Steady progress in building ASEAN Economic Community

[xunzi]

A military alliance does not necessarily require one leader, but a security council group that will make uniformed decision. For the good of the collective. With a Pacific-Oriented alliance system, this will be more feasible.

Think of this as a modern version of a Greater East & South East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.

It sound nice and dandy but when reality kicks in, you need a single leader to coordinate member response. Take NATO for example, the US is always the one directing members to do this and that. So what exactly is the point of a military alliance if you don't possess the leadership capability to direct members? Why not just all it friendly alliance instead? LOL

This is rather untrue. Japan has shown its interoperability with foreign navies through Pacific Partnership Program 2012, 2013, 2014. It has also participated in Exercise Malabar and have proven time and time again of its ability to project naval power in the very heart of the Indian Ocean. It has also even participated in RIMPAC, as well as CARAT.

In fact in these exercises, particularly CARAT, the navies and the militariesof South East Asia have proven their interoperability and communication skills.

You are in Indian Ocean to support the US navy. LOL Beside you are just a follower of the US foreign policy. Now that you give yourself more military freedom, expect the US to call your head to join the fight.

 

[kalu_miah]

If you're referring to Indonesia, yes, its quite substantial. Total GDP is at $2.3 Trillion.

@UKBengali , @kalu_miah , @Indos , @madokafc

They key player in ASEAN will be Indonesia. Her economy alone, is at $2.3 Trillion. And as her industry and telecom and science research areas of expertise continues to grow, the potential for her to reach a $5 Trillion economy is inevitable. This is the reason why it is important to include Indonesia in any economic and perhaps future military partnership. Bangladesh, too, has much it can offer, in term of man power and natural resources that have yet to be totally capitalized upon. Japan, Indonesia and Bangladesh combined have a population of (128 million, 260 million, 150 million = ~538 million). The inclusion of other nations in ASEAN would also add a healthy balance.

ASEAN + Japan + Bangladesh' Combined GDP = $9 Trillion.

I think the Indonesian GDP figure is wrong if you meant $2.3 Trillion is Indonesia's GDP:
List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The total at the bottom is more or less correct:
List of ASEAN countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

$2.3 Trillion is actually total 2012 GDP for ASEAN countries. Out of that Indonesia is about $0.87 Trillion, the biggest chunk in ASEAN. Indonesia is pretty much close to half of ASEAN both in terms of population and GDP.

The important thing you have pointed out is that both Indonesia and Bangladesh have tremendous growth potential with proper country management.

 

[Aepsilons]

It sound nice and dandy but when reality kicks in, you need a single leader to coordinate member response. Take NATO for example, the US is always the one directing members to do this and that. So what exactly is the point of a military alliance if you don't possess the leadership capability to direct members? Why not just all it friendly alliance instead? LOL


You are in Indian Ocean to support the US navy. LOL Beside you are just a follower of the US foreign policy. Now that you give yourself more military freedom, expect the US to call your head to join the fight.

That's the point , it is a security alliance for all members. Not only for one member.

Japan has had a non-interventionalist policy, and this will remain so.

 

[xunzi]

That's the point , it is a security alliance for all members. Not only for one member.

Japan has had a non-interventionalist policy, and this will remain so.

Then what exactly is the point of creating a NATO-like alliance if everyone is non-interventionist? LOL Get real, my Japanese friend. The reason for a security and military alliance is to make the bloc stronger collectively than individually. Unfortunately, collectively it will always required a unique and powerful leader which make other members fall in line with the value, direction, and strategy. If your intention is security alliance is talk, might as well call it friendly alliance and nobody needs to commit to a mutual collective defense, or in other words, declared war together.

 

[Aepsilons]

You are in Indian Ocean to support the US navy. LOL Beside you are just a follower of the US foreign policy. Now that you give yourself more military freedom, expect the US to call your head to join the fight.

Actually, the ships that coordinated with the Indian Navy were part of the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force's South Fleet. The same fleet that is coordinating the interdiction duties in the Persian Gulf, and in escorting merchant fleet through the Somali Coast. Naturally, the ships of the South Fleet have previous and extensive experience in communicating and working with the Indian Navy, which, too, have interdiction duties in the Persian Gulf.

Then what exactly is the point of creating a NATO-like alliance if everyone is non-interventionist? LOL Get real, my Japanese friend. The reason for a security and military alliance is to make the bloc stronger collectively than individually. Unfortunately, collectively it will always required a unique and powerful leader which make other members fall in line with the value, direction, and strategy. If your intention is security alliance is talk, might as well call it friendly alliance and nobody needs to commit to a mutual collective defense, or in other words, declared war together.

Given our being brought up in the Cold War and of hearing about the enmities of the Soviet Union and the United States, we tend to relegate foreign relations and military blocs to that of these nations'.

If there is to be an integration of ASEAN , Japan , Bangladesh and other key nations, it will be built on economic development, and military to military cooperation. Considering that the seas that encompasses this geographic location, is the center of all shipping trade, and also the crossroads of civilizations, stabilization is key here.

This military and economic alliance will be built to ensure that there will be no hegemony of powers, but rather, maintenance of freedom of navigation , and security measures.

 

[kalu_miah]

@

Indonesia economy is actually just under 1 trillion dollars.

The big problem is that while Japan and Korea may see eye to eye, Indonesia may not.

For this block to hold together you really need the big three to pretty much be in sync all the time.

I am pretty sceptical that without a supreme leader, which even Japan cannot be, there is much chance of success.

The only real chance of a "balanced" Asia would be if India could be as successful as China but there is next to zero possibility of this happening in any of our lifetimes if ever. Besides Indians are unlikely to be able to get along with Muslim countries due to their dislike of Muslims and vice-versa.

Sorry but I forsee a Chinese dominated Asia which even Korea will join and few countries like Japan and India staying outside the Chinese dominated sphere

That was the vision I also wanted to hold on to, but I have become a skeptic. You mentioned India do not get along with Muslim nations, what makes you think China will do much better in this regard? All big nations become increasingly chauvinistic with their continued success. They forget that it is their size which is helping them and start believing in inherent superiority of some kind. It happened with Europeans, now it is happening with China and India.

I would much rather like to see a team of small nations who need each other and who can be partners with each other, instead of being abused by one large leading nation who believes in their own superiority and ends up being chauvinistic. So the model you are proposing is unsustainable. Just open your eyes and ears here in this forum and the news that is percolating in and the views people are expressing, if you cannot see it, I would have to say you are not very sensitive to emerging trends.

 

[xunzi]

Actually, the ships that coordinated with the Indian Navy were part of the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force's South Fleet. The same fleet that is coordinating the interdiction duties in the Persian Gulf, and in escorting merchant fleet through the Somali Coast. Naturally, the ships of the South Fleet have previous and extensive experience in communicating and working with the Indian Navy, which, too, have interdiction duties in the Persian Gulf.

You are there to support the US navy. To be consider a global power player, you need foreign military base and port. You need aircraft carrier with its own set of battle group formation. You need a clear cut global strategy for your projection of power or in the words of our American friends, you need to develop a "global value".

 

[Nike]

If you're referring to Indonesia, yes, its quite substantial. Total GDP is at $2.3 Trillion.

@UKBengali , @kalu_miah , @Indos , @madokafc

They key player in ASEAN will be Indonesia. Her economy alone, is at $2.3 Trillion. And as her industry and telecom and science research areas of expertise continues to grow, the potential for her to reach a $5 Trillion economy is inevitable. This is the reason why it is important to include Indonesia in any economic and perhaps future military partnership. Bangladesh, too, has much it can offer, in term of man power and natural resources that have yet to be totally capitalized upon. Japan, Indonesia and Bangladesh combined have a population of (128 million, 260 million, 150 million = ~538 million). The inclusion of other nations in ASEAN would also add a healthy balance.

ASEAN + Japan + Bangladesh' Combined GDP = $9 Trillion.

at PPP terms only, right now our economics just barely hit 1 trillion dollar. But let it aside,


once upon a time in the past, my colleague from Department of Foreign Affair while jokingly say, if Indonesian Economics terms doing much better than our White neighbor (Australia) we can confidently to invite them to join ASEAN and they will have no reason to refuse us or they will retain their dignity as Kangaroo leader forever. Both of us laughing and never thought those day will came very near as each passing days

 

[Aepsilons]

You are there to support the US navy. To be consider a global power player, you need foreign military base and port. You need aircraft carrier with its own set of battle group formation. You need a clear cut global strategy for your projection of power or in the words of our American friends, you need to develop a "global value".

Japan does not have expansive or imperialist designs , nor does Japan wish to establish foreign military bases around the world. Those are contradictory to our military defense prerogatives, as established and enshrined in our military conduct and role as per the constitution.

Secondly, Japan does have the capability, namely, the naval might to project power if need be, in the event that it has to intervene for its shipping interests or to aid in our allies. Minister Onodera has already said, as per consultation with Consitutional lawyers and with Abe himself, stated that Japan will now have the ability and legal measures to come to the aid of any of Japan's allies. In the event that these allies are attacked.

Japan has many allies. The United States is not the only ally; others include the Philippines, then there is also Australia. There are now considerations that Japan will secure a defensive alliance partnership with key South East Asian countries. All of this are developing as we speak, my friend.

Notice that in these stipulations, Japan will be a partner for peace, as we in no way are considering building military bases. Only for support in the event that partners are under attack.

@kalu_miah , @madokafc

Yes, you both are right that Indonesia's GDP (NOMINAL) is at $867 Billion. But Indonesia's GDP (PPP) is at $2.3 Trillion. It is trajectory that in 5 years Indonesia's GDP (PPP) should hit $5 Trillion. And its GDP (NOMINAL) should be already at $1.5- $2.0 Trillion.

 

[xunzi]

Given our being brought up in the Cold War and of hearing about the enmities of the Soviet Union and the United States, we tend to relegate foreign relations and military blocs to that of these nations'.

If there is to be an integration of ASEAN , Japan , Bangladesh and other key nations, it will be built on economic development, and military to military cooperation. Considering that the seas that encompasses this geographic location, is the center of all shipping trade, and also the crossroads of civilizations, stabilization is key here.

This military and economic alliance will be built to ensure that there will be no hegemony of powers, but rather, maintenance of freedom of navigation , and security measures.

You are too idealistic. NATO said the same things but it turned out they became an offensive bloc, instead of defensive by nature. Why? Well power abused for one. Over-confident in their power projection. It turns the bloc into a fearful military bloc that will invade other country. Tough to say how the Asian NATO will turn out but I bet is they follow the direction of NATO to expand members interest. In that case, some particular member interest will collide with China. Then who in the bloc is willing to fight us. After all, we got nuke and can destroy any member in the bloc.

 

[Nike]

Shit happens in Indonesia, our currency is not stable. Sometimes they valued at Rp. 8000 per US dollar, and then for the next three months forward you will find them at Rp 11.000 per US dollar, and then six months forward you will find them moving against dollar to touch Rp.10.000 per US dollar. So we measure our economics growth in Rupiah, and we grow steadily at 5 to 7 percent every year. I think, Indonesia, India and Turkey had the same ache in this regard

 

[Aepsilons]

You are too idealistic. NATO said the same things but it turns out they become an offensive bloc, instead of defensive by nature. Why? Well power abused for one. Over-confident in their power projection. It turns the bloc into a fearful military bloc that will invade other country. Tough to say how the Asian NATO will turn out but I bet is they follow the direction of NATO to expand members interest. In that case, some particular member interest will collide with China. Then who in the bloc is willing to fight us. After all, we got nuke and can destroy any member in the bloc.

Japan is not NATO. Japan has no qualms with countries in the Middle East, nor has it any antagonistic relations with countries in Africa, South America. Ours have been a non-interventionalist policy, centered on research and infrastructure development of developing countries.

I do not see this changing even if Japan is to have a military alliance partnership with key nations in South East Asia and abroad.
If , hypothetically, there is to be a military partnership with say Bangladesh and Indonesia, this will be ideal. Why? Because these two reputable nations are majority Muslim, and considering Japan's very respectable view of Muslim nations , and investiture in the Middle East, will only help catalyze further integration and cooperation with Muslim countries.

Shit happens in Indonesia, our currency is not stable. Sometimes they valued at Rp. 8000 per US dollar, and then for the next three months forward you will find them at Rp 11.000 per US dollar, and then six months forward you will find them moving against dollar to touch Rp.10.000 per US dollar. So we measure our economics growth in Rupiah, and we grow steadily at 5 to 7 percent every year. I think, Indonesia, India and Turkey had the same ache in this regard

Indonesia's steady growth rate of 5-7% per annum is ideal and perfect. I'm also interested in Indonesia's ship building industry, it is very reputable.

 

[xunzi]

Japan does not have expansive or imperialist designs , nor does Japan wish to establish foreign military bases around the world. Those are contradictory to our military defense prerogatives, as established and enshrined in our military conduct and role as per the constitution.

Secondly, Japan does have the capability, namely, the naval might to project power if need be, in the event that it has to intervene for its shipping interests or to aid in our allies. Minister Onodera has already said, as per consultation with Consitutional lawyers and with Abe himself, stated that Japan will now have the ability and legal measures to come to the aid of any of Japan's allies. In the event that these allies are attacked.

Japan has many allies. The United States is not the only ally; others include the Philippines, then there is also Australia. There are now considerations that Japan will secure a defensive alliance partnership with key South East Asian countries. All of this are developing as we speak, my friend.

Notice that in these stipulations, Japan will be a partner for peace, as we in no way are considering building military bases. Only for support in the event that partners are under attack.

@kalu_miah , @madokafc

Yes, you both are right that Indonesia's GDP (NOMINAL) is at $867 Billion. But Indonesia's GDP (PPP) is at $2.3 Trillion. It is trajectory that in 5 years Indonesia's GDP (PPP) should hit $5 Trillion. And its GDP (NOMINAL) should be already at $1.5- $2.0 Trillion.

What if it is a false flag, will you participate in the joint defense operation of ally? LOL This is why you need to be careful when you let your right-wing politicians change your constitution. The false flag operation is one of the most dangerous scheme that will lead country to an uninvited war.

Again, you are too idealistic. If you commit to peace, stick to being a Pacifist. The US already promised to defend your country. No reason for you to try meddling in other country affair when it has nothing to do with you. The moment you meddling in other affair is the moment you will run into conflict. Politics is complex, my friend. You don't get to choose. Other will force you to pick your hand.

 

[kalu_miah]

First, the geographical location of the three main players, South Korea, Japan, and Indonesia are not conducive to a joint-operation in any shape or form. Communication will be problematic due to this. Basically they are disconnect from one another. I also mention about the upper potential of Indonesia as surpassing Japan/SK. That is not mentioning the rivalry between Japan and Korea. They will never accept each other as leader, especially when it comes to a military alliance that will be dictated by one player. As I said, joint-leadership is not efficient and not an option in a military alliance.

Geographical location can be some hindrance but it can be blessing also. Being faraway means that the hordes of migrants will not be able flood Japan or South Korea from the allied countries, they can only fly there through legal established means.

Distance in geography did not stop the US and EU countries to partner in NATO, so there are existing examples that counter your argument.

Actually it is good that there is no clear leader, the group will be more democratic and elect leaders who will take turns, just like it happens in many multilateral institutions.

There are more than one ways to achieve the same goal, where there is a will, a way will be found.

 

[xunzi]

Japan is not NATO. Japan has no qualms with countries in the Middle East, nor has it any antagonistic relations with countries in Africa, South America. Ours have been a non-interventionalist policy, centered on research and infrastructure development of developing countries.

I do not see this changing even if Japan is to have a military alliance partnership with key nations in South East Asia and abroad.
If , hypothetically, there is to be a military partnership with say Bangladesh and Indonesia, this will be ideal. Why? Because these two reputable nations are majority Muslim, and considering Japan's very respectable view of Muslim nations , and investiture in the Middle East, will only help catalyze further integration and cooperation with Muslim countries.
.

I know you said this to win the heart of Muslim. But trust me, all countries are the same when they get powerful. They become overconfident and abuse of power happen. I am afraid Japan will be that, too. Your Muslim population is tiny, so it is impossible to make any direct comparison. Also like I said, you don't have a choice. Muslim states also have their own allegiance. If you side with Sunni, then the Shiite will target you. Likewise you side with Shiite, the Sunny will target you. Best to stay out and stick to non-interventionist especially if you don't have the power and might to change the direction of the wind and deflect any tornado coming at you.

Geographical location can be some hindrance but it can be blessing also. Being faraway means that the hordes of migrants will not be able flood Japan or South Korea from the allied countries, they can only fly there through legal established means.

Distance in geography did not stop the US and EU countries to partner in NATO, so there are existing examples that counter your argument.

Actually it is good that there is no clear leader, the group will be more democratic and elect leaders who will take turns, just like it happens in many multilateral institutions.

There are more than one ways to achieve the same goal, where there is a will, a way will be found.

The US have military bases in West Europe and the Atlantic Ocean is NATO backyard unlike the South China Sea.