South Korea: Dependence in the Age of OPCON

[sahaliyan]

Everyone know that the Hazaras are mistreated in Iran,they are both shias,right?So this is a racial issue,the so-called shia brotherhood is fake,in reality,the Iranians dislike the Hazaras because they have strong Mongoloid feature.
And many Huis and other Chinese muslims look down on Malays because those people have dark skin,wide noses and full lips,though this is wrong and racist,but this attitude is actually exist in ordinary people

And in Burma,the Panthays don't share their mosques with other muslims,this is a fact,even with so many generations,the Panthays may took the local Burmese females as wives,but they never mix with Indian and Rohingya muslims.Is this muslim brotherhood?

 

[sahaliyan]

The west Pakistanis and east Pakistanis are both Muslims,but in reality,many ordinary people in west Pakistan look down on east Pakistanis because the east Pakistanis are darker than them,this is also one of the reasons the Bangladesh break up from Pakistan.
I don't view the People as muslims and non-muslims,I view them as Uzbeks,Uyghurs,Punjabis,Arabs,Persians,Hazaras and so on.The muslim brotherhood doesn't work in real life.
And you can see,the Hazaras are mistreated by Pashtuns in Afghanistan,then in Pakistan,the Pashtuns kill the Hazaras again(but surely the situation of Hazaras in Pakistan is better than the Pashtun-majority Afghanistan,the Hazaras in Pakistan live in Queta,there are many Pashtuns there too,since they both came from Afghanistan),the Pashtuns did this because the Hazaras are shias,but also because the Hazaras are not same race as the Pashtuns.
And you can see,the Kazakhs look down on Uyghurs,because the Kazakhs are nomads and Mongoloids,while the Uyguurs are peasants and have strong Caucasoid features.While the Uyghurs are serious to Islam,the Kazakhs not,the Kzakhs drink the alcohol，many of them eat in Ramadan,and the Kazakhs of Kazakhstan even eat pork,yet the Kazakhs still claim they are "muslims"
So you can see,the muslims are quite diverse,and can't view them asa same.and I will treat the Malays only as Malays,and to me,they are just one of the Southeast Asian peoples,same as Thais,Cambodians and so on,they are same race

 

[Aepsilons]

Good Evening @kalu_miah , @UKBengali , @somsak , @sahaliyan et al,


Our discourse in this thread have revealed the following, from my objective analyses:

1) The working dynamic of ASEAN

• The Organization is composed of multiple nations that have diverse political systems set in place; there are constitutional monarchies as seen in Thailand, Malaysia and Cambodia. The Republican form such as those in the Philippines, and Indonesia. The Absolute monarchy as seen in Brunei. The military dictatorship as in the likes of Myanmar. And the Communist form as seen in Viet Nam and Laos.
  
• Yet despite these rather engrossing differences, the economic vibrancy between these nations have allowed for the integration of member nations in terms of pivotal social contracts per se, workshops on civil governments, processes for learning about human trafficking control mechanisms, constitutional law and interpretation systems, to tourism mandates. You see ASEAN , in its core, is as heteregenous as it is vibrant. The organization, effectively allows many nations that have once , throughout its history, have been at war with each other. The multiplicity of the religious faiths practiced by member states is testament of the ability for nations with dichotomies in demography can still work together.

2) National Security Concerns

• Throughout the history of the nations that compose ASEAN, such as the Philippines, Viet Nam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia ; they have experienced a plethora of national security concerns including: Communist Insurgencies, separatist movements. In the case of the Philippines, the country has a long history of communist insurgency, starting with the 1950s to 1960s military insurgency known as the HUK (Hukbalalahap) War -- an outright communist rebellion. The HUK War, as it is colloquially known, ended with a Government Victory in the early 1960s. Even now the Philippines still has to deal with the NPA (New People's Army) separatist forces, a force that calls for a communist revolution. Several members of the NPA are from a variety of faiths including Christianity, in fact a majority of them are Christians.
  
• Thailand, too, in the 1960s and 1970s had its own Communist Insurgency fielded by the Communist Party of Thailand. During the height of Thailand's War against communism, rebel forces numbered over 10,000 -- and as a result, led to the heavy handed use of force from Thai Politicians such as the late Thanin Kraivichien. The level of in-fighting in Thailand between Government and Pro-Communist forces makes the southern insurgency that is happening in Thailand now look rather insignificant. Do note that most of the members of the Thai Communist Party and insurgents were mostly from Central Thailand, and in the North and North East and were Buddhist as well. So this smashes your premise and your continual fear of Muslims. My dear, the regional insurgencies in Thailand that had occured in the 1960s and 1970s were instigated not by Muslims, but by communist rebels, and anti-military forces.
  
• The large nation of Indonesia had , too, battled communist and separatist insurgecies such as OPM, Aceh Merdeka, Kalimantan Borneo National Liberation Front, Maluku Selantan , and the now-defunct Communist rebellion. These separatist movements have largely been quelled and do note that the ideology behind their birth was not due to a yearning of an Islamic state (because by very definition Indonesia is already a majority Muslim nation, yet a republic) but due to ethnic considerations. The very same kind of issues that Thailand and the Philippines had dealt with and still dealing with.

3) ASEAN's Importance for the wider Asia-Pacific Region

• ASEAN, which can be argued as the successor of the now defunct SEATO, is a strategically as well as economically important union of free and independent nations. Their binding coordination and discourse is a result of the need for growing and emerging markets to find security amongst each other against a volatile region, with threat(s) to national securities. In fact, there are so many examples of the inter-ASEAN coordinated effort to help each other resolve internal conflict; per se, the Thai-Cambodian territory issue of Preah Vihear, the Philippines' issue with Sabah, the issue of Timor Leste etc.
  
• ASEAN has the potential for being a framework for a wider security initiative. That may include a number of potential partners within its immediate proximity, ergo, Papau New Guinea, Timor Leste, Fiji, Bangladesh
• ASEAN's role in collectively defining territoriality within its maritime border(s), and in coodinating efforts of a binding Code of Conduct of the Seas.

4) ASEAN's Relevance to East Asia

• Given the direct involvement of the United States in East Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, and with rising emotions amongst citizens in South Korea and Japan for a wider geopolitical responsibility, there is an increasing demand for the eventual removal of US Forces. As in regards to this Thread, South Koreans are actually calling for the removal of US forces in South Korea. Even in Japan there is also some members of the nation that call for the removal of US military bases.
• How does ASEAN play a role? Does it even play a role ? You bet it does. A lot of citizens in East Asia have seen the rather working rapport amongst ASEAN nations. Tho there are differences, security concerns, despite it all, there are annual workshops amongst ASEAN member representatives to discuss and address economic, political, issues on the plate. Can it be improved? Sure it can. Can a greater framework with ASEAN and key regional power(s) in East Asia be assessed ? I think yes, definitely yes. In fact, I am in the proposition and support base that a greater ASEAN + Japan + South Korea + key members may help in dealing with security concerns in the region, can aid in greater economic integration, and military to military interoperability.
• South Korea's rising and growing dissatisfaction with American leadership in OPCON as well as the mobilization of Japan's Military for a wider Geopolitical Contribution will, invariably, lead to new possibilities in the region. And it is good to discuss these practical processes.

I Sincerely and Respectfully Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

 

[kalu_miah]

The west Pakistanis and east Pakistanis are both Muslims,but in reality,many ordinary people in west Pakistan look down on east Pakistanis because the east Pakistanis are darker than them,this is also one of the reasons the Bangladesh break up from Pakistan.
I don't view the People as muslims and non-muslims,I view them as Uzbeks,Uyghurs,Punjabis,Arabs,Persians,Hazaras and so on.The muslim brotherhood doesn't work in real life.
And you can see,the Hazaras are mistreated by Pashtuns in Afghanistan,then in Pakistan,the Pashtuns kill the Hazaras again(but surely the situation of Hazaras in Pakistan is better than the Pashtun-majority Afghanistan,the Hazaras in Pakistan live in Queta,there are many Pashtuns there too,since they both came from Afghanistan),the Pashtuns did this because the Hazaras are shias,but also because the Hazaras are not same race as the Pashtuns.
And you can see,the Kazakhs look down on Uyghurs,because the Kazakhs are nomads and Mongoloids,while the Uyguurs are peasants and have strong Caucasoid features.While the Uyghurs are serious to Islam,the Kazakhs not,the Kzakhs drink the alcohol，many of them eat in Ramadan,and the Kazakhs of Kazakhstan even eat pork,yet the Kazakhs still claim they are "muslims"
So you can see,the muslims are quite diverse,and can't view them asa same.and I will treat the Malays only as Malays,and to me,they are just one of the Southeast Asian peoples,same as Thais,Cambodians and so on,they are same race

You are partly right, but not entirely correct.

Pakistan broke up because there were some traitors among us who were backed by India. Many among elites realize today that it was the greatest blunder to breakup Pakistan. We were a large powerful nation, now we are weaker more vulnerable nations. The other reason it failed was that there was distance between two separate landmass, so logistics was an issue. Another reason it failed was that Pakistan intelligence could not identify and neutralize traitors before they became too powerful politically.

Every ethnic group has racist feeling about the other race, this is true, but present day Pakistan would not survive if these feelings were too strong. India would not survive, if these racist feelings were too strong. People eventually figure out, it is better to team up and make a bigger team, which makes a winning team.

About Central Asians, yes they have their problems, but they also try to unite:
Central Asian Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
" In his proposal, the Kazakh President said:
"In the region, we share economic interest, cultural heritage, language, religion, and environmental challenges, and face common external threats. The founding fathers of the European Union could only wish they had so much in common. We should direct our efforts towards closer economic integration, a common market and a single currency."[4]"

If Hazara were Sunni, I am not sure if they would be as much persecuted. That is again a religious sect issue, not racial.

Kazakhs normally do not eat pork, exceptions are there in all groups, there are occasional pork eating Bangladeshi Muslims also, which I have seen.

Yes Muslims are quite diverse, but they also know that there is strength in numbers. So as it was in the past, when Muslim countries GDP per capita increase with time, they are bound to figure out what is in their strategic interest, which is to team up with each other, not in a meaningless ineffective OIC, but with increased economic, people-to-people and military interaction.

The challenge for Muslim countries is to develop their human resources and economy, once that happens, cooperation will increase.

So Muslims are not the same, but they can and will team up under the right circumstances, if they see benefit in it, even more so than in the past.

Muslims are one of the most heterogeneous people on earth. Traders, rulers, soldiers, preachers etc. traveled long distance and put down their roots in far flung places of the world and these early pioneers whose legacy still survives in Islamic communities as founding legend is difficult to understand for others who are not part of the community. Muslims did not suddenly discover Islam and became Muslims. It happened over many centuries of migrations, mixing and conversion. I can give you example of my own country:
Rise of Islam in Bengal, role of migration

And on Islam and racism:

 

[sahaliyan]

You are partly right, but not entirely correct.

Pakistan broke up because there were some traitors among us who were backed by India. Many among elites realize today that it was the greatest blunder to breakup Pakistan. We were a large powerful nation, now we are weaker more vulnerable nations. The other reason it failed was that there was distance between two separate landmass, so logistics was an issue. Another reason it failed was that Pakistan intelligence could not identify and neutralize traitors before they became too powerful politically.

Every ethnic group has racist feeling about the other race, this is true, but present day Pakistan would not survive if these feelings were too strong. India would not survive, if these racist feelings were too strong. People eventually figure out, it is better to team up and make a bigger team, which makes a winning team.

About Central Asians, yes they have their problems, but they also try to unite:
Central Asian Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
" In his proposal, the Kazakh President said:
"In the region, we share economic interest, cultural heritage, language, religion, and environmental challenges, and face common external threats. The founding fathers of the European Union could only wish they had so much in common. We should direct our efforts towards closer economic integration, a common market and a single currency."[4]"

If Hazara were Sunni, I am not sure if they would be as much persecuted. That is again a religious sect issue, not racial.

Kazakhs normally do not eat pork, exceptions are there in all groups, there are occasional pork eating Bangladeshi Muslims also, which I have seen.

Yes Muslims are quite diverse, but they also know that there is strength in numbers. So as it was in the past, when Muslim countries GDP per capita increase with time, they are bound to figure out what is in their strategic interest, which is to team up with each other, not in a meaningless ineffective OIC, but with increased economic, people-to-people and military interaction.

The challenge for Muslim countries is to develop their human resources and economy, once that happens, cooperation will increase.

So Muslims are not the same, but they can and will team up under the right circumstances, if they see benefit in it, even more so than in the past.

Muslims are one of the most heterogeneous people on earth. Traders, rulers, soldiers, preachers etc. traveled long distance and put down their roots in far flung places of the world and these early pioneers whose legacy still survives in Islamic communities as founding legend is difficult to understand for others who are not part of the community. Muslims did not suddenly discover Islam and became Muslims. It happened over many centuries of migrations, mixing and conversion. I can give you example of my own country:
Rise of Islam in Bengal, role of migration

And on Islam and racism:

There are many reasons the Pakistan broke up,I said this is one of the reasons,there are other reasons too.
I know the Kazakhs normally don't eat pork,since they are nomads,the pork-eating is not their culture,brought by the Russians,and the Kazakhs in China don't eat pork,but this is not the case of Kazakhstan,they are heavily influenced by Russia,pork is common in their country.
The Kazakhs are worry about their northern Russian-majority terrioties,the current Russian deeds prove they didn't respect the international laws,so the Kazakhs also fear they lose land to Russia.The illegal immigrants from Uzbekistan is also a serious problem to them,cause the social problems in Kazakhstan.Yes,they play the words of Eurasian Union or the unity of central Asian countries,in reality,the Russian and Uzbekistan is biggest threat to them.
The Hazaras also mistreated in Iran,the Iranians don't welcome them.And the based on what the Pashtuns did in the tribal area of Pakistan,they also treat their females like trash,I think it's not strange the Pashtuns mistreat the Hazaras,they are still live in middle ages.

 

[kalu_miah]

There are many reasons the Pakistan broke up,I said this is one of the reasons,there are other reasons too.
I know the Kazakhs normally don't eat pork,since they are nomads,the pork-eating is not their culture,brought by the Russians,and the Kazakhs in China don't eat pork,but this is not the case of Kazakhstan,they are heavily influenced by Russia,pork is common in their country.
The Kazakhs are worry about their northern Russian-majority terrioties,the current Russian deeds prove they didn't respect the international laws,so the Kazakhs also fear they lose land to Russia.The illegal immigrants from Uzbekistan is also a serious problem to them,cause the social problems in Kazakhstan.Yes,they play the words of Eurasian Union or the unity of central Asian countries,in reality,the Russian and Uzbekistan is biggest threat to them.
The Hazaras also mistreated in Iran,the Iranians don't welcome them.And the based on what the Pashtuns did in the tribal area of Pakistan,they also treat their females like trash,I think it's not strange the Pashtuns mistreat the Hazaras,they are still live in middle ages.

OT alert:

What you say is true, Kazakhs have been Russianized for the longest time among Central Asians, because they were the first to succumb to expansion of Russian empire in Central Asia:
Kazakh Khanate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kenesary Khan (1841–1847)[edit]
"Kenesary Khan was proclaimed khan of the Kazakhs when the Russian Empire was already fully in control of Kazakhstan, and in fact the Kazakhs were prohibited (by Russian law) from selecting their leader after 1822. Kenesary Khan's popular rise was in defiance of Russian control of Kazakhstan, and his time as khan was spent in continuous fighting with the Russian imperial forces until his death in 1847. Widely regarded as a freedom fighter and popular as a leading voice against the increasingly aggressive and forceful policies of the Russian Empire, Kenesary was ruthless in his actions and unpredictable as a military strategist. By 1846, however, his resistance movement had lost momentum as some of his rich associates had defected to the Russian Empire, having been promised great riches. Betrayed, Kenesary Khan grew increasingly suspicious of the remaining members of the Resistance, possibly further alienating them. In 1847, the Khan of the Kazakhs met his death in Kyrgyz lands during his assault on northern Kyrgyz tribes. He was executed by Ormon Khan, the sarybagysh tribe leader who was subsequently rewarded by the Russians with a larger estate and an official administrative role, but was still widely regarded as a traitor by most nomadic tribes. Kenesary Khan's head was cut off and sent to the Russians.

During the last decade, Kenesary Khan has become increasingly regarded as a hero in Kazakh literature and media. This, however, is a relatively recent trend since more outspoken views were not possible until Kazakhstan was no longer part of the USSR. Today, a monument to Kenesary Khan can be seen on the shore of the river Esil in the capital of Kazakhstan, Astana."

Kazakh Khan's are direct descendant of Chinggis Khaan.

Astana Shifting Ethnic Kazakhs to Northern Kazakhstan to Block Any Russian Threat | The Interpreter
"Consequently, the Stoletie.ru commentator says, it is probable that the stories about the resettlement of 300,000 ethnic Kazakhs to the northern parts of Kazakkhstan are a trial balloon designed to “test the reaction” of society and presumably of Moscow as well.

“But,” Shustov concludes, “even if these plans are never realized, with the passage of time, the Russian question in the north of the republic will be solved by itself. The birthrate among Kazakhs is higher than that among ethnic Russians who also continue to emigrate to Russia.”

And “under these conditions, the ethno-demographic balance in the northern regions will gradually be changed in favor of the Kazakhs, while the ethnic Russians there, as has already happened in Kazakhstan as a whole, will become an ethnic minority.” "

Why relocate capital to Astana?
http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/1400/1409

Kazakhstan has oil/gas and huge land, so they are the richest among Central Asian stans. Uzbeks as well as people from other stans go there to work, just like migrant workers from these 4 other stans go to Russia. But I don't know if Uzbeks are considered a threat. More relevant than CAU, Russia is trying to pressure all these stans to become a part of Eurasian Economic Union:
Eurasian Economic Community - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Eurasian Economic Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Terror Against Hazara Muslim Minority in Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan | The Weekly Standard
"In 1998, Iranian forces killed more than 630 refugees, mainly Hazaras, in the Safed Sang detention center in northeast Iran. The 2009 Afghan film Neighbor, portraying that crime, was blocked from general distribution in Afghanistan because of Iranian pressure. Nevertheless, the propaganda networks of the Tehran clerical dictatorship exploit the dreadful condition of the Hazaras in Pakistan to promote an ostensible agenda of international Shia unity.

Highland peasants and livestock herders, Hazaras speak Persian although they are of northern Central Asian origin, and their Mongolian features make them an easy object of aggression. Local Hazaras in Iran, along with Hazara refugees from the Taliban, are hated as a reminder of the Mongol subjugation of the region in the 13th century.
......................
Notwithstanding Iranian manipulation of their plight, the Hazaras do not have the militant reputation visible among Shias in Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. They have been peaceful except when faced with direct aggression. In modern times, their affliction began with the 19th-century conquest of their part of Afghanistan, the Hazarajat, by the then-ruler of Afghanistan, Abdul Rehman Khan, a theocratically-inclined Pashtun Sunni (like the Taliban). Their torment continued into the present day at the hands of the Russian and Afghan Communists and the Taliban. Enmity toward the Hazaras is often political as well as religious. The Hazaras are despised by the Afghan Taliban both because they resisted Abdul Rehman Khan more than 100 years ago and because of their Shiism."

I think Bangladesh should welcome Hazara's, as we do not have anti-Shia extremists among us and also Hazara's are not known to be Shia extremists like current Iranian regime. But then it will raise a red flag among the Indian puppet govt. ruling Bangladesh, to see refugees coming from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

 

[kalu_miah]

Good Evening @kalu_miah , @UKBengali , @somsak , @sahaliyan et al,


Our discourse in this thread have revealed the following, from my objective analyses:

1) The working dynamic of ASEAN

• The Organization is composed of multiple nations that have diverse political systems set in place; there are constitutional monarchies as seen in Thailand, Malaysia and Cambodia. The Republican form such as those in the Philippines, and Indonesia. The Absolute monarchy as seen in Brunei. The military dictatorship as in the likes of Myanmar. And the Communist form as seen in Viet Nam and Laos.
  
• Yet despite these rather engrossing differences, the economic vibrancy between these nations have allowed for the integration of member nations in terms of pivotal social contracts per se, workshops on civil governments, processes for learning about human trafficking control mechanisms, constitutional law and interpretation systems, to tourism mandates. You see ASEAN , in its core, is as heteregenous as it is vibrant. The organization, effectively allows many nations that have once , throughout its history, have been at war with each other. The multiplicity of the religious faiths practiced by member states is testament of the ability for nations with dichotomies in demography can still work together.

2) National Security Concerns

• Throughout the history of the nations that compose ASEAN, such as the Philippines, Viet Nam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia ; they have experienced a plethora of national security concerns including: Communist Insurgencies, separatist movements. In the case of the Philippines, the country has a long history of communist insurgency, starting with the 1950s to 1960s military insurgency known as the HUK (Hukbalalahap) War -- an outright communist rebellion. The HUK War, as it is colloquially known, ended with a Government Victory in the early 1960s. Even now the Philippines still has to deal with the NPA (New People's Army) separatist forces, a force that calls for a communist revolution. Several members of the NPA are from a variety of faiths including Christianity, in fact a majority of them are Christians.
  
• Thailand, too, in the 1960s and 1970s had its own Communist Insurgency fielded by the Communist Party of Thailand. During the height of Thailand's War against communism, rebel forces numbered over 10,000 -- and as a result, led to the heavy handed use of force from Thai Politicians such as the late Thanin Kraivichien. The level of in-fighting in Thailand between Government and Pro-Communist forces makes the southern insurgency that is happening in Thailand now look rather insignificant. Do note that most of the members of the Thai Communist Party and insurgents were mostly from Central Thailand, and in the North and North East and were Buddhist as well. So this smashes your premise and your continual fear of Muslims. My dear, the regional insurgencies in Thailand that had occured in the 1960s and 1970s were instigated not by Muslims, but by communist rebels, and anti-military forces.
  
• The large nation of Indonesia had , too, battled communist and separatist insurgecies such as OPM, Aceh Merdeka, Kalimantan Borneo National Liberation Front, Maluku Selantan , and the now-defunct Communist rebellion. These separatist movements have largely been quelled and do note that the ideology behind their birth was not due to a yearning of an Islamic state (because by very definition Indonesia is already a majority Muslim nation, yet a republic) but due to ethnic considerations. The very same kind of issues that Thailand and the Philippines had dealt with and still dealing with.

3) ASEAN's Importance for the wider Asia-Pacific Region

• ASEAN, which can be argued as the successor of the now defunct SEATO, is a strategically as well as economically important union of free and independent nations. Their binding coordination and discourse is a result of the need for growing and emerging markets to find security amongst each other against a volatile region, with threat(s) to national securities. In fact, there are so many examples of the inter-ASEAN coordinated effort to help each other resolve internal conflict; per se, the Thai-Cambodian territory issue of Preah Vihear, the Philippines' issue with Sabah, the issue of Timor Leste etc.
  
• ASEAN has the potential for being a framework for a wider security initiative. That may include a number of potential partners within its immediate proximity, ergo, Papau New Guinea, Timor Leste, Fiji, Bangladesh
• ASEAN's role in collectively defining territoriality within its maritime border(s), and in coodinating efforts of a binding Code of Conduct of the Seas.

4) ASEAN's Relevance to East Asia

• Given the direct involvement of the United States in East Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, and with rising emotions amongst citizens in South Korea and Japan for a wider geopolitical responsibility, there is an increasing demand for the eventual removal of US Forces. As in regards to this Thread, South Koreans are actually calling for the removal of US forces in South Korea. Even in Japan there is also some members of the nation that call for the removal of US military bases.
• How does ASEAN play a role? Does it even play a role ? You bet it does. A lot of citizens in East Asia have seen the rather working rapport amongst ASEAN nations. Tho there are differences, security concerns, despite it all, there are annual workshops amongst ASEAN member representatives to discuss and address economic, political, issues on the plate. Can it be improved? Sure it can. Can a greater framework with ASEAN and key regional power(s) in East Asia be assessed ? I think yes, definitely yes. In fact, I am in the proposition and support base that a greater ASEAN + Japan + South Korea + key members may help in dealing with security concerns in the region, can aid in greater economic integration, and military to military interoperability.
• South Korea's rising and growing dissatisfaction with American leadership in OPCON as well as the mobilization of Japan's Military for a wider Geopolitical Contribution will, invariably, lead to new possibilities in the region. And it is good to discuss these practical processes.

I Sincerely and Respectfully Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

Excellent post, I will give a more detailed response later as time permits. As you know I have been promoting this idea for a few years now in this forum and had almost given up hope. Now at least we see some ray of hope from the opinion of our new respected fellow Japanese forum member. But then the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We need to see concrete actions on the part of Japanese govt. to confirm movement in this direction.

 

[Aepsilons]

Excellent post, I will give a more detailed response later as time permits. As you know I have been promoting this idea for a few years now in this forum and had almost given up hope. Now at least we see some ray of hope from the opinion of our new respected fellow Japanese forum member. But then the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We need to see concrete actions on the part of Japanese govt. to confirm movement in this direction.

I look forward to your post, @kalu_miah . Good to meet intelligent posters in here.

 

[sahaliyan]

OT alert:
Terror Against Hazara Muslim Minority in Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan | The Weekly Standard
"In 1998, Iranian forces killed more than 630 refugees, mainly Hazaras, in the Safed Sang detention center in northeast Iran. The 2009 Afghan film Neighbor, portraying that crime, was blocked from general distribution in Afghanistan because of Iranian pressure. Nevertheless, the propaganda networks of the Tehran clerical dictatorship exploit the dreadful condition of the Hazaras in Pakistan to promote an ostensible agenda of international Shia unity.

Highland peasants and livestock herders, Hazaras speak Persian although they are of northern Central Asian origin, and their Mongolian features make them an easy object of aggression. Local Hazaras in Iran, along with Hazara refugees from the Taliban, are hated as a reminder of the Mongol subjugation of the region in the 13th century.
......................
Notwithstanding Iranian manipulation of their plight, the Hazaras do not have the militant reputation visible among Shias in Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. They have been peaceful except when faced with direct aggression. In modern times, their affliction began with the 19th-century conquest of their part of Afghanistan, the Hazarajat, by the then-ruler of Afghanistan, Abdul Rehman Khan, a theocratically-inclined Pashtun Sunni (like the Taliban). Their torment continued into the present day at the hands of the Russian and Afghan Communists and the Taliban. Enmity toward the Hazaras is often political as well as religious. The Hazaras are despised by the Afghan Taliban both because they resisted Abdul Rehman Khan more than 100 years ago and because of their Shiism."

I think Bangladesh should welcome Hazara's, as we do not have anti-Shia extremists among us and also Hazara's are not known to be Shia extremists like current Iranian regime. But then it will raise a red flag among the Indian puppet govt. ruling Bangladesh, to see refugees coming from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

I hope the Hazaras have a bright future,as far as I know,the Hazaras are focus on education in new Afghanistan.Though most Pashtuns are just normal people,but I‘m very pessimistic to the future of Pashtuns,they are hijacked by the Taliban(all the Taliban are Pashtuns) and Islamist terrorists,they rejest the modern education,and forbidden the females to get modern education because they think it's "unislamic",they are still live in middle age(Not all Pashtuns,but many of them,especially the tribal area).
By the way,the Pashtuns never ruled by others is a myth,anyone know the history know the Pashtuns and their ancestors were ruled by many people include the Greeks,the Mongols,the Mughals,the British and so on.The Pashtuns better not to believe such bullshit

 

[somsak]

4) ASEAN's Relevance to East Asia

• Given the direct involvement of the United States in East Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, and with rising emotions amongst citizens in South Korea and Japan for a wider geopolitical responsibility, there is an increasing demand for the eventual removal of US Forces. As in regards to this Thread, South Koreans are actually calling for the removal of US forces in South Korea. Even in Japan there is also some members of the nation that call for the removal of US military bases.
• How does ASEAN play a role? Does it even play a role ? You bet it does. A lot of citizens in East Asia have seen the rather working rapport amongst ASEAN nations. Tho there are differences, security concerns, despite it all, there are annual workshops amongst ASEAN member representatives to discuss and address economic, political, issues on the plate. Can it be improved? Sure it can. Can a greater framework with ASEAN and key regional power(s) in East Asia be assessed ? I think yes, definitely yes. In fact, I am in the proposition and support base that a greater ASEAN + Japan + South Korea + key members may help in dealing with security concerns in the region, can aid in greater economic integration, and military to military interoperability.
• South Korea's rising and growing dissatisfaction with American leadership in OPCON as well as the mobilization of Japan's Military for a wider Geopolitical Contribution will, invariably, lead to new possibilities in the region. And it is good to discuss these practical processes.

I Sincerely and Respectfully Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

O hi yo @Nihonjin1051

Interesting view about ASEAN and N.E. ASIA security.

- ASEAN is the pillar of Thailand's foreign policy.
- We reiterate the need for "ASEAN Centraility"
- Our core concern is 2015 ASEAN single community. Which is free movement of capital, highly skill workforce, free from trade barior, and unite friendship among people.
- Japan, China, South Korea relation with ASEAN will be within ASEAN+3 framework. (That is the meaning of ASEAN centrality. It means that ASEAN+(#periphery))

In fact ASEAN centrality means (my opinion) No matter how weight your country is, you are a peripheral to ASEAN. ASEAN see other ASEAN members as "inner people", and see nonmember as "peripheral" to aid economic & politic of ASEAN servival.

 

[somsak]

Yes, I have tried to make the point at the beginning to be as clear as possible: any attempt to spread Islam into Southeast asian mainland is considered as assault to our culture, customs and tradition, yes a threat to our national security.

Well Said. Let me repeat the words under Thai flag:
Any attempt to spread Islam into Southeast asian mainland is considered as assault to our culture, customs and tradition, yes a threat to our national security.

 

[kalu_miah]

Good Evening @kalu_miah , @UKBengali , @somsak , @sahaliyan et al,


Our discourse in this thread have revealed the following, from my objective analyses:

1) The working dynamic of ASEAN

• The Organization is composed of multiple nations that have diverse political systems set in place; there are constitutional monarchies as seen in Thailand, Malaysia and Cambodia. The Republican form such as those in the Philippines, and Indonesia. The Absolute monarchy as seen in Brunei. The military dictatorship as in the likes of Myanmar. And the Communist form as seen in Viet Nam and Laos.
  
• Yet despite these rather engrossing differences, the economic vibrancy between these nations have allowed for the integration of member nations in terms of pivotal social contracts per se, workshops on civil governments, processes for learning about human trafficking control mechanisms, constitutional law and interpretation systems, to tourism mandates. You see ASEAN , in its core, is as heteregenous as it is vibrant. The organization, effectively allows many nations that have once , throughout its history, have been at war with each other. The multiplicity of the religious faiths practiced by member states is testament of the ability for nations with dichotomies in demography can still work together.

2) National Security Concerns

• Throughout the history of the nations that compose ASEAN, such as the Philippines, Viet Nam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia ; they have experienced a plethora of national security concerns including: Communist Insurgencies, separatist movements. In the case of the Philippines, the country has a long history of communist insurgency, starting with the 1950s to 1960s military insurgency known as the HUK (Hukbalalahap) War -- an outright communist rebellion. The HUK War, as it is colloquially known, ended with a Government Victory in the early 1960s. Even now the Philippines still has to deal with the NPA (New People's Army) separatist forces, a force that calls for a communist revolution. Several members of the NPA are from a variety of faiths including Christianity, in fact a majority of them are Christians.
  
• Thailand, too, in the 1960s and 1970s had its own Communist Insurgency fielded by the Communist Party of Thailand. During the height of Thailand's War against communism, rebel forces numbered over 10,000 -- and as a result, led to the heavy handed use of force from Thai Politicians such as the late Thanin Kraivichien. The level of in-fighting in Thailand between Government and Pro-Communist forces makes the southern insurgency that is happening in Thailand now look rather insignificant. Do note that most of the members of the Thai Communist Party and insurgents were mostly from Central Thailand, and in the North and North East and were Buddhist as well. So this smashes your premise and your continual fear of Muslims. My dear, the regional insurgencies in Thailand that had occured in the 1960s and 1970s were instigated not by Muslims, but by communist rebels, and anti-military forces.
  
• The large nation of Indonesia had , too, battled communist and separatist insurgecies such as OPM, Aceh Merdeka, Kalimantan Borneo National Liberation Front, Maluku Selantan , and the now-defunct Communist rebellion. These separatist movements have largely been quelled and do note that the ideology behind their birth was not due to a yearning of an Islamic state (because by very definition Indonesia is already a majority Muslim nation, yet a republic) but due to ethnic considerations. The very same kind of issues that Thailand and the Philippines had dealt with and still dealing with.

3) ASEAN's Importance for the wider Asia-Pacific Region

• ASEAN, which can be argued as the successor of the now defunct SEATO, is a strategically as well as economically important union of free and independent nations. Their binding coordination and discourse is a result of the need for growing and emerging markets to find security amongst each other against a volatile region, with threat(s) to national securities. In fact, there are so many examples of the inter-ASEAN coordinated effort to help each other resolve internal conflict; per se, the Thai-Cambodian territory issue of Preah Vihear, the Philippines' issue with Sabah, the issue of Timor Leste etc.
  
• ASEAN has the potential for being a framework for a wider security initiative. That may include a number of potential partners within its immediate proximity, ergo, Papau New Guinea, Timor Leste, Fiji, Bangladesh
• ASEAN's role in collectively defining territoriality within its maritime border(s), and in coodinating efforts of a binding Code of Conduct of the Seas.

4) ASEAN's Relevance to East Asia

• Given the direct involvement of the United States in East Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, and with rising emotions amongst citizens in South Korea and Japan for a wider geopolitical responsibility, there is an increasing demand for the eventual removal of US Forces. As in regards to this Thread, South Koreans are actually calling for the removal of US forces in South Korea. Even in Japan there is also some members of the nation that call for the removal of US military bases.
• How does ASEAN play a role? Does it even play a role ? You bet it does. A lot of citizens in East Asia have seen the rather working rapport amongst ASEAN nations. Tho there are differences, security concerns, despite it all, there are annual workshops amongst ASEAN member representatives to discuss and address economic, political, issues on the plate. Can it be improved? Sure it can. Can a greater framework with ASEAN and key regional power(s) in East Asia be assessed ? I think yes, definitely yes. In fact, I am in the proposition and support base that a greater ASEAN + Japan + South Korea + key members may help in dealing with security concerns in the region, can aid in greater economic integration, and military to military interoperability.
• South Korea's rising and growing dissatisfaction with American leadership in OPCON as well as the mobilization of Japan's Military for a wider Geopolitical Contribution will, invariably, lead to new possibilities in the region. And it is good to discuss these practical processes.

I Sincerely and Respectfully Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

I have thought about this at some length and here is my response.

As you can see from the posts of Thai (Chinese origin), Singapore (Chinese) and even some Vietnamese (not Chinese I think), there is apprehension about inclusion of a big population country like Bangladesh for a combination of two distinct reasons - religious and ethnic difference. This is actually good info, because from a few forum members we can gauge to some extent the popular opinion in these countries, so that helps us to avoid a dead end or blind alley so to speak. It may not be perfect nuanced statistics, but it is better than zero info/data.

So far ASEAN has some working level of unity so I think it should not be disturbed in its continuity, that I believe will be counterproductive to integration of this region.

So Japan + South Korea, with US/West/NATO backing should engage with ASEAN as one unit and perhaps include some smaller countries like Fiji, PNG and Timor Leste. So this is the classic Asian Pivot that the US was planning, but it will be an effort led by Asian countries for Asian countries.

But I think Japan + South Korea should not limit the military alliance building to above effort only. The 2nd parallel effort should include the following countries in a group - Bangladesh, Pakistan and Turkey in 1st phase and GCC and Egypt in 2nd phase. Now I am not sure about the feasibility of this, as the US/West/NATO obviously may not feel very comfortable about this. So they have to be brought in as partner after they are convinced that this bloc will not be anti-West, but rather pro-West or neutral. West has a very questionable track record and image in this region, whereas both Japan and South Korea have positive image. So allowing Japan and South Korea to lead this effort, in a way will mean an opportunity for the West to correct some of the mistakes they have made in their strategy in this region and thus make some remedy for these mistakes.

There are only two billion plus population countries, which gives them tremendous economies of scale in a huge internal market that is not possible to emulate or compete with for the rest of the world. The US/West/NATO is at worst oblivious and at best callous and complacent and sleep walking into a situation where both of these powers are rising and are in the process of creating instability. This situation of instability will continue for the foreseeable future as both China and India become developed at their own respective paces and eventually at some stage feel secure about their place in global stage. But during this transformation process we will see a lot of aggression from these two countries, because the population is going through these stages:

Most of the West (barring the new EU expansion into Eastern Europe) have reached the self-actualization level, but they have some historical baggage of colonialism over centuries. During much of those earlier periods, they have gone through the lower phases and perhaps caused much damage to the historical continuity of global population in different areas. Today that kind of damage is not possible, but yet when large powerful groups of population go through these lower aggressive stages, I believe the effect will be similar for both China and India. The effect of the rise of China and India will not exactly be the same as Western colonialism but similar, as we can already see from behavior of both China and India, with their flexing of newly found muscle.

Japan and South Korea (not quite there yet) are rare non-western countries that have reached the self-actualization level. So I think both are uniquely qualified to play a special role in global affairs.

What the West cannot do themselves due to their own historical baggage and also due to incompetence and lack of foresight, as their close allies Japan and South Korea, I believe, can fill a gap and become a very effective manager of large global areas, which are either dependent or have some form of tenuous relationship with the US/West.

So where exactly am I going with this idea. While China is a rising great power and India aspires to become one some day and while the US/West/NATO is comfortable with its around 1 billion mainly European origin member countries, the rest of the world I believe suffer because they are not members or part of such large powerful blocs or groups.

1. East Asian Pivot: Japan + South Korea + ASEAN or ASEAN+2 can be one Military alliance
2. West Asian Pivot: Japan + South Korea + Muslim world (initially Sunni Large countries while Shia, and small countries to be added later) can be another military alliance of sorts

In both cases Zaibatsu and Chaebols can play key roles in these countries, to bring in manufacturing and to develop indigenous weapons systems utilizing the economies of scale in the huge population base in these two groups of countries. Naturally there can be shared weapons platform between these two groups and close economic interaction.

Both China and India will have huge economies in a few decades, so economic integration of these two countries with rest of Asia is inevitable. The two above groups will however concentrate on military alliance, equipment standardization and inter-operability following the example of NATO, while at the same time facilitating a level playing field for the smaller countries while they integrate their economies with the two large countries.

So essentially my idea is about balance of power. The old balance of power is changing and because of this there has to be a new solution going forward for Asia and the globe. There can be many possible solutions to the same problem. The one I mentioned above is just one possible solution. East Asian Pivot is integral to it, but group no. 2 kind of spells out an idea of West Asian Pivot as well.

Both Japan and the US has a key role in the above plan, where Japan with the backing of the US will take the overt lead in these initiatives to make things happen, both in East Asian Pivot and the West Asian Pivot.

 

[Aepsilons]

@kalu_miah ,

Thanks for the wonderful post. I'm going to do some research before i respond, will have this by the end of the week.

Tomorrow (this morning) i will be heading to New England states (Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont etc) with my family and friends. So , i will be a bit busy. After I am back, then I will respond qualitatively.




I Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

 

[Viet]

Well Said. Let me repeat the words under Thai flag:
Any attempt to spread Islam into Southeast asian mainland is considered as assault to our culture, customs and tradition, yes a threat to our national security.

No worry. We have a very long military tradition that goes back more than 1,000 years. We are not only capable to defend ourselves but to protect our interests abroad if we want.

Think for s second. Why do Vietnam along with Laos and Cambodia belong to the most safest countries in the world? Many international studies show Vietnam as country is as safe as Japan or Germany. Well, we are close to them in terms of safety. How is it possible considering the mess in South and Southeast Asia? That's true, we are a developing country, our income lags behind our peers, but we take safety and security very serious.

Why Indochina, VN Laos Cambodia, has NO terrorism, ethnic violence, separatism and muslim extremists? why from Burma to Thailand to China to Philippines struggle in fighting these evil elements?

I am not decision maker, but I am sure VN government can lend a hand to Thailand, Burma and Philippines to crush these rats that destabilize and endanger your national utility.

 

[somsak]

No worry. We have a very long military tradition that goes back more than 1,000 years. We are not only capable to defend ourselves but to protect our interests abroad if we want.

Think for s second. Why do Vietnam along with Laos and Cambodia belong to the most safest countries in the world? Many international studies show Vietnam as country is as safe as Japan or Germany. Well, we are close to them in terms of safety. How is it possible considering the mess in South and Southeast Asia? That's true, we are a developing country, our income lags behind our peers, but we take safety and security very serious.

Why Indochina, VN Laos Cambodia, has NO terrorism, ethnic violence, separatism and muslim extremists? why from Burma to Thailand to China to Philippines struggle in fighting these evil elements?

I am not decision maker, but I am sure VN government can lend a hand to Thailand, Burma and Philippines to crush these rats that destabilize and endanger your national utility.

Hahaha... That is a nice smart comment I like it.
This comment is 100xmuch smarter than previous comments I saw.
Let me say... Thank you......
For the first time you start to talk like real politicians.

hahaha
Thanx for your offer. We are also a dignity country that must solve our problem by our own.
If we accept this, we are showing to them that we are weak. This will invite more of them to come.