Steady progress in building ASEAN Economic Community

[Aepsilons]

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.

Come now, no country will come in guns blazing without consulting all areas; be it constitutional, legislative, diplomatic. We are living in the modern world, not during the ages of Cowboys and Indians, Samurais and Ninjas, or Warlords and Generals.

 

[kalu_miah]

@xunzi if you recall this kind of idea I floated years ago and I have weighed in my mind how it can shape Asia. The thing Chinese strategists should understand is that if you like to see the reduction of influence of the US/West/NATO, you will have to allow other structures to grow where your existing middle power neighbors will be able to team up and have some bloc of their own. So this is not just for East Asia, I believe it is also true for West Asia and Eurasia.

Please note that many of our nations are not blessed like China or India, we do not have billion plus population. So we have to somehow find a way to compensate for this and balance out this situation to gain some competitive and strategic edge to reach parity with these large nations.

The US/West/NATO provided that offshore balancing for many developed nations in Asia, but increasingly with a rising China and India, this arrangement is loosing its edge.

So local team building is the best way forward for Asia in my opinion, if we want to see further reduction of outside influence. The US/West/NATO influence will not go away overnight, as that is the nature of balance of power. But the more we invest in these new local team building, the less Asian nations will be dependent on non-Asian powers. So instead of feeling threatened, both China and India should extend their horizon of vision and show wisdom and understanding for these efforts, realizing that it is in their own long term interest to have a more balanced and stable future for Asia.

This direction will eventually open up opportunity for both China and India to build more mature and stable ties with these local teams without having too much influence from outside powers.

 

[xunzi]

Come now, no country will come in guns blazing without consulting all areas; be it constitutional, legislative, diplomatic. We are living in the modern world, not during the ages of Cowboys and Indians, Samurais and Ninjas, or Warlords and Generals.

Ask our American friends if they ever use false flag operation to make other member participate in their scheme. I even think the Syrian chemical crisis is a US's dirty scheme in an attempt to make NATO participate in joint operation. LOL

 

[Aepsilons]

Ask our American friends if they ever use false flag operation to make other member participate in their scheme. I even think the Syrian chemical crisis is a US's dirty scheme in an attempt to make NATO participate in joint operation. LOL

The United States is different, and hers is a more interventionist foreign policy. There are vastly different dichotomies.

 

[xunzi]

@xunzi if you recall this kind of idea I floated years ago and I have weighed in my mind how it can shape Asia. The thing Chinese strategists should understand is that if you like to see the reduction of influence of the US/West/NATO, you will have to allow other structures to grow where your existing middle power neighbors will be able to team up and have some bloc of their own. So this is not just for East Asia, I believe it is also true for West Asia and Eurasia.

Please note that many of our nations are not blessed like China or India, we do not have billion plus population. So we have to somehow find a way to compensate for this and balance out this situation to gain some competitive and strategic edge to reach parity with these large nations.

The US/West/NATO provided that offshore balancing for many developed nations in Asia, but increasingly with a rising China and India, this arrangement is loosing its edge.

So local team building is the best way forward for Asia in my opinion, if we want to see further reduction of outside influence. The US/West/NATO influence will not go away overnight, as that is the nature of balance of power. But the more we invest in these new local team building, the less Asian nations will be dependent on non-Asian powers. So instead of feeling threatened, both China and India should extend their horizon of vision and show wisdom and understanding for these efforts, realizing that it is in their own long term interest to have a more balanced and stable future for Asia.

This direction will eventually open up opportunity for both China and India to build more mature and stable ties with these local teams without having too much influence from outside powers.

We are very good with playing the balancing act. To tell you the truth, we want the West to remain the world police but at the same time, remind them to respect our position and interest. Basically we want the West power to decline but not to the point that they can't play the world police role. I hate to say that. LOL It makes us double face and hypocrite but it is the best option for us as we have no interest to lead the world or anything.

Like I said, we have no problem with anyone forming alliance as long as it is not targeting a 3rd country. I have to keep reminding that. However I don't believe it is possible for an Asian military bloc without a clear cut leader.

I am just afraid that some members in this potential Asian military bloc is going to use this opportunity to further gain their interest at the expense of a 3rd country. In that case, the effectiveness of this military bloc will be put to the test.

The United States is different, and hers is a more interventionist foreign policy. There are vastly different dichotomies.

What make you so confident that Japan will always be a non-interventionist especially after you gain the power and prestigious support from the new Asia Bloc?

 

[Aepsilons]

We are very good with playing the balancing act. To tell you the truth, we want the West to remain the world police but at the same time, remind them to respect our position and interest. Basically we want the West power to decline but not to the point that they can't play the world police role. I hate to say that. LOL It makes us double face and hypocrite but it is the best option for us as we have no interest to lead the world or anything.

Like I said, we have no problem with anyone forming alliance as long as it is not targeting a 3rd country. I have to keep reminding that. However I don't believe it is possible for an Asian military bloc without a clear cut leader.

I am just afraid that some members in this potential Asian military bloc is going to use this opportunity to further gain their interest at the expense of a 3rd country. In that case, the effectiveness of this military bloc will be put to the test.


What make you so confident that Japan will always be a non-interventionist especially after you gain the power and prestigious support from the new Asia Bloc?

Simply by the fact that Japan's economic interests is to remain non-interventionalist. We have vested interests in South America, Africa, the Middle East, and any military provocation would be contradictory , more so, counter-productive for Japan.

As seen in our recent military R&D agreement(s) with both Australia and Israel, the former being in cooperation with Japan for submarine warfare research and the latter in air and anti-missile technology research -- shows how much can be done and attained -- with mere diplomatic channeling. At the same time, Japan is building 10 new OPVs (offshore patrol vehicles) for the Vietnamese Coast Guard, and donating some 10 OPVs for the Philippines' Coast Guard. These will be used for maritime interdiction , purely defensive inventory, i must add.

China should see that Japan's collaboration with many of our mutual neighbors is not to contain any specific 3rd country, but merely to help in the development of these neighbors, many of whom have severe deficiencies in their naval inventory. I mean, even South Korea even recently donated 1 Pohang-class corvette to the Philippine Navy, as a means to augment the Philippines' naval fleet. At the sametime, Korea has sold 12 of their FA-50 Eagles to the Philippine Air Force. Whilst at the same time knowing that the Philippines and China have disputes in territory. But at the same time, South Korea and China have resovled to increase greater ties. You see, all of this is part of the business of nations. No need to find harm or take insult where there was no intention in the first place.

 

[kalu_miah]

We are very good with playing the balancing act. To tell you the truth, we want the West to remain the world police but at the same time, remind them to respect our position and interest. Basically we want the West power to decline but not to the point that they can't play the world police role. I hate to say that. LOL It makes us double face and hypocrite but it is the best option for us as we have no interest to lead the world or anything.

Like I said, we have no problem with anyone forming alliance as long as it is not targeting a 3rd country. I have to keep reminding that. However I don't believe it is possible for an Asian military bloc without a clear cut leader.

I am just afraid that some members in this potential Asian military bloc is going to use this opportunity to further gain their interest at the expense of a 3rd country. In that case, the effectiveness of this military bloc will be put to the test.

What make you so confident that Japan will always be a non-interventionist especially after you gain the power and prestigious support from the new Asia Bloc?

You are thinking of a bipolar world, whereas the rest of the world would like to see a 6/7/8 pole multi-polar world.

You can rest assure that there will not be any deliberate targeting of 3rd country. Having said that, by the very definition of mutual defense alliance, if one country becomes a victim of aggression by a 3rd country, that will be considered as an attack on all.

If Japan wants to take such an initiative, I would leave it to them to figure out whether such a military bloc is feasible or not.

Like it or not, with these alliances, countries will definitely further their interest regardless of how it will affect 3rd country interest, that is the nature of international relations and diplomacy.

Once the alliance is formed, there will be creeping interventionism, it will be hard to avoid it. I for one would like Japan to intervene in Bangladesh, help us establish a proper democracy and make sure that we have much better and efficient governance. India is abusing us and strangling our nation. Hopefully when we become part of a military alliance, we will be able to negate and expel the harmful influence from India and establish more positive influence from allied countries. Weak, small, unstable, poor and underdeveloped nations will need more interference from outside, whereas larger nations like Indonesia, Vietnam and Philippines will need little interference.

 

[xunzi]

You are thinking of a bipolar world, whereas the rest of the world would like to see a 6/7/8 pole multi-polar world.

You can rest assure that there will not be any deliberate targeting of 3rd country. Having said that, by the very definition of mutual defense alliance, if one country becomes a victim of aggression by a 3rd country, that will be considered as an attack on all.

If Japan wants to take such an initiative, I would leave it to them to figure out whether such a military bloc is feasible or not.

Like it or not, with these alliances, countries will definitely further their interest regardless of how it will affect 3rd country interest, that is the nature of international relations and diplomacy.

Once the alliance is formed, there will be creeping interventionism, it will be hard to avoid it. I for one would like Japan to intervene in Bangladesh, help us establish a proper democracy and make sure that we have much better and efficient governance. India is abusing us and strangling our nation. Hopefully when we become part of a military alliance, we will be able to negate and expel the harmful influence from India and establish more positive influence from allied countries. Weak, small, unstable, poor and underdeveloped nations will need more interference from outside, whereas larger nations like Indonesia, Vietnam and Philippines will need little interference.

On one hand you want eventual interventionist policy in the alliance but on the other hand our Japanese friend @Nihonjin1051 said he don't foresee Japan engaged in interventionism. So I see some crack already. This is why it is good in theory only. It is not practical. Too many states having different viewpoint and value. But if you plan to make alliance, make sure don't let the little Vietnamese join. They are rat that will destroy any alliance prosperity. LOL

 

[Cossack25A1]

I doubt that South-East Asia will have its own NATO as the last time it had which is in the form SEATO, it failed. Also, each nations in South-East Asia has their own territorial claims and if given the chance (warmongering leaders, irrational decisions), the SEA countries would rather tear each other apart than solve it as "humanely" as possible.

 

[Aepsilons]

On one hand you want eventual interventionist policy in the alliance but on the other hand our Japanese friend @Nihonjin1051 said he don't foresee Japan engaged in interventionism. So I see some crack already. This is why it is good in theory only. It is not practical. Too many states having different viewpoint and value. But if you plan to make alliance, make sure don't let the little Vietnamese join. They are rat that will destroy any alliance prosperity. LOL

One of the reasons why I like conversing with @kalu_miah is because, ever since I was a new participant to this forum, he was one of the nicest members who welcomed me here , and through links and descriptive threads , he conveyed with me with his enthusiasm for a larger integration with Asia - Pacific countries. That was back in May (Isn't amazing how 2 months pass by? , lol). Its always good to think and analyze things in an asymmetric viewpoint, beyond the box, so to say, beyond the scope of the horizon.

Now, to answer your query, about my saying non-interventionist policy; yes, that remains true. An offensive , or a first-strike initiative would be contradictory. But say, for example, one member of a mutual alliance is attacked or perhaps a territory belonging to this member nation has been illegally occupied by another country outside the security alliance, then members of the alliance will , collectively, eject the illegal occupiers and persecute the situation until there is a ceasefire called.

You see, this kind of security alliance does not have to rely on foreign military intervention from countries beyond the Asia-Pacific horizon.

 

[kalu_miah]

On one hand you want eventual interventionist policy in the alliance but on the other hand our Japanese friend @Nihonjin1051 said he don't foresee Japan engaged in interventionism. So I see some crack already. This is why it is good in theory only. It is not practical. Too many states having different viewpoint and value. But if you plan to make alliance, make sure don't let the little Vietnamese join. They are rat that will destroy any alliance prosperity. LOL

There is no crack like you stated. We are just posting our ideas from our own point of view. As the first mover and founder, Japan will of course set the tone about how things will be run.

Vietnamese should be free to join, like any other nations in South East Asia. In your case, you would be dealing with more mature leadership from allied countries, if you don't like dealing with them. So that is another plus.

 

[Aepsilons]

I doubt that South-East Asia will have its own NATO as the last time it had which is in the form SEATO, it failed. Also, each nations in South-East Asia has their own territorial claims and if given the chance (warmongering leaders, irrational decisions), the SEA countries would rather tear each other apart than solve it as "humanely" as possible.

I agree that ASEAN , as an entity, has much to develop, one has to credit the Bloc's ability to maintain dialogue. They were able to keep peace after the 1998 East Timor (Timor Leste) debacle with Indonesia, the recent Cambodian and Thai border clashes (due to differences on the Preah Vihear temple site), as well as the recent Philippine rebels that had landed in Eastern Malaysia at Lahad Datu, due to historical claims. They were, ASEAN, able to maintain peace and communication.

I would rather convey my congratulations to the ASEAN countries for keeping the unity. Despite the cultural, and political dynamism.

 

[xunzi]

There is no crack like you stated. We are just posting our ideas from our own point of view. As the first mover and founder, Japan will of course set the tone about how things will be run.

Vietnamese should be free to join, like any other nations in South East Asia. In your case, you would be dealing with more mature leadership from allied countries, if you don't like dealing with them. So that is another plus.

It is a crack in that you have the ultimate different value than what Japan envision in the alliance. You only think it will be smooth sailing alliance where everyone is happily living together except until their house got burn. Nobody comes to the rescue. India will not give up a fight against Japan if they interfering in their political sphere. So say what you might, Japan will be put to the test facing against the big boy of the world.

Everyone knows the Vietnamese claim our territories. By letting them join, we will feel threaten by this collective self defense. You have to understand our position and respect our national interest. Like Russia have demonstrated, when you mess with Russia core interest, Russia will not walk away without a fight.

 

[Aepsilons]

It is a crack in that you have the ultimate different value than what Japan envision in the alliance. You only think it will be smooth sailing alliance where everyone is happily living together except until their house got burn. Nobody comes to the rescue. India will not give up a fight against Japan if they interfering in their political sphere. So say what you might, Japan will be put to the test facing against the big boy of the world.

Everyone knows the Vietnamese claim our territories. By letting them join, we will feel threaten by this collective self defense. You have to understand our position and respect our national interest. Like Russia have demonstrated, when you mess with Russia core interest, Russia will not walk away without a fight.

@xunzi ,

I think you need to research a bit more the political discourse between Bangladesh and India. These two nations, recently settled their maritime differences, wherein Bangladesh was awarded. The resolution ended a 40-year-old dispute, a United Nations tribunal delivered its verdict on Tuesday on India and Bangladesh's maritime boundaries in the Bay of Bengal, awarding nearly four-fifth of the 25,000 sq km of the exclusive economic zone to Bangladesh.

The verdict, binding on both countries, opens the way for Bangladesh to explore for oil and gas in the Bay of Bengal, and ends a dispute over a sea border with India that has ruffled ties between the nations.

This effectively establishes maritime boundaries between India and Bangladesh, as well as secures the Bangladeshi Navy's area of operations. Bangladesh, has been a core player for South East Asia, being the fact that it shares a large land and maritime boundary with Myanmar.

Bangladesh would benefit from its integration in this alliance because : 1) It would pave the way to a Free Trade Agreement, 2) Investments into infrastructure projects such as electrical grid, nuclear power, possibility of building a deep sea port in Sonidia Island. Bangladesh, as a largely peaceful nation, and one with a large population, will benefit in a FTA, and technology trade. Also, As a Muslim country, and relatively peaceful, it will open the mindsets of peaceful integration with Muslim core nations.

 

[xunzi]

Simply by the fact that Japan's economic interests is to remain non-interventionalist. We have vested interests in South America, Africa, the Middle East, and any military provocation would be contradictory , more so, counter-productive for Japan.

As seen in our recent military R&D agreement(s) with both Australia and Israel, the former being in cooperation with Japan for submarine warfare research and the latter in air and anti-missile technology research -- shows how much can be done and attained -- with mere diplomatic channeling. At the same time, Japan is building 10 new OPVs (offshore patrol vehicles) for the Vietnamese Coast Guard, and donating some 10 OPVs for the Philippines' Coast Guard. These will be used for maritime interdiction , purely defensive inventory, i must add.

China should see that Japan's collaboration with many of our mutual neighbors is not to contain any specific 3rd country, but merely to help in the development of these neighbors, many of whom have severe deficiencies in their naval inventory. I mean, even South Korea even recently donated 1 Pohang-class corvette to the Philippine Navy, as a means to augment the Philippines' naval fleet. At the sametime, Korea has sold 12 of their FA-50 Eagles to the Philippine Air Force. Whilst at the same time knowing that the Philippines and China have disputes in territory. But at the same time, South Korea and China have resovled to increase greater ties. You see, all of this is part of the business of nations. No need to find harm or take insult where there was no intention in the first place.

You must realize the Muslim world is against Israel right? This is another example that you don't get to choose. Your action will lead to some resentment elsewhere. This is why it is extremely difficult to have an effective alliance without a CLEAR cut leader with a CLEAR GOAL and STRATEGY. If you are non-interventionist, don't bother making alliance. It will never work. Alliance intend for interventionism..