AGAIN,

MORE PLAGIARIZED WORK FROM YOU-KNOW-WHO

Left side:
His opinion, published by The Jakarta Post, 30 July 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/07/30/the-us-growing-interest-southeast-
asia.html

Right side:
Catharin Dalpino, “Group Think: The Challenge of U.S.-ASEAN Relations” published by
The Asia Foundation, 2008
http://asiafoundation.org/resources/pdfs/17ASEANARA2008.pdf
Muhadi Sugiono, “30-year Dialogue Relations and the Challenges Ahead”, paper
presented in a seminar co-organized by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Republic of
Indonesia and the Department of Internatioal Relations, the Faculty of Social and Political
Sciences, Gadjah Mada University, in Yogyakarta, 29 August 2007
http://msugiono.staff.ugm.ac.id/publikasi/30yearsdialogue.pdf

NOTICE THE COLOR-HIGHLIGHTS!!!!

 Perwita’s 30 July 2009 Jakarta Post Opinion
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed
the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation
(TAC) last week. The formal establishment of
this friendship treaty with the United States
marks a new chapter in US-ASEAN relations.
Although relations between ASEAN and the
US have no doubt been largely positive for
both sides, the shift in US foreign policy
regarding the region will no doubt impact
future relations.
Even though many analysts have argued that
Southeast Asia has enjoyed an environment of
relative stability, it does not necessarily mean
the region has been free from potential
conflict. There are still many problems which
have the potential to trigger an escalation of
the complex pattern of relations among the
members and non members of ASEAN. In
other words, ASEAN should maintain its
strategic opportunities by working well both
internally and internationally.
In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, the US found
itself in a paradoxical position with Southeast
Asia and, more specifically, with ASEAN. On
the one hand, relations with several ASEAN
member states have expanded significantly
with the US-led global war against terrorism
and because of a new appreciation in
Washington of China’s rise in the region.
Catharin Dalpino 2008 Article
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations
has favorably altered the balance of power in
East Asia by lending collective weight to the
smaller and less powerful countries of
Southeast Asia, all of whom now belong to the
organization. However, the inclusion of Burma
(also known as Myanmar) in the group has
complicated the U.S. relationship with ASEAN
because of strong congressional opposition to
any contacts with that regime. Although U.S.
relations with individual members of ASEAN
are good, many members of ASEAN believe
the United States has been less attentive than
other regional countries to the organization.
The United States is the only regional country
that has not adhered to the ASEAN Treaty of
Amity and Cooperation, a prerequisite for
participation in the annual East Asia summit
meetings. How important a role should
ASEAN play in the U.S. approach to the
region, and are there steps a new U.S.
administration could take that would
strengthen U.S. ties to the countries of
Southeast Asia?
Half a decade after the pivotal events of
September 11, 2001, the United States finds
itself in a paradoxical position with Southeast
Asia and, more specifically, the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). On the one
hand, relations with several Southeast Asian
governments have expanded significantly with
the U.S.-led global war against terrorism and
because of a new awareness in Washington of
China’s rise in Asia.
 Perwita’s 30 July 2009 Jakarta Post Opinion
These two factors sparked a modest
renaissance in US bilateral relations with
ASEAN. Washington found new common
cause with Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore
and Manila in initiatives to strengthen anti-
terrorism measures which included intelligence
sharing, joint surveillance and police training.
However, critics make two arguments that
detract from this claim. First, the global war
against terrorism has created a backlash,
particularly in Muslim areas of Southeast Asia,
particularly in Indonesia.
Surveys suggest that the image of the United
States in the region’s domestic populations has
fallen significantly since the promulgation of
the Bush doctrine and the beginning of the Iraq
War. The post 9/11 era has diminished the
power of state-centered political and military
rivalry to dominate international relations.
On the other hand, many non-state actors now
have a more significant global influence. There
is also a process of reconfiguring power
through which international security
relationships are channeled.
Catharin Dalpino 2008 Article
These two factors sparked a modest
renaissance in U.S. bilateral relations with
Southeast Asia. Washington found new
common cause with
Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, and Manila
in initiatives to strengthen intelligence sharing,
joint surveillance and police training. Indeed,
anti-terrorism was the wedge that enabled the
United States to resume military-to-military
relations with Indonesia. It has helped to
reconfigure and renew the U.S.-Philippines
treaty alliance, although it has proved to be
more problematic in the U.S.-Thailand alliance
because of the violence in southern Thailand in
recent years. Counter-terrorism has also
created a new and positive, if minor,
dimension in relations with Hanoi, Phnom
Penh, and Vientiane — one that does not
involve the complex legacy of the Vietnam
War. U.S. policymakers are not inaccurate
when they say that U.S. relations with
Southeast Asia have never been better.
But critics make two arguments that diminish,
if not entirely contradict, this claim. One is that
the global war against terrorism has created a
backlash, particularly in Muslim areas of
Southeast Asia. Surveys and anecdotal
evidence suggest that the image of the United
States in the region’s domestic populations –
the now-cliché loss of “soft power” – has
fallen precipitously since the promulgation of
the Bush doctrine and the beginning of the Iraq
war.
 Perwita’s 30 July 2009 Jakarta Post Opinion
A second argument holds that China has
increased its political, economic, and security
presence in Southeast Asia. US counter-
terrorism policy has indirectly helped Beijing
to deepen its engagement in smaller, poorer
Southeast Asian countries where Islamic
radicalism is not a major problem such as
Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos.
The growing number of external powers
seeking closer ties with Southeast Asia –
Japan, Australia, India, Russia, the EU, as well
as China – has led analysts on both sides of the
Pacific to worry that the US presence in the
region is diluted by default. A more specific
concern is that a regional architecture is
emerging which could weaken US power in
the region, if not now then at some point in the
future.
. on both sides of the Pacific to worry that the
Catharin Dalpino 2008 Article
A second, related, argument holds that China
has increased its political, economic, and
security presence in Southeast Asia
because of the current tendency for U.S.
policymakers to focus primarily on counter-
terrorism in the region. Although Beijing’s
new Southeast Asia policy essentially
coalesced in the 1990s —a
nd received a quantum boost with the 1997
Asian economic crisis when China reached out
to the most afflicted countries with offers of
bilateral assistance — U.S. counter-terrorism
policy has no doubt helped Beijing to deepen
its engagement in smaller, poorer Southeast
Asian countries where Islamic radicalism is
not a major problem: Burma, Cambodia, and
Laos.1 The growing number of external
powers seeking closer ties to Southeast Asia –
Japan, Australia, India, Russia, the European
Union, as well as China – has caused analysts
U.S. presence in the region is diluted by
default. A more specific concern is that a
regional architecture is emerging which could
weaken U.S. power in the region, if not now
then at some point in the foreseeable future.
Some new regional groups, such as ASEAN
Plus Three (APT) seek to draw a sharper line
between Asia and the broader Pacific. Others,
such as the East Asia Summit (EAS) are more
inclusive but require that members adhere to
specific regional standards. For all
practicalpurposes, these standards are
encapsulated in “the ASEAN way.” Recently,
adhering to them also required signing the
ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation
(TAC).
 Perwita’s 30 July 2009 Jakarta Post Opinion
While there are no major problems that
threaten the relations between ASEAN and the
US in the near future, the lack of trust will lead
to serious problem in the long term. Amid the
rise of China as regional power, both ASEAN
and the US have to make a greater effort to
trust each other. They cannot take their
common interests for granted. The common
interests of containing communism during the
Cold War and now in combating terrorism
have no doubt brought the two parties together.
Secretary Clinton stated that a greater
engagement with ASEAN is pivotal for the
US. Further, US Ambassador to ASEAN Scot
Marciel argued that the US also wants ASEAN
“to remain strong and independent, enjoy
peace, stability, ensure growing prosperity and
greater freedom, achieve their goals for
integration and [for the US] to work in
partnership with ASEAN on bilateral, regional
and global issues”.
Long lasting cooperation can only be built
upon a more important foundation than simple
interests. Trust and shared norms are essential
if long lasting relationships are to be
maintained. Unfortunately, so far, ASEAN-US
relations have not reached a phase where trust
and shared norms rule.
Muhadi Sugiono’s 2007 paper
The Challenges Facing ASEAN-US
Relations
Critical analysis clearly shows that the
ASEAN-US Relations were based mainly on
the logic of power politics and of
functionalism. Despite the difference between
the two logics, they both are instrumental in
character, in the sense that interests
(understood respectively as political and
material interest) motivates ASEAN and the
US to cooperate very closely. But, while the
two logics may be very important or necessary
for cooperation to take place, they are not
sufficient to produce long lasting interstate
cooperation (Sugiono, 1997). A long lasting
cooperation can only be build upon the more
important foundation than simply interest.
Trust and shared norms are among the most
important aspects that the parties have to have
in order to maintain long lasting relationship.
Unfortunately, the ASEAN-US Relations have
not reached such a phase where trust and
shared norms rule.
...
...
While it does not necessarily poses immediate
threat to the relations between ASEAN and the
US in the near future, the lack of trust will lead
to serious problem in the longer future. Amid the
rise of China as regional power both ASEAN
and the US have to devote more effort to bring
more trust to each other. They cannot take their
common interest for granted. Common interest in
containing Communism during the Cold War
and in combating terrorism after the terrorist
attack in 2001 have no doubt brought the two
parties together. But, beyond these immediate
interests, the two parties need more substantial
logic of cooperation, i.e. the logic that bring
more trust and shared norms.
 Could we fix you if you broke?
And is your punch line just a joke?

I’ll never talk again

Oh boy you’ve left me speechless
You’ve left me speechless, so speechless

(Lady Gaga, “Speechless”)