Words matter greatly in diplomatic statements. They reveal political attitudes and power relations, and are potential precursors to future state actions and policy behaviors. In recent years, the term “Indo-Pacific” has become widely resonant as a diplomatic and geopolitical construct, especially at the highest levels of Australian, Indian, Japanese, and American governments. During his Asia tour last year, US President Donald Trump consistently used the term when speaking to Asian counterparts.

Gurpreet Khurana argues that the term “Indo-Pacific” highlights the importance of the “Indian Ocean” in which India, because of its growing profile, would play a greater role in Asia-Pacific affairs, particularly the maintenance of a maritime environment that is conducive to regional economic growth and development. To others, the term “Asia-Pacific” is a “more narrow East Asian or Western Pacific formulation.” This observation has basis because India is absent in economic arrangements such as the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Read more ...

^{Photo from PCOO.gov.ph}

“The United Nations,” the American diplomat Richard Holbrooke once said, “is only as strong as its member-states wish it to be.” To an even greater extent, the same is true for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). A loose grouping of diverse countries, ASEAN operates primarily through the principles of consensus and consultation which, in practice, means that every member-state has a veto power.

Arguably, these guiding principles have served ASEAN well in decades past. However, recent events suggest that, underpinned by these principles, ASEAN appears to show some signs of strain in addressing regional security issues, foremost of which is the South China Sea (SCS). ASEAN plays a leading role in shaping the multilateral architecture of the region. As Amitav Acharya pointed out, “[t]here is currently no alternative to ASEAN’s convening power in Asia” since the “great powers are not capable of leading Asian regional institutions because of mutual mistrust and a lack of legitimacy.” In this context, the SCS dispute, as one scholar emphasized, will be a “hard case test” of both ASEAN’s capacity to resolve/manage the issue among affected member-states and promoting the overall regional peace and stability.

Read more ...

After five months in battle, Marawi City in the Philippines was declared liberated from the control of the homegrown pro-ISIS Maute group. The attack was significant not just for the Philippines but also for ASEAN, as terrorists were attempting to obtain a foothold in the Southeast Asian region. However, the liberation should not make ASEAN complacent. With the growing threats of terrorism and its use of modern technology, ASEAN should beef up security measures and work with other countries that share these security concerns.

Photo from The Indian Express

Several countries extended assistance to Philippine security forces during the Marawi crisis. The United States provided technical and logistics assistance, and claimed that no US troops were on the ground fighting alongside Filipino soldiers. China sent rifles and ammunition. Aside from these, the Philippine government had received rehabilitation aid even before the crisis ended. India, for instance, donated US$500,000 to rebuild the devastated city. It was the first time for the country to send outreach to another nation to help counter terrorism.

India is one country that has had much experience in dealing with violent extremism. ASEAN should take advantage of what an increasingly proactive India can offer in countering terrorism and transnational illegal activities that come along with it. In terms of long term assistance, India is providing support for the Philippines in cybersecurity information exchanges and through the training of officers handling deradicalization. New Delhi’s efforts to secure and monitor cyberspace can help track activities of terrorists and prevent extremist recruitment not just in the Philippines but in Southeast Asia.

In what other areas do ASEAN’s and India’s interests in security converge? How can their partnership enhance the broader security of the region?

Read more ...

^{Photo from Rappler}

Manila is now under pressure after the Japanese embassy expressed concern over a statue to commemorate "comfort women" put up along Roxas Boulevard on December 8. Wartime atrocities, including comfort women forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese Imperial Army during World War II, continue to mire Japan’s relations with its neighbors, notably China, Korea, and the Philippines. But over time, Japan’s soft power, investments, and overseas aid softened the position of most Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines. While surviving comfort women became national figures in Korea, their Filipina counterparts have become marginalized and Philippine authorities have become largely indifferent to their legitimate demands for an official apology and compensation from Japan.

Read more ...