Vietnam relationship is complicated. To describe it comprehensively can fill book shelfs. In short we cooperate with China, while we look for ways to contain them. China does the same to Vietnam.

A balance of power game is going on and has been going on in the past, in every corner of the world.

The renewed focus on Asia is because China is rising and destabilizing the status quo. Also, the center of gravity of world economic output (GDP) and hence economic and military power is shifting back to Asia, specially East Asia, from Europe, after several centuries of interregnum.

If Asians continue to fight with each other, then USA still has a role, but lets say at some point, in 2-3 decades, Japan and S Korea figure out that USA is not enough to protect them from the overwhelmingly superior Chinese military machine (if and when China gets to that point), then they will have to look for other alternatives to bring a balance, even while keeping the USA option open. That is the point of ASEAN+. Whether this will be enough to eventually remove US bases, it all depends on how things turn out and how powerful a possible ASEAN+2 security alliance can become and if and when it switches from NATO to SCO umbrella.

VN is one of the border countries that China either did not want to absorb or could not absorb as its own. Historically I think it fought many wars with the Chinese and has some common ancestry. My impression about Vietnam is that it is one of the most powerful countries in ASEAN. Even if its population is less than half the size of Indonesia, or almost same size as Philippines, VN stands out as much more of a fighting force, unlike Indonesia or Philippines, both of which are archipelago countries with many islands, which provides them with a natural defense. They did not have to fight large empires and survive, like VN did. So I think VN has a special place in ASEAN and will be instrumental in creating a more powerful and unfied ASEAN.

Japan was never colonized. Korea was a vassal state, but it was a successful vassal state that was able to retain its identity, avoiding direct occupation and assimilation, except for a short Japanese occupation for 35 years. Both Japan and Korea have had Sinic influence, but never direct occupation.

Japan and S Korea and ASEAN have a mutual opportunity to create a security alliance. If Japan, S Korea and China can agree to an integration plan for the region, then it is very much possible to develop not just an integrated developed region, but a tight security alliance under SCO umbrella, as an alternative to the US bases.

So the initiative will have to come from Japan, S Korea, Vietnam and perhaps Indonesia, and the green signal has to be obtained from China.

But like Reashot says in his post, may be it is a little too early to talk about such things, except as some exotic possibility. In every endeavor, we need to consider if a goal is beneficial, if it is, then we should visualize such a goal in our vision for future and work towards it, without worrying about how difficult things look today.

 

[Viet]

@kalu_miah

The rise of China has changed everything in Asia. For some it is a blessing, other see it as a threat. Among China´s neighbors, there are two countries in particular that on one side profit from the economic rise of China, but on the other side also feel the inscreasing threat of its giant neighbor: Japan and VN. One must look into the history to undertand why so. You have made some correct points. It is once again complicated.

In short, both Japan and VN have ambition in the region, that is not in China´s interest.

VN is very vulnerable as it shares a common land border with China. That´s the reason why every step we take is very carefully calculated, how China sees it.

JP is protected by the sea. It can afford to act more independently and take an aggressive stance toward China.

 

[kalu_miah]

@kalu_miah

The rise of China has changed everything in Asia. For some it is a blessing, other see it as a threat. Among China´s neighbors, there are two countries in particular that on one side profit from the economic rise of China, but on the other side also feel the inscreasing threat of its giant neighbor: Japan and VN. One must look into the history to undertand why so. You have made some correct points. It is once again complicated.

In short, both Japan and VN have ambition in the region, that is not in China´s interest.

VN is very vulnerable as it shares a common land border with China. That´s the reason why every step we take is very carefully calculated, how China sees it.

JP is protected by the sea. It can afford to act more independently and take an aggressive stance toward China.

Excellent points. Geopolitics is like three dimensional chess game, as played by Mr. Spock in Star Trek, if you are familiar with this TV and movie series.

My wife is Korean in her twenties and we often discuss the Korean situation. Korea is kind of in the same boat like Vietnam, with a land border with China and got divided by post WW II cold-war era politics of communists vs capitalists, but unlike Vietnam, it could not unify in the Korean war. South Korea remained under US control and it may not have been a bad thing for them.

Now the situation in Korea is like this. Christianity is still increasing and Christians together with the rich Chaebols support the current Grand National Party of Lee Myung Bak (half Japanese), the past President and the newly elected Park Geun-hye, daughter of late President Park Chung Hee. This party is close to the US and want to continue US control of this country. The Uri Party of late President Kim Dae Jung OTOH is against US control of Korea, support a gradual reduction of US influence in Korea and a return to the sunshine policy of constructive engagement with North Korea. They are more open to the concept of Asia for Asians and kicking out US bases from the region.

Now North Korean nuclear policy has become one of the key issues in East Asian politics and geopolitics. If and when North Korea successfully develops a smaller nuclear war head and a perfect delivery mechanism, then that will be a game changer. In that situation, both South Korea and Japan would want to go nuclear to create a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) situation to balance against this threat. My wife mentioned that this is the chatter that is going on among South Koreans. If and when, S Korea and Japan go nuclear, then essentially the point of US bases used as the current balancer mechanism become moot, null and void and would essentially make way for removal of these bases.

Since the removal of these US bases are in the interest of China and all of Asia, I would then argue that, it might be in the best interest of all Asians as well as Chinese to see that North Korea soon develops these technology and force both South Korea and Japan to go nuclear, since both have sufficient know how to make these with a few months or years.

In the name of Nuclear Non-proliferation, the status quo nuclear powers are essentially saying that they are the only ones who are responsible and the rest are irresponsible, till they somehow become a member of the nuclear club. Eventually I see all 7 regional blocs nuclear powered and armed against threat from each other and there are no other way to get around this eventuality.

 

[NiceGuy]

Now the situation in Korea is like this. Christianity is still increasing and Christians together with the rich Chaebols support the current Grand National Party of Lee Myung Bak (half Japanese), the pa

Now North Korean nuclear policy has become one of the key issues in East Asian politics and geopolitics. If and when North Korea successfully develops a smaller nuclear war head and a perfect delivery mechanism, then that will be a game changer. In that situation, both South Korea and Japan would want to go nuclear to create a MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) situation to balance against this threat. My wife mentioned that this is the chatter that is going on among South Koreans. If and when, S Korea and Japan go nuclear, then essentially the point of US bases used as the current balancer mechanism become moot, null and void and would essentially make way for removal of these bases.

Since the removal of these US bases are in the interest of China and all of Asia, I would then argue that, it might be in the best interest of all Asians as well as Chinese to see that North Korea soon develops these technology and force both South Korea and Japan to go nuclear, since both have sufficient know how to make these with a few months or years.

In the name of Nuclear Non-proliferation, the status quo nuclear powers are essentially saying that they are the only ones who are responsible and the rest are irresponsible, till they somehow become a member of the nuclear club. Eventually I see all 7 regional blocs nuclear powered and armed agayinst threat from each other and there are no other way to get around this eventuality.

If Japan-SK need some help from ASEAn and VN,then they must say sorry for what they did in WW2 and VN war first.

Btw:VN always prefer N.K communist brother to S.K .NK helped VN during VN war,we never forget it.As the communist revival,SK should be united by NK.

 

[kalu_miah]

If Japan-SK need some help from ASEAn and VN,then they must say sorry for what they did in WW2 and VN war first.

Btw:VN always prefer N.K communist brother to S.K .NK helped VN during VN war,we never forget it.As the communist revival,SK should be united by NK.

Apologies may come, if they want cooperation bad enough.

As for communism, it is pretty much dead since the death of Soviet Union. What we have left is state capitalism instead "free market" capitalism. South Korea want to unify with North Korea to unite former unified Korean nation, but it is a drag on Souths economy, just like East Germany was a drag for West Germany. Unification will cost a lot, but there is public support for it, because in the long run it will make Korean nation stronger.

 

[kalu_miah]

Rising Voices in S. Korea, Japan Advocate Nuclear Weapons

An analyst monitors from a computer screen in the control room of the international nuclear test monitoring agency CTBTO, in Vienna, February 12, 2013.


Rising Voices in S. Korea, Japan Advocate Nuclear Weapons

Steve Herman
February 15, 2013

SEOUL — North Korea's claim this week to have successfully conducted a third underground nuclear test is prompting some in South Korea and Japan to advocate possessing their own such weapons.

Chung Mong-joon, chairman of the ruling Grand National Party, June 2, 2010 file photo.
​​South Korean lawmaker Chung Mong-joon of the governing Saenuri (New Frontier) party made such a remark during a meeting of his colleagues from the National Assembly, comparing the situation with North Korea to “a gangster in the neighborhood buying a brand-new machine gun” and trying to defend oneself with merely a pebble.

Chung is no fringe politician. He is the country's wealthiest lawmaker through his controlling shares in the Hyundai Heavy Industries group.

The JoongAng Ilbo, major South Korean newspaper, terming North Korea's latest test an existential threat to Seoul, questions whether the country should arm itself with nuclear weapons and if the United States will ultimately protect it if Pyongyang were to threaten a nuclear attack.

A spokesman for the opposition Democratic United Party, Park Yong-jin, criticizes the ruling party for failing during the past it is not possible to solve the problem of North Korea's nuclear program with a South Korean nuclear armament.

Another option is reintroducing U.S. nuclear weapons onto the Korean peninsula.

But South Korea “is not considering bringing in tactical nuclear weapons right now because the priority is to make North Korea give up its nuclear armament,” says Defense Ministry spokesman Kim Min-seok.

The nuclear debate is not limited to South Korea.

Japan also concerned

Former four-term Tokyo governor Shintaro Ishihara, now a member of parliament, and co-leader of the Japan Restoration Party, has openly stated his country should have nuclear bombs to counter China, North Korea and Russia.

Japan's Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera during an interview with Reuters in Tokyo February 14, 2013.

​​In a VOA interview just hours after North Korea announced its latest nuclear test, Japanese defense minister Itsunori Onodera commented that his country's pacifist constitution restricts Tokyo “when it comes to having nuclear weapons” and thus strengthening the U.S.-Japan security alliance is the key response.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, however, is among those advocating revision of Article 9 of the constitution which prohibits Japan from maintaining a war potential.

Getting China's attention

Some international observers contend the pro-nuclear statements from Seoul and Tokyo are in part intended to get the attention of policy makers in Beijing.

“I'd really like to think that that's really what's happening is that their trying to make a political statement to try to get China interested in dealing with the problem,” says
Carl Baker, director of programs at the Pacific Forum of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a bi-partisan U.S. think tank. “Ultimately the politicians in Seoul and Tokyo believe that the only way we're going to get North Korea really interested in not pursuing nuclear weapons further is by having China tell them to stop.”

Non-Proliferation Treaty

Baker, a former political and economic analyst for U.S. Forces Korea, cautions that any moves by South Korea or Japan to initiate a nuclear weapons program would not find approval in Washington.

“It'll be received very negatively because we have, of course, always ensured South Korea and Japan that we provide an extended deterrent capacity to them,” he says. “There is the Non-Proliferation Treaty which requires people who don't possess nuclear weapons to not possess nuclear weapons. For South Korea and Japan to basically disregard the treaty would be a very bad step.”

Both countries are protected under the U.S. nuclear umbrella and host thousands of American troops and several major military bases.

Despite that, South Korea and Japan in past decades appear to have considered clandestine nuclear weapons development.

Secret programs

A secret South Korean program under a “weapons exploration committee” during the dictatorship of the late President Park Chung-hee existed in the 1970s. His daughter, Park Geun-hye, is to be inaugurated as president February 25, succeeding Lee Myung-bak, who was limited to a single five-year term.

The International Atomic Energy Agency in 2004 concluded that South Korean scientists, in previous years, had produced a very small amount of fissile material that could have been placed in a weapon.

South Korea's government at the time contended it had not authorized the experiments.

Japan reportedly undertook, in the 1960s, a secret study on building nuclear weapons.

Prime Minister Tsutomu Hata in 1974 stated Japan certainly had such a scientific capability. In 2006, then foreign minister Taro Aso repeated that assertion and argued Article 9 did not prohibit Japan from having nuclear weapons for self defense.

Aso would later become a prime minister and is currently the deputy prime minister and finance minister.

Both South Korea and Japan each have dozens of commercial nuclear power plants - a potential source of ample fuel for such weapons.

South Korea wants revision of its atomic energy agreement with the United States to allow Seoul to reprocess spent fuel to use in future fast breeder reactors and reduce its stored nuclear waste. Washington has resisted altering the pact amid fears that the fuel could be used for nuclear weapons.

Talks on the agreement are expected to be held after the new Park administration takes office.

In Japan, a former overseer of the country's atomic energy program told VOA, on condition he not be named, that he has been approached by several influential lawmakers asking him how quickly the country, with its highly advanced technology, would be able to construct a viable nuclear weapon.

Officials in Tokyo and abroad have been quoted anonymously in the past as saying the answer to that question would be six months or less.

Youmi Kim in the VOA Seoul bureau contributed to this report.

 

[kalu_miah]

South Korea nuclear weapons possible within 6 months, newspaper says | GlobalPost

 

[NiceGuy]

Apologies may come, if they want cooperation bad enough.

As for communism, it is pretty much dead since the death of Soviet Union. What we have left is state capitalism instead "free market" capitalism.

Dead ?? pls update the revival of communism, bro.

MOSCOW, February 14 (RIA Novosti) – Nothing can stop or slow down the reintegration of the post-Soviet space, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...an-union-unstoppable-putin.html#ixzz2Lxj4dGWz

(Reuters) - Russia will lease eight jets worth $650 million to its Cold War- era ally Cuba and will partially write off the country's multi-billion-dollar, Soviet-era debt under agreements signed during Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Havana on Thursday.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...billion-dollar-soviet-debt.html#ixzz2LxjlWoDo

South Korea want to unify with North Korea to unite former unified Korean nation, but it is a drag on Souths economy, just like East Germany was a drag for West Germany. Unification will cost a lot, but there is public support for it, because in the long run it will make Korean nation stronger.

US is falling, so it can't protect S.K any more. I don't think S.K still can survive when U.S completely fall .

 

[kalu_miah]

Dead ?? pls update the revival of communism, bro.

US is falling, so it can't protect S.K any more. I don't think S.K still can survive when U.S completely fall .

Bro, Communism may not come back, but Democratic Socialism that is not hostile to religious freedom is the wave of the future IMO:
Democratic socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About Eurasian Union, I am a big supporter of this concept. I believe this new Eurasian Union will be the first step towards a Eurasia+:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region.html

As for Cuba, they can join UNASUR:
Union of South American Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latin American integration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SoKo has a size able economy and military. If they go for Nukes, then they can survive without the protection from US bases. And USA will not fall, its staying the same, while the rest of the world is catching up. USA may loose the top position to China, but the time-frame is the big question.

 

[NiceGuy]

Bro, Communism may not come back, but Democratic Socialism that is not hostile to religious freedom is the wave of the future IMO:
Democratic socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About Eurasian Union, I am a big supporter of this concept. I believe this new Eurasian Union will be the first step towards a Eurasia+:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region.html

Yeah, it's no use to be hostile to religious, just like in VN, we're welcome Buddhism, Muslim etc. The Christian did the bad thing to our country , they helped France, US to invade VN, so they're strictly under monitored to make sure that they can't help the West to invade us again.

SoKo has a size able economy and military. If they go for Nukes, then they can survive without the protection from US bases. And USA will not fall, its staying the same, while the rest of the world is catching up. USA may loose the top position to China, but the time-frame is the big question.

\If SoKo can go for Nuke, then Japan will also can, so does to Iran and many more nations, I don't think US-Russia-China will allow Soko or Japan to do that.

At least US will fall in ASEAN region, as you know, Russia will have a new military base in VN soon, and it gives a big threat to oil-food supply route to Guam (Guam buy oil-food from Singapore-Malaysia). We don't like US, so with the help from Russia, we soon will kick it out of ASEAN region and cut off its supply to Guam. When US has to abandon Guam due to lack of oil and food supply, then it can help Soko and Japan too.

 

[Okemos]

It' rather funny to see Vietnamese members here talking about China's threat, lol. They love investment, but they don't want any influence. WTF. Investment without any influence is way too dangerous. If I am gonna invest in a company, buying stocks, etc, I expect some say in the company. If China has no voice in SE Asian countries, you guys can easily confiscate our investment if there is any political instability. We are not harmless rabbits, and brainless monkeys. The fate of Chinese business men in SE Asia should never be repeated.

Anyway, when you compare Vietnamese members here with other SE Asians, for such puny country like Vietnam, it does surprisingly breed very belligerent people.

 

[NiceGuy]

It' rather funny to see Vietnamese members here talking about China's threat, lol. They love investment, but they don't want any influence. WTF. Investment without any influence is way too dangerous. If I am gonna invest in a company, buying stocks, etc, I expect some say in the company. If China has no voice in SE Asian countries, you guys can easily confiscate our investment if there is any political instability. We are not harmless rabbits, and brainless monkeys. The fate of Chinese business men in SE Asia should never be repeated.

Anyway, when you compare Vietnamese members here with other SE Asians, for such puny country like Vietnam, it does surprisingly breed very belligerent people.

So, Don't invest to my country, and we will capture your merchant ships,oil tankers passing by our EEZ for ransom

 

[kalu_miah]

It' rather funny to see Vietnamese members here talking about China's threat, lol. They love investment, but they don't want any influence. WTF. Investment without any influence is way too dangerous. If I am gonna invest in a company, buying stocks, etc, I expect some say in the company. If China has no voice in SE Asian countries, you guys can easily confiscate our investment if there is any political instability. We are not harmless rabbits, and brainless monkeys. The fate of Chinese business men in SE Asia should never be repeated.

Anyway, when you compare Vietnamese members here with other SE Asians, for such puny country like Vietnam, it does surprisingly breed very belligerent people.

When you are next to a country almost ten times your size in population and land, and they are flexing their muscle, then it is natural to feel the way Vietnamese feel. I understand their pain, because we are the same way with India.

But if I may say it, for you the no. 1 problem is US dominance and then perhaps India's wish for regional dominance. Vietnam is an important country to integrate and manage ASEAN. Vietnam is small, but among ASEAN countries, they are like a tower of strength that others can rally around. China cannot afford to antagonize Vietnam too much.