Military
-

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has long been based on the principle of national sovereignty, including a norm against interference by one member state in another's domestic affairs. But some members would like to set aside the prohibition in cases such as Myanmar, whose military junta continues to repress Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy to the detriment of ASEAN's image in the West. Opposed to this view are the group's newest, poorer, more continental, and politically more closed members: Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, and of course Myanmar itself. They want ASEAN to uphold national sovereignty and reaffirm non-interference. The prospect of Myanmar assuming the chair of ASEAN in 2006-2007 makes this controversery even more acute. Is ASEAN splitting up? Will a compromise be reached? And with what implications for the nature and future of ASEAN and its conservative faction?

Carlyle A. Thayer is the 2004-2005 C. V. Starr Distinguished Visiting Professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington DC. He has written and lectured widely on Southeast Asian affairs. He has held positions at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies (in Hawaii) and the Australian Defence College. His degrees are from the Australian National University (PhD), Yale University (MA), and Brown University (BA).

This is the 10th seminar of the 2004-2005 academic year hosted by the Southeast Asia Forum.

Okimoto Conference Room

Carlyle A. Thayer Professor of Politics Australian Defence Force Academy
Seminars
Paragraphs

Prospects for Peace in South Asia, the inaugural title in a new series of "Studies of the Asia-Pacific Research Center" published by Stanford University Press, addresses the largely hostile, often violent relations between India and Pakistan that date from their independence in 1947. The persistent conflict between the two neighboring countries over Kashmir has defied numerous international attempts at resolution and entered its most dangerous phase when both India and Pakistan became nuclear powers in 1998.

The struggle over Kashmir is enduringly rooted in national identity, religion, and human rights. It has also influenced the politicization of Pakistan's army, religious radicalism, and nuclearization in both countries. This incisive volume analyzes these forces, their impact on relations between the two countries, and alternative roles the United States might play in resolving the dispute. While acknowledging the risks, the book is optimistic about peace in South Asia. The key argument is that many of the domestic concerns (such as territorial integrity in both countries and civilian-military rapprochement in Pakistan) that were fueling the conflict have abated.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction, by Rafiq Dossani and Henry S. Rowen

PAKISTAN: POLITICS AND KASHMIR

2. Islamic Extremism and Regional Conflict in South Asia, by Vali Nasr

3. Constitutional and Political Change in Pakistan: The Military-Governance Paradigm, by Charles H. Kennedy

4. The Practice of Islam in Pakistan and the Influence of Islam on Pakistani Politics, by C. Christine Fair and Karthik Vaidyanathan

5. Pakistan's Relations with Azad Kashmir and the Impact on Indo-Pakistani Relations, by Rifaat Hussain

INDIA: POLITICS AND KASHMIR

6.Who Speaks for India? The Role of Civil Society in Defining Indian Nationalism, by Ainslie T. Embree

7. Hindu Nationalism and the BJP: Transforming Religion and Politics in India, by Robert L. Hardgrave, Jr.

8. Hindu Ethnonationalism, Muslim Jihad, and Secularism: Muslims in the Political Life of the Republic of India, by Barbara D. Metcalf

9. Jammu and Kashmir in the Indian Union: The Politics of Autonomy, by Chandrashekhar Dasgupta

INDIA AND PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR DOCTRINES AND U.S. CONCERNS

10. The Stability-Instability Paradox, Misperception, and Escalation-Control in South Asia, by Michael Krepon

11. Pakistan's Nuclear Doctrine, by Peter R. Lavoy

12. Coercive Diplomacy in a Nuclear Environment: The December 13 Crisis, by Rajesh M. Basrur

13. U.S. Interests in South Asia, by Howard B. Schaffer

Notes

About the Contributors

Index

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford University Press: Studies of the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Authors
Rafiq Dossani
Henry S. Rowen
-

Charles Kartman has served since May 2001 as the Executive Director of KEDO, an international consortium established in 1995 to manage a $4.6 billion energy project in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Prior to that he was U.S. Special Envoy for the Korean Peace Talks and concurrently served as U.S. Representative to and Chairman of KEDO's Executive Board, until retiring from the Department of State in April 2001. From June 1996, Ambassador Kartman was Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs. He was Acting Assistant Secretary for much of 1997. He had previously served as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Seoul, Director for Korean Affairs at the Department of State in Washington, and Political Counselor in Seoul.

Ambassador Kartman is recognized for his expertise on Northeast Asia, having earlier specialized on Japanese affairs, working as a political officer in the Embassy in Tokyo, Consul General in Sapporo, and twice in the office of Japanese Affairs at the Department of State. Ambassador Kartman also held a variety of other positions focused on Asia: in the Department on politico-military Affairs; for the Under Secretary for Political Affairs; and on loan to the Congress.

Mr. Kartman joined the State Department in 1975, after completion of a graduate program at Georgetown University. In his 26-year career, he received the Department's highest honors: a multiple winner of the Department's Superior Honor Award, the James Clement Dunn Award for outstanding service, the Secretary's Distinguished Honor Award, and the Secretary's Distinguished Service Award. He is married to Mary Kartman, a fellow graduate of Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois. They have two daughters.

A buffet lunch will be available to those who RSVP by Tuesday, February 22 to Debbie Warren at dawarren@stanford.edu or at 650-723-2408.

This seminar is part of the North Korea Seminar Series hosted by the Walter Shorenstein Forum.

Philippines Conference Room

Charles Kartman Executive Director Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO)
Seminars
-

Ambassador Charles L. Pritchard, an expert on U.S. relations with Japan and Korea, was a top aide to President Bush in the administration's negotiations with North Korea and the U.S. Representative to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). He was also special assistant to the President and senior director for Asian affairs in the Clinton administration. Pritchard joined the Brookings Institution as a visiting fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies program on September 2, 2003. While at Brookings, Pritchard has published "North Korea Needs A Personal Touch", Los Angeles Times (09/10/03); "A Guarantee to Bring Kim into Line", Financial Times (10/10/03); "Freeze on North Korea Nuclear Program is Imperative", The Korea Herald (01/09/04); "What I Saw in North Korea", New York Times (01/21/04), "While the US Looked for Iraqi WMD North Korea Built Theirs", YaleGlobal(01/01/04), and "U.S. Should Confide in Allies on North Korean Nukes", Asahi Shimbun/International Herald Tribune (08/06-07/04).

Following a twenty-eight year career in the army, during which he held military assign-ments with the Office of the Secretary of Defense, as its country director for Japan, and as the U.S. Army Attaché in Tokyo, Pritchard joined the National Security Council in 1996.

Pritchard obtained his B.A. in Political Science from Mercer University in Georgia and his M.A. in International Studies from the University of Hawaii. He is the recipient of the Defense Distinguished Service Medal.

Philippines Conference Room

Charles L. Pritchard Visiting Fellow Speaker Foreign Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution
Lectures
Paragraphs

Many similarities exist between America's alliances with Japan and South Korea. The United States provides a security guarantee to both countries, and maintains a military presence in each. Local ambivalence about these foreign troops has long been a staple of politics in both countries.

The two alliances are strategically connected. The United States would find it difficult to support its commitments to South Korea without access to bases in Japan. Japan would have trouble sustaining political support for US bases if it were America's only ally in the region. Trilateral security consultations among the United States, Japan, and South Korea enhance deterrence and generate diplomatic leverage with respect to North Korea.

The US-Japan and US-ROK alliances have yielded mutual benefits for over fifty years. Yet today, while US-Japan defense cooperation is flourishing, conflicting perceptions in Washington and Seoul of Kim Jong-il's North Korean regime--and how to deal with it--have generated deep concerns about the future of the US-ROK alliance. This has prompted officials on both sides to shift their attention from managing these defense partnerships to redefining their terms.

Armacost and Okimoto's provocative book examines this policy challenge. Substantial progress has been achieved in modernizing the US-Japan alliance. A shared US-ROK analysis of the North Korean challenge, and a common strategy for combating it, is now the urgent priority. Without it, the US-ROK alliance will not regain the relevance and promise that mark America's relationship with Japan. Given the stakes, Washington and Seoul must summon the political will to address current problems promptly and purposefully. Written by some of the most eminent scholars and practitioners in the field, the chapters in this timely volume offer thoughtful suggestions to help policymakers achieve this goal.

(This title is now out of print; four PDFs, arranged by section, may be downloaded at the links below.)

Introduction
Preface (Daniel I. Okimoto)
The Future of America’s Alliances in Northeast Asia (Michael H. Armacost)
America’s Asia Strategy during the Bush Administration (Kurt M. Campbell)  

Japan
The Japan-US Alliance in Evolution (Kuriyama Takakazu)
The Changing American Government Perspectives on the Missions and Strategic Focus of the US-Japan Alliance (Rust M. Deming)
Japanese Adjustments to the Security Alliance with the United States: Evolution of Policy on the Roles of the Self-Defense Force (Yamaguchi Noboru)
US-Japan Defense Cooperation: Can Japan Become the Great Britain of Asia?
Should It? (Ralph A. Cossa)
The Japan-US Alliance and Japanese Domestic Politics: Sources of Change, Prospects for the Future (Hiroshi Nakanishi)

Korea
Shaping Change and Cultivating Ideas in the US-ROK Alliance (Victor D. Cha)
The United States and South Korea: An Alliance Adrift (Donald P. Gregg)
Challenges for the ROK-US Alliance in the Twenty-First Century (Won-soo Kim)
US-ROK Defense Cooperation (William M. Drennan)
Changes in the Combined Operations Arrangement in Korea (Kim Jae-chang)
Domestic Politics and the Changing Contours of the ROK-US Alliance: The End of the Status Quo (Lee Chung-min)

China
US-China Relations and America’s Pacific Alliances in the Post–-9/11 Era (David M. Lampton)
China and America’s Northeast Asian Alliances: Approaches, Politics, and Dilemmas (Jing Huang)
Contributors 

 

 

 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Authors
Michael H. Armacost
Daniel I. Okimoto
Book Publisher
Shorenstein APARC
Paragraphs

Ever since 1998, the year of India and Pakistan's nuclear tests, many commentators have argued that, in the absence of U.S. intervention, the two nations are headed for armed conflict that will likely end in nuclear war. The logic underlying this view is twofold. First, that religious radicalism--defined as the participation in political and/or military activities by groups in the name of religion--has become sufficiently powerful in Pakistan to make ongoing support for the Kashmir insurgency inevitable. Second is that India's concurrent growth of nationalism and religious radicalism, as well as a rise in economic power, will make the state less willing to tolerate Pakistan's support for insurgency in Kashmir. Against this seemingly inevitable clash, Pakistani President Musharraf is viewed as a lonely holdout against the forces of religious radicalism in Pakistan. U.S. support is therefore argued to be critical for sustaining Musharraf, whether through political support for Pakistan's policies in Kashmir, or economic support.

This paper reaches a different conclusion: that peace is about to "break out" between India and Pakistan. Our conclusion is based on the following analysis. First, Islamic radicalism in Pakistan relies (and has always relied) on the army to survive, as it lacks sufficient popularity to influence state policy through political parties or popular agitation. Second, the army has previously supported Islamic radicalism tactically, but not ideologically, providing such support only when it has perceived the state to be in crisis. Contrary to a common view, the elections of 2002 were no different in this respect. Third, Hindu radicalism in India, though gaining in both popular and political support, is insufficiently popular to support irrational aggression against Pakistan. At the same time, India's improved economic prospects have influenced its rulers to favor accommodation with Pakistan. Third, the outcomes of recent elections in India and Pakistan have shifted the Pakistani army's strategic priorities toward negotiating a civilian-military balance, and away from destabilizing civilian politics through "crisis-mode" tactics that have included support for Islamic radicalism.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Shorenstein APARC
Authors
Rafiq Dossani
-

Conflicting claims over Kashmir have been the main cause of hostility between India and Pakistan. The Kashmir dispute is complex. Although the area is predominantly Muslim, significant other religious minorities coexist in Indian Kashmir, while Pakistan Kashmir is linguistically divided from the rest of Kashmir. Nevertheless, both sides of the region are linked by common historical aspirations for a united Kashmir. India and Pakistan have fought several times over differences in their vision for Kashmir, which itself differs from the Kashmiri vision. During the late 1980s, an armed uprising in Indian Kashmir over independence resulted in the deaths of an estimated 60,000 people. A peaceable resolution should look at the region's history and culture even as it balances India and Pakistan's ambitions over Kashmir. It is not obvious, though, that such a resolution must be a "once-and-for-all-time" resolution or an agreed-to process without a committed timeline or, indeed, goals. The seminar will present and discuss these issues. Samina Ahmed is project director for South Asia at the International Crisis Group. She has worked previously as a research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University; the Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad; and the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs, Karachi. Dr. Ahmed has a masters degree in international relations and a Ph.D. in political science from the Australian National University, Canberra. Dr. Ahmed is the author of several book chapters and articles in academic journals and the print media. Her publications include ?The United States and Terrorism in Southwest Asia: September 11 and Beyond,? International Security, Vol. 26, (Winter 2001/2002); ?Pakistan: Professionalism of an Interventionist Military? in Muthiah Alagappa, ed., Military Professionalism in Asia: Conceptual and Empirical Perspectives (Honolulu: East-West Center, University of Hawaii, 2001), and a co-edited book.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall

Samina Ahmed Project Director, South Asia International Crisis Group, Pakistan Office
Seminars
-

Many have argued that the terrorist attacks on the U.S. in September 2001 and the bombings in Indonesia in October 2002 (Bali) and August 2003 (Jakarta) have revamped the security situation for America?s partners in and near Southeast Asia. Is this true? What security challenges do America?s partners now face in the region? Are these challenges so thoroughly domestic and political in nature that that they cannot be addressed by military force, or through military cooperation? And to the extent that military approaches are viable, are America?s Southeast Asian and Australian partners equipped and trained to undertake them? For example: How interoperable are the relevant Southeast Asian, Australian, and American forces? How well does Australia in particular fit into this picture? Is Canberra disdained by Southeast Asian governments as a ?deputy sheriff? of Uncle Sam? Should Washington develop meetings of defense ministers into an alternative to the so far unimpressive ASEAN Regional Forum? Or is hub-and-spokes bilateralism the better way to go? Should Washington try to upgrade its warming security relations with Singapore into a fully fledged security treaty along U.S.-Japanese lines? How should nontraditional security threats?not only terrorism but piracy, drugs, and people-smuggling?be factored into these calculations? Sheldon Simon is a leading American specialist on Southeast Asian security. The author or editor of nine books--most recently The Many Faces of Asian Security (2001)--and more than a hundred scholarly articles and book chapters, Professor Simon has held faculty appointments at George Washington University, the University of Kentucky, the University of Hawaii, the University of British Columbia, Carleton University (Ottawa), the Monterey Institute of International Studies, and the American Graduate School of International Management. He visits Asia annually for research and is a consultant to the U.S. Departments of State and Defense. He earned his doctorate in political science from the University of Minnesota in 1964.

Okimoto Conference Room

Sheldon Simon Professor of Political Science and Southeast Asian Studies Arizona State University
Seminars
-

Admiral Thomas Boulton Fargo assumed duties as Commander U.S. Pacific Command, at Camp H.M. Smith, Hawaii, on May 2, 2002. He is the twentieth officer to hold the position. As the senior U.S. military commander in the Pacific and Indian Ocean areas, he leads the largest of the unified commands and directs Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force operations across more than 100 million square miles. He is responsible to the President and the Secretary of Defense through the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff and is the U.S. military representative for collective defense arrangements in the Pacific.

Bechtel Conference Center

Admiral Thomas B. Fargo Commander U.S. Pacific Command
Seminars
Subscribe to Military