Authors
Donald K. Emmerson
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

August was a bloody month. There was barely time to mourn between the exploding bombs: first at the Marriott hotel in Jakarta on Aug. 5, at U.N. headquarters in Baghdad and on a bus in Jerusalem on Aug. 19, then the two in Bombay on Monday. These were the latest sites in a chronology of carnage running from Casablanca through Riyadh and Bali to Manhattan's crumbling towers.

Each atrocity involved local actors and local motives. Each was perceived differently by the local populace, and the local repercussions of each terrorist act varied widely. Yet all were attributed to a single global menace: jihad. For three years now, acts of violence done in Allah's name have made terrorism and Islam almost synonymous, not just in Westerners' vocabularies but around the world.

From this blight, who will rescue Islam?

The nearly reflexive association of Islam and terrorism is not simply the creation of rush-to-judgment pundits and politicians. Not when the terrorists proudly proclaim religious inspiration for their acts. Both Jerry Falwell and Osama bin Laden have maligned Islam. But it is, above all, the jihadists who have distilled their faith to sacred hatred - of Americans, Christians, Jews and the millions upon millions of moderate or secular Muslims who disdain this perversion from within.

Muslims respond in different ways to Islamist violence. In Jakarta a few days after 11 Indonesians and a Dutchman were killed in the blast at the Marriott, I met up with two Muslim friends. They were brimming with conspiracy theories. Why, they asked, had 20 Americans reportedly canceled their reservations before the bomb went off? Could these no-shows have known in advance of the attack? Why was the severed head of the alleged perpetrator later found on the hotel's fifth floor? Had the CIA planted it there? Why were arrests made so soon? Could the U.S., or perhaps the Indonesian military, have staged the event?

Behind their questions lay an unspoken one: How could Muslims have done such a thing?

It would be convenient if my two friends despised Americans and were products of Islamist schools. But both men hold advanced degrees from top universities in the U.S. and exhibit no obvious animosity toward Americans. That two such people could give voice to such dark misgivings about U.S. intentions shows that Islam is not alone in its association with violence.

The flip side of denial is demonization. For some in the West, the enemy is not jihadists but all Islamists. Never mind that the vast majority of Muslims who promote their faith do so peacefully. The PowerPoint charts of counter-terrorism experts that ignore Muslim diversity and feature the evil genius Bin Laden reinforce a distorted, top-down view of Islam.

Al Qaeda's responsibility is all too real. But local context matters. For jihad to succeed, an outside agitator needs inside sympathizers, and their receptivity to recruitment will depend on local circumstances. Recognizing that Muslim societies are autonomous and heterogeneous is a necessary first step to realizing that Bin Laden and his version of Islam aren't absolute control.

Defenders of Islam in the West stress the fact that most of its billion-plus adherents are moderates who reject violence. Such reassurance is far preferable to demonization. But understanding is not served by exaggerations - that Islam or Muslims are always peaceful, or that jihadists entirely lack sympathy in the Muslim world. In Muslim communities, extremist and mainstream views intersect in many places, including schools, mosques and organizations. It is in these myriad local settings that Islam's connection to violence will or won't be broken.

Regrettably, reassurance sometimes lapses into denial. In Indonesia recently, several leading Muslim figures urged journalists to stop using the words "Islam" and "Muslim" in their coverage of the Marriott bombing. I've even heard Muslims object to the phrase "moderate Muslims" because it implies the existence of immoderate ones. Islam will never be rescued by language inspectors who would substitute deflection for introspection.

Can reform rescue Islam? In principle, yes, but in practice, not necessarily. There are at least a few individuals and groups in every Muslim society striving to make the practice of their faith more tolerant of difference and dissent, less restrictive toward women, more compatible with secular democracy and less preoccupied with imposing Islamic law. Liberal American observers tend to celebrate these reformers as rescuers of Islam.

Yet the sheer diversity of Muslim societies suggests that efforts to liberalize Islamic doctrine will face varying prospects of success. Before assuming that liberals and jihadists have nothing in common, one should remember that both advocate far-reaching changes that threaten the conservative views and habits of many mainstream Muslims. Reformers deserve American support. But preventing the status quo from getting worse may be a more realistic goal of such help than winning "hearts and minds" for humanism, let alone making the Muslim world look as secular and democratic as, say, Turkey.

Is America responsible for Islam's predicament? Some U.S. actions have fueled jihad. The American presence in Iraq could become a magnet for holy warriors comparable to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Muslims pressed by Washington to oppose the hijacking of Islam by jihadists may instead decry the hijacking of U.S. foreign policy by hard- liners around President Bush.

But jihadists were fighting enemies long before the United States was born. The drive to create Islamist states is more than an attempt to check American hegemony. Different U.S. policies might shrink Muslim hostility toward U.S. actions. But intransigent theocrats will not be assuaged by the compromises necessary to resolve the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. Nor will either the failure or success of U.S.-led reconstruction of Iraq remove the reasons for Islamist violence in other Muslim societies.

Also shaky is the notion that "they hate us for our values." The democracy Americans espouse remains popular in the Muslim world. American notions of equal treatment for women are less welcome. But a woman's opportunities vary among Muslim-majority countries, including those in Asia that preceded the U.S. in having female heads of state.

Americans are disproportionally responsible for a modern world most Muslims feel they never made. Extremists have used such alienation to justify jihad. But it is not up to Americans to rescue Islam.

Non-Muslims can avoid unnecessary provocations and false reassurances. They can facilitate liberal reform. But it is Muslims, acting in diverse local circumstances, who will or won't break the cycle of jihadist demonization and naive denial that is ruining the image of their religion. Whether to rescue their faith is a choice only they can make.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

On the eve of accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), with the aid of border policies, China was the second largest corn exporter in the world. During the time prior to accession, China's corn prices were estimated to be more than 30 percent above world market prices (Huang, Rozelle and Chang, 2003). China's government explicitly admitted to providing subsidies for corn exports of up to $US35 per metric, which accounted for almost all of the protection that corn producers in China were receiving. During the late 1990s and through 2001, with such high subsidies the nation's exporters were able to sell around 5 million metric tons (mmts) annually into world markets (Gale, 2003). Most of the shipments, especially in the 2000 and 2001, were sent to Korea and Malaysia. With such large shipments, the exports of other nations in the world (especially those from the US that traditionally was Korea's main supplier of feed grains) were displaced.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
US Grains Council
Authors
Scott Rozelle
-

About the Talk: In Muslim-majority Indonesia and Malaysia, initial reactions to the American war in Iraq were overwhelmingly negative. Nor could support for American action be found among Muslim minorities in the Philippines, Singapore, or Thailand. But Southeast Asian Muslims were not equally or uniformly outraged. Complex and distinctive local contexts and agendas shaped Muslim anger and the responses to it. Dr. Emmerson will highlight these Southeast Asian settings and analyze the politics of anti-American backlash along a critical periphery of the Muslim world. Donald Emmerson is director of the Southeast Asia Forum at the Asia/Pacific Research Center at Stanford University. He teaches courses in international relations and comparative politics. His research interests focus on Islamism, regionalism, democratization, and US policy regarding Indonesia and Southeast Asia. Emmerson has testified before Congress in 1998, 1999, and 2001 on East Timor, Indonesia, and Southeast Asian topics. He assisted the Carter Center in monitoring Indonesia's national election and the UN vote on autonomy in East Timor. Members of the World Affairs Council: $5.00 Non-members: $8.00 Students with ID: Free To make a reservation, please contact the World Affairs Council at 415-293-4600. Cosponsored by the Asia/Pacific Research Center and Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiation at Stanford University and the World Affairs Council of Northern California.

Stanford Law School, Alvarado and Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford University

0
Senior Fellow Emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Affiliated Faculty, CDDRL
Affiliated Scholar, Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies
aparc_dke.jpg PhD

At Stanford, in addition to his work for the Southeast Asia Program and his affiliations with CDDRL and the Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, Donald Emmerson has taught courses on Southeast Asia in East Asian Studies, International Policy Studies, and Political Science. He is active as an analyst of current policy issues involving Asia. In 2010 the National Bureau of Asian Research and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars awarded him a two-year Research Associateship given to “top scholars from across the United States” who “have successfully bridged the gap between the academy and policy.”

Emmerson’s research interests include Southeast Asia-China-US relations, the South China Sea, and the future of ASEAN. His publications, authored or edited, span more than a dozen books and monographs and some 200 articles, chapters, and shorter pieces.  Recent writings include The Deer and the Dragon: Southeast Asia and China in the 21st Century (ed., 2020); “‘No Sole Control’ in the South China Sea,” in Asia Policy  (2019); ASEAN @ 50, Southeast Asia @ Risk: What Should Be Done? (ed., 2018); “Singapore and Goliath?,” in Journal of Democracy (2018); “Mapping ASEAN’s Futures,” in Contemporary Southeast Asia (2017); and “ASEAN Between China and America: Is It Time to Try Horsing the Cow?,” in Trans-Regional and –National Studies of Southeast Asia (2017).

Earlier work includes “Sunnylands or Rancho Mirage? ASEAN and the South China Sea,” in YaleGlobal (2016); “The Spectrum of Comparisons: A Discussion,” in Pacific Affairs (2014); “Facts, Minds, and Formats: Scholarship and Political Change in Indonesia” in Indonesian Studies: The State of the Field (2013); “Is Indonesia Rising? It Depends” in Indonesia Rising (2012); “Southeast Asia: Minding the Gap between Democracy and Governance,” in Journal of Democracy (April 2012); “The Problem and Promise of Focality in World Affairs,” in Strategic Review (August 2011); An American Place at an Asian Table? Regionalism and Its Reasons (2011); Asian Regionalism and US Policy: The Case for Creative Adaptation (2010); “The Useful Diversity of ‘Islamism’” and “Islamism: Pros, Cons, and Contexts” in Islamism: Conflicting Perspectives on Political Islam (2009); “Crisis and Consensus: America and ASEAN in a New Global Context” in Refreshing U.S.-Thai Relations (2009); and Hard Choices: Security, Democracy, and Regionalism in Southeast Asia (edited, 2008).

Prior to moving to Stanford in 1999, Emmerson was a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he won a campus-wide teaching award. That same year he helped monitor voting in Indonesia and East Timor for the National Democratic Institute and the Carter Center. In the course of his career, he has taken part in numerous policy-related working groups focused on topics related to Southeast Asia; has testified before House and Senate committees on Asian affairs; and been a regular at gatherings such as the Asia Pacific Roundtable (Kuala Lumpur), the Bali Democracy Forum (Nusa Dua), and the Shangri-La Dialogue (Singapore). Places where he has held various visiting fellowships, including the Institute for Advanced Study and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 



Emmerson has a Ph.D. in political science from Yale and a BA in international affairs from Princeton. He is fluent in Indonesian, was fluent in French, and has lectured and written in both languages. He has lesser competence in Dutch, Javanese, and Russian. A former slam poet in English, he enjoys the spoken word and reads occasionally under a nom de plume with the Not Yet Dead Poets Society in Redwood City, CA. He and his wife Carolyn met in high school in Lebanon. They have two children. He was born in Tokyo, the son of U.S. Foreign Service Officer John K. Emmerson, who wrote the Japanese Thread among other books.

Selected Multimedia

Date Label
Donald K Emmerson Professor Speaker
-

Is unipolarity--American primacy--good or bad for the world? For Southeast Asia? For Indonesia? How dangerous or constructive is the Bush doctrine of preemption? Should the U.S. try to spread democracy abroad? If not, why not? If so, why and how--by example, persuasion, force? Has the war in Iraq squandered American "soft power"? How has that conflict affected the campaign against terrorism in Southeast Asia? Has the U.S. been ignoring the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)? Or has ASEAN become so irrelevant that it deserves to be ignored? In the run-up to Indonesia's presidential election in April 2004, should the U.S. support the incumbent, Megawati Sukarnoputri? Or would that only strengthen her Islamist opponents by enabling them to portray her as an American pawn? What grade does the Bush administration's policy toward North Korea deserve? These are among the questions to be addressed in a wide-ranging evaluation of what the United States is doing, should be doing, and should not be doing in Asia.

Jusuf Wanandi has long been Indonesia's best-known analyst of Southeast Asian regionalism and the politics and foreign policies of Indonesia and the United States. He holds leadership positions in the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific, the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council, the Prasetiya Mulya Graduate School of Management in Jakarta, and the Foundation of Panca Bhakti University in Pontianak (West Kalimantan). He heads the company that publishes Indonesia's leading English-language daily, The Jakarta Post. He co-founded Indonesia's most successful foreign-affairs think tank, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. He has co-authored or co-edited more than a dozen books, including Europe and the Asia Pacific (1998), Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region (1993), and Asia and the Major Powers (1988).

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Jusuf Wanandi Senior Fellow Speaker Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta
Seminars
-

5:30 pm registration 6:00 pm program followed by reception Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Founders' Room, 5th Floor, San Francisco $12 Members of the Asia Society $15 Non-members $8 Student with ID Please contact that Asia Society to register for this event. They can be reached at 415-421-8707. Experts on Indonesia's political, social, and economic climate will share their insights on the challenges and opportunities ahead for the world's fourth most populous country. Organized in conjunction with the upcoming release of Asia Society's Asian Update on decentralization in Indonesia, this panel will assess some of the key issues facing the largest Muslim society in the world. With presidential elections scheduled for April 2004, what progress has been made toward political reforms and increased accountability in Indonesia? As regional conflicts in Aceh and Papua continue to simmer and expanded military authority is being debated, how will Indonesia balance its needs for effective central authority and greater regional autonomy? Will transferring power and resources downward merely decentralize corruption? How will Indonesia's economy fare in the face of the war in Iraq, sagging American and global markets, and the prospect of higher energy prices? How have the AmericanÑled wars against terrorism and the Iraqi regime affected Indonesia's domestic politics and relations with the United States? Please join us for a timely and informative briefing on political, economic, and social developments in Indonesia today.

Public Policy Institute of California, 500 Washington Street, Founders' Room, 5th floor, San Francisco, CA

0
Senior Fellow Emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Affiliated Faculty, CDDRL
Affiliated Scholar, Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies
aparc_dke.jpg PhD

At Stanford, in addition to his work for the Southeast Asia Program and his affiliations with CDDRL and the Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, Donald Emmerson has taught courses on Southeast Asia in East Asian Studies, International Policy Studies, and Political Science. He is active as an analyst of current policy issues involving Asia. In 2010 the National Bureau of Asian Research and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars awarded him a two-year Research Associateship given to “top scholars from across the United States” who “have successfully bridged the gap between the academy and policy.”

Emmerson’s research interests include Southeast Asia-China-US relations, the South China Sea, and the future of ASEAN. His publications, authored or edited, span more than a dozen books and monographs and some 200 articles, chapters, and shorter pieces.  Recent writings include The Deer and the Dragon: Southeast Asia and China in the 21st Century (ed., 2020); “‘No Sole Control’ in the South China Sea,” in Asia Policy  (2019); ASEAN @ 50, Southeast Asia @ Risk: What Should Be Done? (ed., 2018); “Singapore and Goliath?,” in Journal of Democracy (2018); “Mapping ASEAN’s Futures,” in Contemporary Southeast Asia (2017); and “ASEAN Between China and America: Is It Time to Try Horsing the Cow?,” in Trans-Regional and –National Studies of Southeast Asia (2017).

Earlier work includes “Sunnylands or Rancho Mirage? ASEAN and the South China Sea,” in YaleGlobal (2016); “The Spectrum of Comparisons: A Discussion,” in Pacific Affairs (2014); “Facts, Minds, and Formats: Scholarship and Political Change in Indonesia” in Indonesian Studies: The State of the Field (2013); “Is Indonesia Rising? It Depends” in Indonesia Rising (2012); “Southeast Asia: Minding the Gap between Democracy and Governance,” in Journal of Democracy (April 2012); “The Problem and Promise of Focality in World Affairs,” in Strategic Review (August 2011); An American Place at an Asian Table? Regionalism and Its Reasons (2011); Asian Regionalism and US Policy: The Case for Creative Adaptation (2010); “The Useful Diversity of ‘Islamism’” and “Islamism: Pros, Cons, and Contexts” in Islamism: Conflicting Perspectives on Political Islam (2009); “Crisis and Consensus: America and ASEAN in a New Global Context” in Refreshing U.S.-Thai Relations (2009); and Hard Choices: Security, Democracy, and Regionalism in Southeast Asia (edited, 2008).

Prior to moving to Stanford in 1999, Emmerson was a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he won a campus-wide teaching award. That same year he helped monitor voting in Indonesia and East Timor for the National Democratic Institute and the Carter Center. In the course of his career, he has taken part in numerous policy-related working groups focused on topics related to Southeast Asia; has testified before House and Senate committees on Asian affairs; and been a regular at gatherings such as the Asia Pacific Roundtable (Kuala Lumpur), the Bali Democracy Forum (Nusa Dua), and the Shangri-La Dialogue (Singapore). Places where he has held various visiting fellowships, including the Institute for Advanced Study and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 



Emmerson has a Ph.D. in political science from Yale and a BA in international affairs from Princeton. He is fluent in Indonesian, was fluent in French, and has lectured and written in both languages. He has lesser competence in Dutch, Javanese, and Russian. A former slam poet in English, he enjoys the spoken word and reads occasionally under a nom de plume with the Not Yet Dead Poets Society in Redwood City, CA. He and his wife Carolyn met in high school in Lebanon. They have two children. He was born in Tokyo, the son of U.S. Foreign Service Officer John K. Emmerson, who wrote the Japanese Thread among other books.

Selected Multimedia

Date Label
Donald K Emmerson Professor Speaker
Yuli Ismartono Executive Editor Speaker TEMPO Magazine, Jakarta, Indonesia
Nancy Peluso Professor of Environmental Social Science Speaker Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley
Harry Bhaskara Managing Editor Moderator Jakarta Post
-

Journalism in Southeast Asia is triply constrained. In a given country, the regime in power may impose censorship or induce self-censorship. Outraged by an article, headline, or photograph, a threatening mob can achieve the same result. Concern for the bottom line may pressure commercial media to avoid "serious" analyses in favor of "lighter" stories with ostensibly greater reader, listener, or viewer appeal. Violence and sex may be featured for the same material reason. What is it like to work under such constraints? What strategies are available to journalists for defeating or deflecting them? How do the news environments in Indonesia and Thailand differ in these respects? What about the prejudices and preferences of journalists themselves? How do all these limits, incentives, and propensities go into the making of the news in Southeast Asia? Yuli Ismartono is uniquely suited to answer these questions. As a correspondent for TEMPO, she covered wars in Cambodia and Sri Lanka, drugs in the Golden Triangle, the student uprising in Burma, the Soviet exit from Afghanistan, Russian elections, the first Gulf War, and events in Pakistan, the Philippines, South Korea, Vietnam, and, of course, Indonesia. For five years while TEMPO was banned, she worked in television and corporate public relations while writing for The Indonesian Observer. Her current responsibilities as executive editor include managing TEMPOInteraktif (online news).

Okimoto Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, East Wing

Yuli Ismartono Executive Editor Speaker TEMPO Magazine, Jakarta, Indonesia
-

How is the American-led war in Iraq affecting Asian countries and their relations with the United States? Is a clash of civilizations underway? Will Islamist rage in Southeast Asia spawn terrorist attacks on Americans there? Will Islamist parties in Indonesia be able to ride this wave of anger into power in the elections to be held in April 2004? Will the regime in North Korea take advantage of American preoccupations in Iraq and Afghanistan to escalate tensions in Northeast Asia? How will the economies of Southeast and Northeast Asia be affected by the conflict in Iraq? Will Washington's priority on ousting Saddam Hussein undermine its effort to stabilize Afghanistan? And what will the repercussions in Asia be if, against the expectation of many observers, the Iraq war turns out to be short and the seeds of Iraqi democracy are successfully sown?

Founders Room, 5th floor
Public Policy Institute of California
500 Washington Street, San Francisco

Robert Scalapino Professor Emeritus Panelist Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley
Theordore Eliot, Jr. Dean Emeritus Panelist Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
Greg Fealy Visiting Professor Panelist School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Workshops
-

Educational achievement in Malaysia is racially skewed across its three main cultural groups: The Malay-Muslim majority lags behind the country's Chinese and Indian minorities. This poses a dilemma. Should the state give the majority preferential access to education in the name of group equality? Or permit such access to be decided by merit alone, in the name of fairness among individuals? Malaysia has chosen to expand opportunities for schooling while maintaining a strict policy of affirmative action for Malays, all within a centrally controlled and standardized system of national education that relies on the Malay language and includes emphasis religion and morality. After showing how this pattern evolved from the secular, English-language format adopted by the British when they ruled Malaysia, Dr. Bakri Musa will assess the costs and benefits of affirmative educational action in the country today. Bakri Musa has written extensively on Malaysia. His latest book, An Education System Worthy of Malaysia (2003), has been described as "a severe critique" and "a comprehensive proposal for reform." Earlier titles include Malaysia in the Era of Globalization (2002), and The Malay Dilemma Revisited (1999). Shorter commentaries have appeared in Asiaweek, Education Quarterly, The Far Eastern Economic Review, and The International Herald Tribune, among other print media, and been aired by National Public Radio on its program, "Marketplace." A surgeon in private practice in Silicon Valley, Dr. Musa earned his medical and graduate degrees at the University of Alberta in Canada.

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

M. Bakri Musra Columnist Speaker Malaysiakini (Malaysia Today)
-

Asked his reaction to the Iraq war, the accused Bali bomber Amrozi said: "It just goes to show I was not wrong to bomb." The October 2002 bombings of two nightclubs on Bali were the worst act of terrorism since 9/11. 202 people died; 350 were seriously injured. Preliminary analysis of what the suspected perpetrators have said about the case suggests that they were motivated mainly by deep hatred of the United States. This lecture will explore the ideology and psychology of the accused bombers and, more broadly, the likely impact of the war in Iraq on terrorism in Southeast Asia. Greg Fealy is a leading specialist on Islam and the history and politics of Indonesia. His publications include two co-edited books, Nahdlatul Ulama, Traditionalism and Modernity in Indonesia and Local Power and Politics in Indonesia: Decentralisation and Democratisation. He has worked as an Indonesia analyst for the Office of National Assessments in Canberra and as a consultant for the Asia Foundation and the U.S. Agency for International Development in Jakarta. The history of Indonesia's largest Muslim party was the subject of his dissertation (PhD, Monash University, Australia, 1998).

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Greg Fealy Visiting Professor, Southeast Asian Studies Program School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University
-

Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo recently pointed to gold mining on the island of Mindanao as a possible solution to her country's chronic financial problems. Philippines gold reserves are among the world's largest, and gold prices are near a six-year high. But the metal is no panacea; damage to the environment and battles over land rights are among the risks and impediments. The president is not the first in her country to have focused on gold. In pre-Hispanic times the metal was both a medium of exchange and a sign of status. Ferdinand Marcos' rise to power is still widely, if credulously, attributed to his discovery of a famous hoard of gold. This lecture will show how scholarly attention to precious metals, including silver, can yield a perspective on Philippine history that challenges conventional narratives. By foregrounding precious metals, the archipelago's past can be relocated--away from the peripheral position it occupies in most world histories and toward a strikingly central role in global events and trends. About the Speaker: Martin W. Lewis came to Stanford in Fall 2002 from Duke University, where he co-directed the Program in Comparative Area Studies. His first book examined the interactions of economic development, environmental degradation, and cultural change on the Philippine island of Luzon. His other publications include The Myth of Continents (1997), coauthored with Karen Wigen. He received his PhD in geography from the University of California, Berkeley in 1987.

Okimoto Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, East Wing

Martin Lewis Lecturer in International Affairs Stanford University
Subscribe to Southeast Asia