Indonesia has seen no respite from its turbulent politics, faltering economy, and simmering conflicts since mass pressure forced President Soeharto from office in 1998 after decades of authoritarian rule. The International Crisis Group (ICG) has focused its Indonesian research on separatist conflicts in Aceh and Papua, communal violence in Maluku and Kalimantan, and the ongoing economic crisis, and has recommended specific military and judicial reforms. In Burma, which has known near-constant conflict since its independence in 1948, the Group has focused on ethnic antagonisms, regime policies, and needed reforms. ICG has also assessed the efficacy of foreign sanctions and engagements as alternative ways of inducing change, and suggested how the international community might help lower the potential for violent strife in a future political transition. Gareth Evans, during his long tenure as Australia's foreign minister (1988-1996), played key roles in bringing peace to Cambodia, founding the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, and promoting forms of regionalism reflecting his country's proximity to Asia. For his Cambodian work he was awarded the ANZAC Peace Prize in 1994. Writing of Evans' record as foreign minister, ex-Hong Kong Governor Chris Patten has observed: "High intelligence and principle added to a razor-sharp wit ensured that he was a controversial figure, but one who left the world better than he found it." Foreign affairs, human rights, and legal reform are among the topics explored by Evans in his many publications. Most recently he co-chaired the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. A long-time former member of Australia's parliament (1978-1999), Evans holds degrees in law from Melbourne University and in politics, economics, and philosophy from Oxford University.

American news from Indonesia has been alarming. "Asian Terror: Al Qaeda Seeks Niche in Indonesia, Officials Fear," headlined the New York Times on 23 January 2002. In the same issue, in a column ambitiously subtitled "What the Muslim World Really Feels," Tom Friedman described "an iron curtain of misunderstanding separating America and the Arab-Muslim world"--a world marked, in his view, by "enormous cultural resistance to believing anything good about America."

Indonesia is mainly Malay, not Arab, but it has more Muslims than any other country. How seriously should signs of jihadism there be taken? Ostensibly Islamist or jihadist movements include Darul Islam, HAMMAS, Laskar Jihad, the Islamic Defenders Front, the Islamic Youth Movement, Jemaah Islamiah, and KISDI. In Maluku and Sulawesi, Christians have killed Muslims and vice versa. Americans and their embassy in Jakarta have been threatened. How should such groups, events, and risks be described, explained, and responded to? In what specific ways are faith, politics, and violence intersecting in Indonesia--and with what implications for Indonesians and Americans?

Analysts have long portrayed Indonesian Muslims as exemplary in their openness and tolerance toward non-Muslims and, within the Muslim community, toward religious diversity, creativity, and reform. Were these observers naive? Or have jihadism and Islamism been grossly overdrawn, and for reasons that involve politics, prejudice, and sensationalism far more than actual conditions? In this volatile context, how realistic are current reformist projects to foster a "liberal Islam," a "moderate Islam," a "feminist Islam," or a distinctively accommodative "Indonesian Islam"--as against an avowedly "militant Islam" that would impose an "Islamic state"?

How was it that Afghanistan, a country that was often conquered and ruled by outsiders before 1800, became seemingly impossible to conquer and rule in the 19th and 20th centuries? An historical examination of Afghan history reveals that premodern Central Asian rulers looked upon war and conquest as the business of displacing rival elites, a process having little or nothing to do with the inhabitants of the territory. During the 19th century, this pattern began to change in Afghanistan where governments found themselves dependent on raising tribal armies to repel foreign invaders, such as the British, at the cost of sharing power with them in the postwar period. This pattern continued into the 20th century when during each period of state collapse drew an ever-wider part of the population into the political struggle for power. The Soviet invasion drew the widest possible opposition but upon their withdrawal no faction was able to create a stable government. Afghanistan fell into ten years of civil war that opened it up to extreme movements such the Taliban and its exploitation by outsiders such as Osama bin Laden. Since war alone has now proved incapable of solving Afghanistan's problems the current conflict in Afghanistan can only be won by a wider policy that makes Afghanistan's economic and political reconstruction a priority in a way that can end its cycle of anarchy.

High-level talks between the United States and North Korea began under the previous Bush administration, and continued throughout the 1990s. These negotiations succeeded in mothballing the North's nuclear reactor and, with immense help from President Kim Dae-Jung's "sunshine policy," were on the brink of another major breakthrough a year ago. Although little diplomacy movement has occurred since the new Bush administration took office, and much has changed elsewhere in the world since the terrorist attacks on September 11th, conditions remain conducive to a rapprochement between Washington and Pyongyang, and a final, formal end to the Korean War. This program is free and open to the public. Lunch will be provided for those who **RSVP before noon on Wednesday, January 16th** to Okky Choi. Tel: (650) 724-8271 or Email: okkychoi@stanford.edu

How has the largely American war in Afghanistan--the terrorist attacks of 11 September, the counterattack that began on 7 October, and the retreat of Taliban forces since 13 November--affected the foreign policy environment now facing Northeast and Southeast Asian states? Is this the beginning of Cold War II? Has terrorism replaced communism as the enemy of a new and enduring global alliance led by the United States? How do East Asian governments see themselves in relation to this anti-terrorist coalition? As enthusiasts eager to defend or promote democracy in politics and moderation in religion? As joiners hoping to elicit American support for the repression of "terrorism" inside their own countries, e.g., in Tibet, Aceh, and the Sulu archipelago? As bystanders skeptical of American motives and resentful of American influence, but resigned to their inability to curb American hegemony? As balancers eager to organize East Asia into a region able to defend itself against unchecked American power? Matters relevant to the answering of such questions include: disappointing economic trends in much of East Asia; the likely impact of the compromises reaching at the recent World Trade Organization meeting in Qatar; the status and implications of the proposed free trade area between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN); changing affinities and tensions among ASEAN members; military progress or failure in the effort to destroy Al Qaeda; and the possible involvement of East Asian contingents in a UN-brokered arrangement for the stabilization of Afghanistan. Simon SC Tay teaches international law at the National University of Singapore. He was selected for three terms as a Nominated Member of the Singapore Parliament. His many publications include A New ASEAN in a New Millennium (2000); Preventive Diplomacy and the ASEAN Regional Forum (1999); and "Towards a Singaporean Civil Society," in Southeast Asian Affairs 1998. He also writes stories and poems; his 1991 book, Stand Alone, was short-listed for the Commonwealth Prize. In 2000 the World Economic Forum named him a "global leader of tomorrow."

Anand Patwardhan's latest film, a work in progress (180 min.), shot in India, Pakistan, and Japan The director will be present for discussion after the screening. Starting with the outbreak of jingoism that marked the 1998 series of nuclear tests by India and Pakistan, Patwardhan creates a road movie that vivifies the human and historical realities of this new leap in the world's nuclearization. We visit test sites with politicians, watch urban sound-and-light spectacles glorifying the military, hear the stories of suffering villagers near the test site, travel with peace marchers who confront furious pro-bomb crowds, join a conference of Indian and Pakistani peace activists, and go to Japan to hear testimony from survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear attacks. In the style that has distinguished his earlier films, Patwardhan brilliantly captures individual voices, gestures, facial expressions, and public dramas that simultaneously reveal intimate human experience and the sweep of history. India's most controversial and renowned documentary producer, Patwardhan has won numerous Indian and international prizes during his career as a filmmaker, which spans more than a quarter of a century. While his films cover a wide variety of subjects, regions, and social groups, his central interests have been human rights, communalism, and violence. For information, see . Further questions? Contact , , or 650-725-9732.

In the wake of the horrific terrorist attacks of September 11th, and the subsequent response by the United States, millions of Muslims across Asia face a new political landscape and changes to daily life. As the conflict in Afghanistan drags on, Muslims in Asia are being put in a more difficult position, and uncertainty about the the future abounds. A panel of distinguished scholars on Islam in Asia will help to explore this complex situation.

Press reports of rising anti-Americanism and Muslim militance in several Southeast Asian countries have fueled speculation that the United States may be planning to intervene against terrorist groups in that part of the world. How credible are these reports? In Indonesia, which has more Muslim citizens than any country with the possible exception of India, Islamist activists have demanded the severing of U.S.-Indonesian relations and threatened to expel Americans. There has been speculation that American advisers may soon arrive in the southern Philippines to help Manila root out ostensibly Islamist rebels operating there. While criticizing the bombing of Afghanistan, Malaysian Premier Mahathir Mohamad has accused his Muslim opposition of links to Islamist subversion. Meanwhile, Malaysian jihadist elements are alleged to have been in touch with Osama bin Laden's network. How real are these perceived dangers? What do they imply for stability and democracy in Southeast Asia, and for the future of America's global coalition against terror? Bambang Harymurti has long been associated with Tempo, the leading newsweekly in Indonesia. He served on its editorial board from 1987. When the magazine was banned in 1994, he moved to the daily newspaper Media Indonesia. He returned to Tempo following its reappearance in printed form in 1998. He has held fellowships at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and the East-West Center, among other institutions. He was also a finalist in Indonesia's astronaut program. Fortunately for journalism, he did not make the cut. Don Emmerson convenes the Southeast Asia Forum in the Asia/Pacific Research Center, a unit of Stanford's Institute for International Studies.

Physically aligned as they are toward Mecca, the daily prayers and lifetime pilgrimages of Muslims around the world--hundreds of millions of spokes of religious practice--surround and sustain the Arabian hub of Islam as religious practice. Yet the demographic center of gravity of the Muslim world could hardly be farther from the Middle East. For it is in the vast arc of Asia, in countries such as Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Malaysia, that the great majority of the world's Muslims live. How, if at all, does this striking difference between ritual focus and social fact affect the outlooks and actions of Asian Muslims? What, roughly, is the balance of militancy and toleration in this Asian context, especially in ethnically and religiously plural societies such as Malaysia? Is it realistic to think that Asian attitudes and behaviors could form the basis for a 21st-century reformation and renaissance of Islam in which the jihadist passions of Al Qaeda and the purist strictures of the House of Saud would be refuted and shunned in favor of intercultural cooperation and liberal democracy? Or has the American-Afghan crisis, on the contrary, ignited a chain reaction of sympathy for Arab (and Pashtun) resentments that will inflame Asian Muslims against unbelievers? Finally, what relevance do these questions have for the people and policies of the United States? Karim Raslan is one of Southeast Asia's leading public intellectuals. His diverse interests run from constructing fictional plots to restructuring all-too-real bankruptcies. When he is not writing short stories and newspaper commentaries, or appearing on CNN or the BBC, he partners a highly regarded Malaysian law firm, Raslan Loong. His first novel, Desire--the first of four planned volumes about a family of Malay Muslims--will be published next fall. A third collection of his short stories should be out next spring. His syndicated column, "Eye in Asia," appears weekly in newspapers in Malaysia and Singapore, and is often reprinted elsewhere in Asia and Australia. The specialties of his law firm include corporate finance, capital markets, and information technology. He is presently a visiting scholar at Columbia University. When he is not traveling, Mr. Raslan lives in Malaysia.