EAST TIMOR/ASEAN (r)

[bina@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Good for you, Julien.  All the rats come out of the walls when they think the house might be falling down.  The only thing that matters to them is what directly affects their income and their prestige.  They dont care what happens to Burma, or to anybody else, for that matter.  They dont care about right or wrong, or truth or justice.  These are just words for them, they never talk about or think about these things.  That's why they come out with nothing but curses when you challenge them.

Telling the truth to these fools is like holding a cross up to a vampire.

At 11:18 PM 9/15/99 -0400, Julien Moe wrote:
>Dear All,
>             On the 14th of September  I wrote an article on ASEAN's failed
>constructive engagement policies towards Burma and I received loads of
>flaming emails from people working for ASEAN. To my surprise nobody among
>them argued my statements on ASEAN. They just said I am wrong but never gave
>me an explanation why I  was wrong. To criticise  is  your right but
>dictating is an authoritarian behaviour that is done by dictators who do not
>know how to appreciate freedoma nd democracy. Learn to appreciate freedom of
>expression. When you're in a country imposed by dictators,that's a different
>story.
>
> <<<<ASEAN shouldget rid of its status quo policies and prescribe new
>policies that practically
>work out to influence the Burmese situation and Indonesian situation.
>Non-interference policies are beneficial only for the ruliong class when
>there is a conflict. When there's a conflict, the ruling class defeats the
>ruled class inhumanely. Burma could have been free from military
>dictatorship if ASEAN denied Burma into the organisation. Now that ASEAN is
>being used by the military brasshats to be able to hold on to power without
>the will and the consent of the people because ASEAN is now supporting the
>military regime with blind faith.Is constructive engagement by ASEAN
>working to influence the Burmese situation? Obviously not!Since ASEAN admitted
>Burma into the organisation as a member, human rights situations in Burma have
>been worsening.>>>
>
>The following news article is from a STRATFOR REPORT  from Global
>Intelligence Update dated the 15th of September 1999. The article does talk
>about how the founding principles of ASEAN suck.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Julien Moe
>
>
>East Timor Triggers Reevaluation of ASEAN Principle of Non-Intervention
>15 September 1999
>
>Summary
>
>The debate continues over the composition of the United Nations peacekeeping
>force for East Timor. The main focus has been on an Asian versus Western-led
>mission. Despite the Indonesian government stating it will accept any forces
>the UN decides to send, many in Indonesia and other Asian nations maintain
>that the peacekeeping force and the issue of East Timor as a whole should be
>handled within Asia. The question of peacekeepers has accelerated the
>dialogue among ASEAN nations on the basic principle of non-interference,
>bringing to the forefront the issues of Asian unity and cooperation in
>non-economic areas. If the ASEAN nations overcome their long-held opposition
>to involvement in the internal affairs of member countries it could lead the
>region down a slippery slope. 
>
>Analysis
>
>With Indonesia's decision to allow foreign peacekeeping forces into East
>Timor, the debate over the force's composition began. Although Australia
>offered to lead the peacekeepers, Malaysia's proposal of a primarily Asian
>force, presented at the APEC summit in New Zealand on September 12, quickly
>attracted Indonesia. Members of Indonesia's parliament called for the
>rejection of Australian, New Zealand, Portuguese, and U.S. troops. The U.S
>reacted by insisting that Indonesia not put conditions on the international
>force's composition.
>
>The debate over an appropriate response continues among Asian nations, even
>though Indonesia said it would leave the decision of force composition to
>the UN. Within the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) the issue
>of whether and how to intervene in East Timor raises the long held and often
>contentious principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of member
>nations. Since its founding in 1967 as a chiefly economic organization,
>ASEAN distanced itself from the internal issues of member states. As a
>result, countries like Myanmar were admitted despite international
>condemnation of its human rights record.
>
>An ASEAN decision to allow member states to intervene in the East Timor
>crisis would open a Pandora's Box leading to the violation of the
>non-interference principle, in a region where member states have had some
>very bad experiences with outside intervention. A decision to enter into
>East Timor would lead to the downfall of one of the founding principles of
>ASEAN cooperation. On a larger scale, the principle of non-interference is
>followed by most of the Asian nations. Overturning it could unsettle the 
>region.
>
>Non-interference became a focus among ASEAN nations in 1997. Cambodia's
>entrance into ASEAN was delayed following now Prime Minister Hun Sen's coup.
>Asia's economic crisis further complicated the non-interference issue. The
>crisis threw ASEAN nations into competition over western funds. But distaste
>of the IMF-induced austerity measures and the region's slow recovery led to
>a reunification of sorts among ASEAN and other Asian nations. A movement
>toward a more economic, political, and even militarily unified Asia
>independent from the West began to form.
>
>Given the current crisis in East Timor, non-interference is particularly
>significant for ASEAN, as Indonesia is its largest member. The entire
>organization depends on Indonesia's stability.
>
>All of ASEAN's founding members agreed that an Asian solution is more
>palatable than western interference in East Timor. Still each of the
>countries, especially Thailand, ASEAN's current chair, emphasized that in
>offering support and assistance in East Timor, they are not doing so under
>the ASEAN banner. Not surprisingly, both Myanmar and Cambodia have said they
>will not offer troops, as both are staunch supporters of the
>non-interference ideal.
>
>Beside ASEAN, Japan, South Korea, and China are being drawn into the East
>Timor crisis. Japanese Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura said on August 14,
>"We should listen to the opinion of the Indonesian government on what sort
>of troops will be most effective in restoring order." South Korea is
>currently mulling 300 Special Forces troops for East Timor, while China is
>considering also sending troops.
>
>For China to even consider joining the peacekeeping operation in East Timor
>is significant, as it has traditionally feared setting an international
>precedent for similar actions toward separatist struggles in China. This
>involvement is part of the larger move toward Asian unity and a response to
>the perceived U.S. hegemony in international affairs. Among the Northeast
>Asian nations, there have been several recent advancements in military
>cooperation, with joint naval exercises between South Korea and Japan, Japan
>and Russia, and proposed exercises between South Korea and China.
>
>As the UN decides the structure of the East Timor peacekeeping mission,
>discussions on Asian unity and regionalism have accelerated. East Timor is a
>test case for post economic crisis Asia in determining just how far Asian
>cooperation should go. While the issue of economic cooperation without
>western intervention was previously Asia's unifying theme, dealing with
>regional political and security crises will force Asia to rethink its
>generally accepted non-interference relationship.
>
>The debate that is now raging is whether it is better to remain politically
>and militarily neutral, a path that may lead to more western intervention in
>Asia's political structure, or to become more closely involved in each
>other's national issues in order to avoid western interference. While the
>former was previously the overwhelmingly accepted mandate for Asia, the
>latter now appears to be gaining the upper hand.
> 
>