SEO - ASEAN, Growing and Changing Together As ONE.

Subject: International Negotiation Date: Nov.
25, 2017
Name: Seo Dongyeong Professor: Sir. Jumel Estranero
Course and Section: AB Foreign Service 401
ASEAN, growing and changing together as ONE.
I. INTRODUCTION
On August 8 1967, ASEAN or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations was
established in Bangkok, Thailand with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration of its
Founding Fathers: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. After
some years, it was then found by and later on joined by the countries, Vietnam,
Myanmar (Burma), Cambodia, Laos, and Brunei, making up what is todays 10
Member States of ASEAN.
As an association, ASEAN has aims and purposes for establishing such, which is
set out in the ASEAN Declaration such as: Accelerate economic growth, social
progress and cultural development of regions through joint endeavours, more of the
spiritual equality and partnership to be able for the foundation to be strengthened for
the prosperous and peaceful community of Southeast Asian nations. In
accomplishing these aims and purposes, ASEAN Members has to adopt and abide
with the principles indicated in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast
Asia of 1976 as follows:
Mutual respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity,
and national identity of all nations;
The right of every State to lead its national existence free from external
interference, subversion or coercion;
Non-interference in the internal affairs of one another;
Settlement of differences or disputes by peaceful manner;
Renunciation of the threat or use of force; and
Effective cooperation among themselves.
Therefore coming up with the motto, One Vision, One Identity, One Community in
accordance with its emblem as well, simply implies the want of the cooperating
members for stability, tranquillity, unity and dynamic of ASEAN. The participating
colours in the emblem of ASEAN which are, blue, red, yellow and white also depict
meanings. Blue for stability and peace, Red for courage and dynamism, White that
shows purity, and Yellow for prosperity. The stalks of PADI in the centre of the
Reference(s):
www.undv.org www.aunsec.org www.tandfonline.com
https://globalnation.inquirer.net https://soapboxie.com https://aseanup.com
emblem represent the dream of ASEAN's Founding Fathers comprising all the
countries in Southeast Asia, bound together in friendship and solidarity, while the
circle surrounding them represents unity.
II.
A.) STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
How will the members of ASEAN deal with the most significant differences
among them?
What could be the possible reason why ASEAN still lack a sense of
ownership among its population?
Is it important for ASEAN members to have high knowledge about each
other among the ASEAN countries?
B.) METHODOLOGY
o ASEAN from then up to now, is stuck in the situation to where there is myriad
issues when it comes to each religions and the increasing/decreasing of
population, which are both the two most significant differences they should
give attention to. Many of us are aware what could be the possible results if
these werent able to be resolved or at least weaken its capability of getting
worse. To identify the root cause of religious conflict is a difficult task. The
moral basis that established their cultures is one that ASEAN countries
cannot forget, because they believe that a place without order is a place that
is unstable.
In todays modern world, we are all aware of the power of what Science and
Technology can do and its effects that improves the quality of our daily living,
except for the fact that it cannot change the way people think when it comes
to morale declination and growing obsession with money and wealth, which
assures a total destruction of each and everyones peace of mind and
relationships with the community. Religious leaders need to work closely with
politicians and businesses of society to avoid the rising of conflicts among
diverse communities and loss of security. In looking at the political, economic
and religious aspects of the society, ASEAN should be very mindful of the
help their people receive, especially to religion-related issues since it is the
most vulnerable. Because once religiously attached people were involved
heavily in politics, foreign countries and religious groups can easily dominate
and influence them with harmful ideologies, and once this happens, can affect
to harmonious coexistence.
Reference(s):
Increasing and decreasing of a countrys population as mentioned earlier
should also be attended to. Although ASEAN territorial waters cover an area
of about three times larger than its land, they cannot escape the arising
possibility of this issue. The member countries of ASEAN have combined
population of approximately 640 million people or at 8.8% of the worlds
population and are continuing to grow. As of 2015, Vietnam, which ranked
third of the largest population in ASEAN, may soon overtake the Philippines
population, because of its (Vietnam) highest population growth rate among
ASEAN members states with 2.1%. Brunei though has the smallest
population is then the third fastest growing population with the growth rate of
1.6%, next to Singapore. A growing populations effect may have both
positive and negative side. On one hand, a large population means, the more
people you have, the more work is done; the more value (more money) is
created. On the other hand, considering the country is offering only limited
resources then may result in putting pressure on the resources that exist.
More people means more mouths to feed, more education and health care
services to provide, and so forth.
These two matters can undoubtedly affect the aims and purposes of ASEAN.
Therefore, several practices should be implemented; addressing to the
religious conflict, there are 4 Ds:
a. Disavow. Disavowal of violence requires religious and political leaders
to disassociate their countries and religions with radical violent sects.
The clearing of this statement implies that both political and religious
philosophy is not to support violence which will lessen the impact of
committing violent acts in the name of their country and religion.
b. Discuss. Discussing their differences in faith, cultures, and socio-
economic strata may be a way to reduce the rising conflict about
religion, since communicating is the only way to be able to express our
different point of views about a certain subject. Thus, they will be
allowed to listen and respond to one another with an authenticity that
forges bonds in between. These first two things help prevent violence
from occurring among different people by building a barrier which
would separate them, yet initiating inter-faith communication that will
provide a bridge to draw people closer together.
c. Develop. For instance, by means of designing cultures of the
nationals, norms, and values will probably cause the unity of people
and show that there are certain things in which they also have
similarities may destroy discrimination and give peace in the future.
d. Delegate. Assigning tasks to world leaders will probably be a help in
maintaining the system being put in place, so that they will not
revert/come back to the situation nations were on before change was
brought.
Reference(s):
According to Karen Armstrong, Just as setting a controlled fire is often
an effective counter to an out-of-control fire, so too can religious
reconciliation be an effective instrument for dampening the flames of
religious fanaticism
o Ownership, according to MacMillan Dictionary, is a legal possession of

something, usually something big or/and valuable; or in a formal form, is an
attitude of accepting responsibility for something and taking control of how it
develops. Some citizens do not yet identify themselves as part of the ASEAN
family, unlike and compared to the citizens belonging to the European Union,
who increasingly identify themselves as Europeans first, then their national
identities next.
Some nationals being a member of ASEAN up to now still do not participate
in the decision-making process of the association. The lack of one nations
ownership may be the effect of the lacking of common policy that may be
seen as a non-rigid that actually indicates a lack of putting the interests of the
collective ASEAN ahead of the interests of individual member states. The lack
of putting their interest may also mean the lack of joining in making decisions.
One reason that may hinder them from participating in the decision-making is,
or instance, that in a situation to where somebody wants to create mischief by
not going along with what seems like sensible, reasonable idea of how to
move forward. If they dont come along with it then, most probably, all of them
will be held back and the whole region will suffer. In the business world, the
solid foundation of any successful company is its people. Employees
represent a source of knowledge and ideas, but oftentimes that resource
remains untapped. Involving employees in the decision-making process not
only empowers them to contribute to the success of an organization, but also
saves the companys time and money, increased productivity and reduced
outsourcing. This may also be considered a weak point of the association
because there is no principle of ASEAN affairs come first, there is no shared
feeling of ASEAN people that we are ASEAN, and ASEAN is us, which
implies a deficit in trust. Some say that policy makers seek independence
over interdependence that limits the ASEANs stability to encourage
cooperation.
o A knowledge based economy is an expression coined to describe trends in

advanced economies towards greater dependence on knowledge, information
and high skill levels and the increasing need for ready access to all of these
by the business and public sectors. Earlier, it is said that some of the
ASEANs purposes is to accelerate economic growth, social progress and
cultural development. Dani Rodrik once quoted, Historically nothing has
worked better than economic growth in enabling societies to improve the life
chances of their members, including those at the very bottom. Having a
mutual knowledge is necessary for an effective group communication. The
breakdown of mutual knowledge may be the product of failure of
Reference(s):
communication. There is an early model of communication (message-model)
that is assumed when people want to convey a message to someone else
and language allows them to use signals that can pair an exact meaning they
want to convey with what is physically transmitted, but because we are now in
a world surrounded by technology, communicating may be an easy act. By
means of communicating our thoughts and perceptions, nations will be able to
understand and become aware of the happenings in each others sides,
especially as an existing association that will surely result in achieving the
purposes it has established.
III. JOURNAL
*FOREIGN*
Opinion: "Connectivity key to sustainable ASEAN Community" by S.

Pushpanathan for The Jakarta Post
Last October, ASEAN leaders adopted the Master Plan on ASEAN
Connectivity to further advance ASEAN Community building and integration.
The landmark Master Plan is a testament to the astute foresight of the
ASEAN leaders to help the region stay focused and on track toward the
ASEAN Community by 2015, and to keep the momentum going beyond 2015.
It is ASEANs response to the regions needs for improved physical,
institutional and people-to-people linkages within and with the rest of the
world.
All eyes are now upon ASEAN as we implement the strategies, but how will
connectivity benefit stakeholders particularly ASEAN peoples?
I would say that enhancing ASEAN connectivity would bring about many
economic and non-economic gains including employment, business
opportunities, convenience, as well as greater and better choices of goods
and services. Further, it is estimated that a one percent increase in
infrastructure spending in Asia can increase private consumption by one to
two percent of gross domestic product (GDP). This will benefit the wider
investment community as well as ASEAN countries and their people.
The development of physical infrastructure within the regional grouping
promises tremendous business opportunities.
Lower-income countries, land-locked regions and hinterlands will gain access
to mainstream economic activities, which include exports to larger regional
markets and linkages with regional production networks and industrial zones.
In deciding on connectivity projects, it is important to strengthen the bonds
between mainland and archipelagic ASEAN member states, and accord equal
priority to the maritime connectivity as more than 80 percent of freight is
transported through the sea. With better connectivity, we can expect costs
and distance to shrink remarkably within ASEAN and beyond.
According to the ASEAN Logistics Study 2008, the logistics cost of intra-
ASEAN container movements is estimated to be US$2.25 billion a year, with
Reference(s):
about 55 percent representing out-of-pocket costs (transport, terminal and
access costs) and 45 percent time costs. Implementing a comprehensive
logistics infrastructure could reduce average logistics cost by 4 percent and
logistics time by 9 percent. This is substantial amounting to roughly $140
million in logistics cost reductions in a year.
The same study shows that customs clearance processes are time
consuming and domestic transportation constitute a large portion of total
logistics costs.
For example, one shipment of goods can often involve dozens of parties and
documents. ASEAN member states are in various implementing stages of
their National Single Windows, and this will eventually move toward an
ASEAN Single Window. When that happens, we can expect faster border
clearance by providing traders a single point for submitting clearance
documentation. The savings in costs can only boost business activities
among ASEAN traders.
Improving people-to-people contacts, on the other hand, will foster a stronger
sense of shared cultural and historical linkages. In 2010, tourism in ASEAN
flourished with total international arrivals of over 73 million. This is an
increase of 11.53 percent compared to 2009. Intra-ASEAN travel was the
major source market for the region, with share of 47 percent in 2010.
Improved connectivity, in terms of better air linkages and more liberal visa
requirements, will increase further inbound and intra-ASEAN tourism. All
these in turn will strengthen and intensify ASEAN community building efforts.
Enhanced ASEAN connectivity would also bring about greater effectiveness
of the web of ASEAN-centered Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), and speed up
the development of a free trade arrangement in East Asia as the region
booms. It will benefit not only ASEAN, but also other regional and global firms
operating in the region.
Opinion: "Asean's Caravan of Goodwill on the road for Japan" by Surin Pitsuwan
Bangkok Post, 30 April 2011
Less than a month after the Association of Southeast Asian Nations hosted the historic
Special Asean-Japan Ministerial Meeting on April 9, I am impressed by the natural
goodwill my fellow Asean citizens are ready to share with our Japanese neighbours.
Natural disasters are no respecter of borders or countries. Similar scenes, and worse,
have been witnessed in Japan. This metre-deep earth slip occurred on the road in
Sichon district of Nakhon Si Thammarat following heavy rain.
With the aim of reaching out to the people stranded in evacuation centres, children still
shaken and all Japanese friends-at-large victimised by the triple tragedy of the Great
Reference(s):
East Japan Earthquake one way or another, Asean is planning to send the Asean Youth
Caravan of Goodwill their way early June.
The Caravan will travel to Northeast Japan and visit a few evacuation centres, perform
some cultural shows, share personal experiences from similar natural disasters in the
recent past and strengthen the human bond that has long existed between the
Japanese and Asean peoples.
As in its name, the Special Asean-Japan Ministerial Meeting was special in that it
touched on peoples hearts. Disaster is not a stranger to Asean, as eight of 10 Asean
countries have been ravaged by significant disasters in the last seven years.
Throughout the meeting, I sensed how the intense sorrow felt by Japanese Foreign
Minister Takeaki Matsumoto and his delegates were also shared by foreign ministers
and delegates from Asean countries.
Our region was the unvolunteered host to two prominent disasters of the century, the
great Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 2004 and Cyclone Nargis of May 2008. We
have experienced simultaneous disasters in multiple countries almost every year. In the
same month of the triple tragedy in Japan, Shan State of Burma experienced a strong
6.8- magnitude earthquake while southern Thailand, notably in my own hometown of
Nakhon Si Thammarat, suffered from prolonged floods.
Many Asean countries are still in the midst of recovery from disasters of the past two
years. These disasters have taken nearly 500 million precious lives. Millions of people
have been affected, and billions of US dollars have been spent on recovery. These are
outrageous numbers for our region of 600 million people and a combined GDP of US$2
trillion.
Japan has always been a standby and generous partner in times of these disasters. As
fellow Asian countries, we cannot help but feel compelled to reciprocate the unselfish
generosity that Japan has shown us in many disaster situations. But what can we give
to the government and people of Japan, known to be among the most resilient, self-
reliant people?
As I was contemplating this question, the Fukuda doctrine of 1977 came to mind. The
then Japanese prime minister Takeo Fukuda had declared this doctrine as one that is
centred on a relationship of mutual confidence and trust, based on heart-to-heart
understanding. For the last 34 years, Asean and Japans cooperation has been founded
on this heart-to-heart relationship.
So, I thought to myself, this principle shall guide our assistance to the ongoing crisis in
Japan.
Reference(s):
The Special Meeting concluded with a motion that Asean will always stand by the
Japanese people, and support the recovery process in response to Japans needs. I
noted that economic recovery is important, but a more immediate need is human
bonding.
With this spirit, we tapped into the ready Southeast Asian civil society organisations,
volunteers and non-governmental organisations ready to demonstrate their support by
helping displaced communities recover and rise to their feet. There are many scholars
from Asean countries who graduated from Japans universities and have lived in Japan
for years. They too are surely ready to help Japan in areas needed for recovery. This
people-to-people approach is an example of the kind of heart-to-heart solidarity that
the people of Asean can offer to the people of Japan.
The meeting had tasked me as the Asean Humanitarian Assistance Coordinator,

another title entrusted to me by the Asean leaders in 2009, to facilitate Aseans
collective efforts to support Japan, and report the outcome of our efforts to the 18th
Asean Summit in May and 19th Summit later this year in Indonesia. I humbly took on
this assignment, which reminded me of the days when the foreign ministers of Asean
tasked me to help coordinate the post-Nargis relief and recovery efforts in Burma.
The triple tragedy has also brought the necessity for all of us to re-configure the whole
political, economic and socio-cultural relationship between Asean and Japan. Some
short-term economic adjustments will be needed, such as in the areas of production,
energy supply, food and tourism. Reconstruction of the devastated areas will stimulate
the stagnant economy and help the regions overall economic well-being.
Asean countries could contribute to reconstruction efforts in Japan by sending

construction materials, and skilled workers to help in building more efficient and disaster
resilient structures. In the aftermath of the nuclear crisis, Asean could also benefit from
working with Japan in research and development projects designed to find alternative
energy and reduce its dependence on nuclear energy and imported oil.
The various regional mechanisms in Asean, such as the Asean-Japan Strategic

Partnership, Asean+3, East Asia Summit, and the Asean Regional Forum, will also have
to be optimised. The Master Plan on Asean Connectivity should focus not only on the
hardware but also people-to-people relations.
The cardinal lesson that can be drawn from Japans triple tragedy is the importance of
investing in prevention, mitigation and preparedness, and combining development with
disaster risk reduction approaches.
The terrible toll in Japan could have been worse without nearly a century of planning
and tough enforcement. Japan offers valuable lessons that Asean could apply in the
process of institutionalising the Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and
Reference(s):
Emergency Response. Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, in his
opening remarks, said that Asean will have to expedite its own mechanisms to be
prepared for the inevitable, and that the Asean Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian
Assistance on disaster management (AHA Centre), being set up in Jakarta, must be in
place without further delay.
Regardless of the triple tragedy, Japan continues to support Asean in the areas of
disaster preparedness and risk reduction. During the meeting, Mr Matsumoto proposed
to conduct an Asean-Japan seminar by end of the year, to share experiences of the
recent disasters, and to dispatch experts to the AHA Centre.
Friendship, humanity, empathy, kindness and compassion were felt by all in the Asean
hall as the Special Meeting concluded. I thank Indonesia, the chair of Asean, especially
President Yudhoyono and Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, for their leadership in
taking Asean through this heart-to-heart journey with the people of Japan. Together with
the rest of the world, Asean will stand by the Japanese government and the people as
they take on the task of building an even more resilient and better Japan.
The ASEAN-China Relationship by S. Pushpanathan China Brief Magazine, 7 May

2010
Key Players for Global Economic Growth
The relationship between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and
Chinas Free Trade Agreement (FTA) has garnered international attention. Several
agreements reached their dates of full implementation by early January of this year.
Among the most significant results, ASEAN FTA is now one of the lowest international
trade tariff areas in the world. ASEAN-China is the largest FTA in population size and
includes 1.9 billion total people. It is the third largest FTA in economic size, with a
cumulative GDP of US $5.8 trillion. And after the EU and the North American Free
Trade Agreement, it is the third largest FTA in terms of total trade transacted. In 2008,
ASEAN-China accounted for a combined US $4.3 trillion, or 13 percent of global trade.
The international interest is not surprising. ASEANs overall economic growth and
Chinas own rapid expansion are contributing to economic dynamism on both a regional
and global scale. Both are experiencing rapid integration into the global economy, and
are quickly being absorbed into the evolving global supply chains and taking on the role
as factories to the world. Therefore, there is a natural gravitation towards each other as
production bases with geographical proximity, historical ties and shared cultural affinity.
Reference(s):
A more open and liberal regime of trade between the two is benefiting ASEANs rapid
trade growth (26.4 percent per annum between 2003 and 2008), as well as greater
inflows of investment into manufacturing and resource and energy-rich sectors. It has
also increased access to the large consumer base in China. In the last few years, the
strong trade growth between the two has propelled China to become ASEANs third
largest trading partner, while ASEAN is well on its way to becoming Chinas third largest
trading partner in 2010.
There is also an economic link between ASEAN and the inner provinces of China. The
Chinese market in these areas is less developed than in the coastalregion. Sub-regional
development cooperation is also part of Chinas interest in engaging with ASEAN, which
hopes to capitalize on the FTA by establishing early footholds in these markets with
untapped potential. ASEAN can be on the supply chain for the various industries
operating across China, in eastern, western and central provinces.
The FTA uniquely positions ASEAN countries to take advantage of Chinas rapid
growth. The rising middle class of China, with its high consumption pattern and future
potential, provides ASEAN members with a market for its products and services. This
market includes consumer electronics, food products, tourism, health and education
services. China has already surpassed Japan as the largest consumer of luxury goods.
ASEAN should use the FTA to build a network that will capitalize on Chinas next wave
of expansion. The huge China market also forms a bulwark against a decline in demand
from the traditional markets in the west.
Through the FTA, ASEAN and China have a more sustained approach for addressing
tariff reduction, non-tariff barriers, services trade and investment. Both sides are also
exploring closer cooperation in trade facilitation, including harmonization of standards
and simplifying customs procedures. This process provides both sides with an avenue
to take economic cooperation to higher levels.
At the same time, ASEAN-China economic cooperation has not merely existed on the
trade front. It is also strengthening cooperation in tourism, infrastructure, human
resource development, people-topeople interaction and the business sector partnership.
In particular, ASEAN sees the benefit of developing transport and infrastructure services
between the two production bases. A strong and integrated transport network between
the two regions will facilitate regional connections, lower overall production costs, raise
business efficiency and enhance overall competitiveness of the economies. It will also
support tourism as the number of Chinese visiting ASEAN countries continues to
increase.
Looking Ahead
Reference(s):
ASEAN and China have concluded the ASEAN-China Maritime Transport Agreement
and the ASEAN-China Aviation Cooperation Framework. Under it, they have agreed to
work towards concluding an ASEANChina Regional Air Services Agreement by 2010,
covering both air freight and air passenger services to support and facilitate the traffic
and movement of passengers and cargo to increase their trade and economy.
In this connection, China has launched a US $10 billion infrastructure investment fund
to improve road, railway, airlines and information telecommunications links between
China and ASEAN to meet the demand of growing business ties. In addition,
recognizing the potential of ASEANs own internal integration, China has provided a US
$15 billion credit facility to promote integration of the two economies.
SG Interview by 21st Century Business Herald Singapore, 11 October 2004
please click here for the Chinese version of the interview
AFTA/ACFTA
(1) 21st Century: Is the China threat still in existence among ASEAN Member
Countries?
SG: While it is easy and tempting to see Chinas rise as an economic threat, it would
also be a mistake to do so. A rapidly growing China is the engine which powers regional
economies and the global economic train. ASEAN member countries will benefit greatly,
provided they adapt fast enough to ride on the train. Indeed, increased trade with China
was one reason why many of the crisis-hit economies in ASEAN recovered as quickly
as they did.
There has been a steady rise in the relative share of ASEAN in Chinas global
merchandise trade: from 5.8% in 1991 to 8.8% in 2003. ASEAN has now become the
fifth largest trade partner of China (after Japan, the United States, the European Union,
and the Special Administrative Region (SAR) of Hong Kong). On the other hand, China
has also become an important trade partner of ASEAN, occupying the fifth position in
2003. The share of China in ASEANs trade with the world expanded from 2.3 % in
1991 to 7% in 2003. Last year, ASEAN-China trade amounted to nearly US$79 billion.
(2) 21st Century: Please provide an update of the AFTA?
SG: SEAN is reviewing the local content formula of the AFTA, and hope that the revised
calculation formula would give manufacturers with regional production networks in
ASEAN greater access to lower tariff rates for the relevant products. ASEAN does not
follow the European Union (EU) way of imposing an across-the-membership common
tariff policy. ASEAN remains open to trade with all those wishing to do business with
Reference(s):
member countries. However, having said that, our aim is to achieve a zero tariff rates
for most products, which would increase the ASEAN competitiveness. For example,
some of the automotive manufacturers who have plants in Indonesia and Thailand,
could have the flexibility to source for their parts and components (supply-chain
management), and not to worry too much on tariffs.
(3) 21st Century: Is the ACFTA Negotiation moving towards this direction as well? What
is the major challenge?
SG: If the local content calculation is indeed successful, it would also be a major boost
to the ACFTA negotiation. As a matter of fact, this is a major discussion in the ACFTA.
(4) 21st Century: With the new administration in placed in Indonesia, would the
commitment by the previous government be binding? Likewise, would the change in
leadership in some of the ASEAN Member Countries be a hinder to the negotiation?
SG: This is the crunch of the issue. I have always believed that the negotiating parties
should (attempt to) sign an early stage agreement, in the event of minimal differences.
At least, this would be binding even if there is a new government among the negotiating
parties. However, if the negotiation is still in-process, the new government could always
claimed that they do not agree with the previous administration! Such situation would
then require a re-start of negotiation and additional time is consumed for the new
administration to get familiar with the already-discussed issues.
Currency
(5) 21st Century: There is always frequent comparison between ASEAN and EU.
Recognising that the differences in culture, religion, economic development and political
structure are smaller in EU, would this increase the difficulties of cooperation in the
(ASEAN) region?
SG: ASEAN has an advantage over EU. At least, English is the official language during
ASEAN meetings, and the subsequent ASEAN plus China, plus Japan, and plus Korea
meetings. English is used during the actual meeting as well as for meeting documents.
This is unlike the EU, where there is a need to translate the meeting proceedings and
documents to French, German and Spanish etc. This is extremely exhaustive. Since a
trade negotiation is generally a complicated process, a slight wrong
translation/interpretation of word would have a substantial consequence.
(6) 21st Century: In the long term, does ASEAN need a common currency?
SG: During the process of economic integration, it is unlikely for ASEAN to have a
common currency. Member Countries would only review the need (of a common
Reference(s):
currency) in 10 years time. On the whole, Member Countries are satisfied with their
present monetary structure, so this is not an urgent issue yet.
(7) 21st Century: What is the ASEANs view on the Chinese RMB in view of USs
constant critics that the devaluing of Chinese RMB has caused goods from US to lose
its competitiveness?
SG: Generally, ASEAN Member Countries enjoy the current value of RMB since the
import of Chinese goods to ASEAN is relatively economical. However, in the same time,
ASEAN opined that the re-evaluation of the RMB is not a bad move after all. The key is
to prepare the stakeholders before undergoing such evaluation, and not on a
sudden/abrupt basis, bearing in mind that the vast trade between ASEAN and China is
built on a stable currency exchange rate. Any drastic fluctuation would have a major
impact.
ASEAN would purchase more Chinese goods
(8) 21st Century: What is the next opportunity in the ASEAN-China economic
relationship?
SG: This would be the November ASEAN-China Expo / Fair in Nanning. I would
recommend that all the Chinese and ASEAN private sectors to participate in this event,
to get to know fellow private sectors and to do business networking.
This (event) was in fact suggested by your premier, Wen Jiabao, in the ASEAN-China
Summit in Bali in 2003. I am extremely impressed by Premier Wens knowledge on
economic matters and his sincerity to enhance the ASEAN-China relations, not just in
economic/trade, but the overall relationship, since ASEAN and China are friendly
neighbours.
Premier Wen Jiabao had also proposed that trade volume between ASEAN and China
be increased to US$100 billion by 2005. Well, we hit US$79 billion last year, and the
projected figures this year is between US$85 to US$90 billion. I believe this target is
within reach.
(9) 21st Century: Having said this, the main reason for the ASEAN-China trade volume
to grow was due to the increase in China import from ASEAN, plus the high price of the
oil and natural gas. Hence, there is now a China trade deficit with ASEAN.
SG: This is temporary. ASEAN would increase its import from China. Just think, when
ASEAN export more agriculture products to China, of which many are tariff-free, the
income of the (Chinese) farmers would increase. When that happen, what would they
be thinking of buying? Well, definitely not the European fashion or the Japanese
electronics products but China-made household electronics products (white goods),
Reference(s):
because of the low-price and the durable of these home-made products, something
which they can afford. Indonesia may have profited from its sale of natural gas, though I
believe she has also use the money to purchase Chinese products. This is a win-win
relationship.
(10) 21st Century: Apparently, there are many ASEAN countries, particularly the weaker
economies, are worried that the Chinese goods would hit on their local industries, and
hence, refused to open up their market.
Scaling new heights in ASEAN-Japan ties S. Pushpanathan, Head, ASEAN Plus Three
Relations, Jakarta
The ASEAN-Japan Summit in Tokyo last week concluded on a high note and with
resounding success for both ASEAN and Japan in every aspect of their cooperation.
The substantive Tokyo Declaration and its Plan of Action, which outlined more than 100
measures, reflected the dynamism of the relationship and the commitment of both sides
to develop an enduring and comprehensive mutual partnership in the 21st century.
The Summit endorsed the contribution of Japan to ASEANs economic development

and prosperity in the past three decades. Japan is the second largest trading partner of
ASEAN and Japanese companies have invested more than US$100 billion in the region
since the founding of ASEAN in 1967.
Japan had steadfastly supported ASEAN countries during the financial crisis of 1997-
1998 by providing assistance amounting to about $80 billion and keeping its market
open to ASEAN exports. Japans Official Development Assistance (ODA) to ASEAN
countries amounted to $23 billion in the last ten years or about 30 percent of Japans
total ODA. ASEAN is expected to continue gaining the lion share of Japanese ODA for
the foreseeable future.
In terms of future relations, ASEAN affirmed that ASEAN-Japan relations will continue
to be a cornerstone for a peaceful, stable and prosperous East Asia. Japan has
committed to providing more than $3 billion assistance to ASEAN for human resource
development (HRD) and exchange programs and for the development of the Mekong
sub-region. The HRD and exchange program will take up $1.5 billion in three years and
will involve 40,000 people from the region.
The Mekong assistance will see development of infrastructure and other capacity
building activities to help integrate the Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Viet Nam
(CLMV) countries into ASEAN. Other sub-regions such as the East ASEAN Growth
Area covering Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines and the new
Reference(s):
Economic Cooperation Strategy covering Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand
could also receive Japanese assistance.
In order to realize the ASEAN-Japan comprehensive economic partnership (CEP),

Japan will enter into economic partnership agreements (EPA) with Malaysia, Thailand
and the Philippines. The EPAs are expected to be highly beneficial since the three
countries account for 75 percent of total trade with Japan. Brunei Darussalam,
Indonesia and Viet Nam have indicated their interest to Japan to follow suit. Singapore
has already an EPA with Japan and has started to reap the benefits with its exports to
Japan increasing by 30 percent since the launching of the EPA.
The EPAs are different from a free trade area (FTA) since they would go beyond trade
and will encompass services, investments, tourism, standardization of regulation and
intellectual property rights and others. The EPAs are similar to the CEP and therefore
will serve as building blocks for the realization of the ASEAN-Japan CEP, including the
most lucrative ASEAN-Japan FTA by 2012.
The conclusion of the EPAs between Japan and the ASEAN countries will see the
emergence of a major economic zone with a population of 650 million and a combined
GDP of $5 trillion making it an extremely attractive market and production base. This will
also set the stage for the East Asia Free Trade Area recommended by the East Asia
Study Group whose recommendations were adopted by the ASEAN Plus Three Summit
in Phnom Penh in 2002.
Japan will help to set up a Malaysia-Japan International University in Kuala Lumpur to

assist ASEAN in training the workforce in ASEAN countries to undertake higher value
added economic activities, facilitate transfer of management know-how and inculcate
the discipline and resourcefulness seen among Japanese workers.
*LOCAL*
The Republic of Korea (Korea) and the countries of the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) have been integral to the miracle that has transformed
East Asia from a group of typically poor third world countries into the worlds
most dynamic economies. More precisely, Korea and ASEANs Indonesia,
Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand have sustained rapid growth in the postwar
era, alongside Hong Kong, China; Japan, and Taipei,China to put East Asia on
the world map as an economic powerhouse. Hong Kong, China; Korea;
Singapore; and Taipei,China are newly industrialized economies, while
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand have transformed themselves from stagnant
agricultural economies into dynamic manufacturers. These eight miracle
economies share a number of elements, including sound macroeconomic
policies, high savings and investment rates, and heavy investment in education.
Above all, the remarkable success of these countries has been based on export-
Reference(s):
oriented industrialization and is a powerful tribute to the potential benefits of
globalization. But that same globalization turned against these countries with a
vengeance in the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis. The massive capital inflows that
had helped fuel rapid economic growth wreaked financial havoc as foreign
investors suddenly lost confidence, beginning with Thailands forced baht
devaluation in May 1997. Turmoil in the financial markets soon spread to the real
economy and saw output contract sharply. Passionate debate rages about the
causes of the crisis, but it is likely that a combination of external and internal
factors played a role. What is beyond doubt is that the crisis was a painfully clear
reminder that globalization holds opportunities as well as risks. Furthermore,
there has been an unmistakable loss of momentum and self-confidence among
many of these once high-flying economies. There is a widespread perception
throughout the region that external forces, such as investors from the United
States (US) and Europe, were largely responsible for the Asian crisis.
Regardless of their accuracy, such perceptions gave rise to a region-wide sense
of vulnerability to and suspicion of external forces, which, in turn, fostered a
greater sense of regional identity and gave a strong impetus to regional
economic integration.1 In the immediate aftermath of the Asian crisis, the focus
of economic regionalism lay in promoting regional financial cooperation, best
exemplified by the Chiang Mai Initiative (CMI) among the ten ASEAN countries,
the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), Japan, and Korea. The focus of
regionalism has more recently been shifting toward the expansion of intra-
regional trade. The regions governments increasingly view intra-regional trade
and domestic demand as a means of reducing their heavy dependence on extra-
regional trade. The ASEAN-Korea Free Trade Area (AKFTA)2 is a concrete
example of the active promotion of intra-regional trade. In May 2006 the two
sides signed a free trade agreement that would lead to a free trade area by 2016.
(Thailand did not sign due to the exclusion of rice from the agreement.) Greater
economic cooperation between the twowith Korea the worlds eleventh largest
economy and ASEAN collectively a substantial economic presencecan yield
significant benefits for both sides. And Korea and ASEAN face many common
challenges in the post-crisis periodsuch as growing competition from the PRC
for manufactured exports and foreign direct investmentthat strengthen the case
for economic integration. While economic integration refers to the removal of
barriers to the cross-border flows of goods, services, capital, and labor, economic
integration between ASEAN and Korea realistically means only more trade
between the two sides before they can contemplate moving toward deeper levels
of integration. The central objective of our paper is to examine the extent to
which economic criteria favor AKFTAs prospects. That is, our central question is
whether AKFTA is an optimal free trade area in the sense that it is likely to be
mutually beneficial for ASEAN and Korea from a purely economic viewpoint. To
address this question we use qualitative analysis based on the theory of
economic integration pioneered by Viner (1950), which tells us whether
theoretical criteria favor AKFTA, and quantitative analysis using the CGE model,
providing us with quantitative estimates of the impact of AKFTA.
Reference(s):
Korea has been a dialogue partner of ASEAN since July 1991, and through the
ASEAN plus Three multilateral framework of East Asian co-operation, it now
meets regularly with ASEAN at summit levels. ASEAN members regard it as a
valuable contributing partner. In November 1989 Korea and ASEAN established
a Sectoral Dialogue relationship. In July 1991 the relationship was moved up to
Full Dialogue Partnership. In these dialogues mutual support for moving towards
strengthened KoreaASEAN co-operation was rearmed. However, the level of
public awareness of Korea in ASEAN remains low. Asian
attentionontheKoreanPeninsulahasbeenfairlyparochial,withmuchfocusonthe
vicissitudes in its security environment weapons of mass destruction (WMD),
nuclear proliferation, and problems in the north. In the light of this the image of
Korea is inevitably skewed or distorted. Despite the popularity of Korean movies
and actors and actresses a new cultural phenomenon sweeping Asia, aptly
called The Korean Wave (in Korean, Hallyu) among citizens in ASEAN
countries in recent years, our understanding of Korea needs to be further
enhanced. The security environment in East Asia features prominently in our
discussions of geopolitics. Within the East Asian equation, the Korea factor was
overshadowed by Japan at one time, and now ever increasingly, by a rising
China. The ASEAN public image of Korea was equally skewed in the post11
September era as well as the years following the onslaught of the Asian
nancial/economic crisis. The after-eects of these incidents of economic and
political turbulence have not dissipated, and ASEAN has far from recovered its
pre-Asian nancial crisis economic turnovers. These images belie the realities of
growing interdependence between ASEAN and Korea, for the latter is a member
of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), an ASEAN dialogue partner, and a player
in the ASEAN plus Three. Furthermore, the ASEAN states and Korea are
members of the Asia-Pacic Economic Co-operation (APEC). Korea and ASEAN
have jointly executed over 100 co-operation projects since 1990 in the areas of
trade, investment, FM.indd 9 FM.indd 9 1/24/07 2:06:04 PM 1/24/07 2:06:04 PM
tourism, technology transfer, and the fostering of human resources. Globalization
has brought Northeast and Southeast Asia much closer together, leading to
expectations of an emerging East Asian integration process, and kindling hopes
for an East Asian community. In October 1994, the Institute of Southeast Asian
Studies (ISEAS) organized the rst KoreaASEAN conference in Singapore to
look into the emerging issues in trade and investment relations between Korea
and ASEAN. The conference proceedings were published in the ISEAS
publication, ASEAN and Korea: Emerging Issues in Trade and Investment
Relations the following year. That rst KoreaASEAN conference was followed
by another conference in Seoul in cooperation with the Korean Association of
Southeast Asian Studies. The book compiling the papers presented at the
second KoreaASEAN conference, ASEAN and Korea: Trends in Economic and
Labour Relations, was published by ISEAS in 1997. In the ensuing years both
the ASEAN region and Korea have experienced momentous developments 11
September, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the rising spectre of new
transnational threats, foremost of which is international terrorism, the
Reference(s):
reorientation of Americas international security role and attendant impacts on
friends and allies, and regional expansion on the ASEAN side. These events
have resulted in changes in North and South Korean relations, stagnation in the
Japanese economy, the rising economic prole of China, and changing patterns
of international economic relations. These developments have had various
impacts on Korea and ASEAN countries; and as such, call for a much-needed re-
examination of the political and economic realities governing the ASEANKorea
relationship. In recent times ISEAS has successfully organized international
forums and conferences on ASEANJapan, ASEANIndia, and ASEANChina
relations. Singapore has also successfully negotiated a bilateral free trade
agreement (FTA) with Korea, and is in fact tasked to lead the ASEAN side in the
upcoming ASEANKorea FTA talks. ISEAS has had the great honour of fostering
this spirit of co-operation when it jointly organized with Koreas Institute of
Foreign Aairs and National Security (IFANS), the Conference on Strengthening
the KoreaASEAN Relationship on 15 September 2005 in Singapore, with
generous funding from the Korea Foundation. This book is the product of the
conference.
Changing Security Environments in Northeast Asia: A Korean View Seo-Hang

Lee GEOPOLITICAL FEATURES OF NORTHEAST ASIA Although the countries
constituting Northeast Asia are few, the regions security environment is very
complicated. The following geopolitical elements complicate the security situation
of the region:1 The existence of the worlds only remaining divided state, North
and South Korea; The existence of two states with nuclear capabilities China
and Russia; The military presence of another state with nuclear capabilities, the
United States which is allied to the Republic of Korea (hereafter cited as
Korea or ROK) and Japan; The absence of ocial bilateral relations between
North Korea and the United States, as well as between North Korea and Japan;
and The presence of two vast semi-enclosed seas, causing various maritime
disputes, including territorial ones. Chap3.indd 30 Chap3.indd 30 1/24/07 2:07:55
PM 1/24/07 2:07:55 PM Reproduced from ASEAN-Korea Relations: Security,
Trade, and Community Building, edited by Ho Khai Leong (Singapore: Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies, 2007). This version was obtained electronically direct
from the publisher on condition that copyright is not infringed. No part of this
publication may be reproduced without the prior permission of the Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies. Individual articles are available at 31 Changing
Security Environments in Northeast Asia: A Korean View With these geopolitical
elements, security in the Northeast Asian region has long been characterized by
the following three features. First, there is a deep-rooted distrust and rivalry
arising from the states historical experiences with each other. This is reected in
the volatile relations between the two sets of major powers, namely China and
Japan, and China and the United States. Second, the regions political survival is
not only dependent on each states international autonomy and territorial
integrity, but also the protection of its existing political system and survival of its
incumbent government. This is one of the core security concerns for some of the
Reference(s):
states in the region, particularly North Korea and Taiwan. Third, the formation of
alliance and alignment has been a key security strategy for most of the Northeast
Asian states. The security order created during the Cold War era was built on a
complete set of bilateral alliances, with the United States as a maritime power
and, less stably, the Soviet Union as a continental power. Given the strategic
alliance emphasis to security, the area had been largely bipolar, and there were
little horizontal linkages between alliance partners. After the collapse of the
Soviet Union, China lled the power vacuum and the post-Cold War bipolar
regional structure is now characterized by the Chinese dominance of mainland
Northeast Asia and U.S. dominance of maritime Northeast Asia.2 Over the past
few years, the security environment of Northeast Asia has been relatively stable,
with the exception of the North Korean nuclear issue. In particular, the end of the
Cold War has generally reduced international tensions across the region by
improving bilateral relationships among regional countries. The preoccupation of
virtually all countries in the region with accelerating economic development and
enhancing their economic competitiveness has encouraged them to promote co-
operative commercial relations with their neighbours, thereby contributing to a
reduction of tensions. As a result, trade among Northeast Asian countries has
signicantly increased in recent years, and intra-regional interdependence is
improving annually. In particular, Chinas accession to the World Trade
Organization (WTO), which was nalized in November 2001, has accelerated the
Chinese economys expansion and its incorporation into the global and regional
markets. Consequently, this has spurred an increase in the intra-regional trade
volume and greater economic interdependence among the countries in the
region. In2002ChinabecamethebiggestimportertoJapanovertheUnitedStates.
Similarly, Japans exports to China exceeded half of those to the United States.
Also, there was rapid growth in trade relations between China and Korea. In
2004 China began to rank rst in Korean foreign trade with about Chap3.indd 31
Chap3.indd 31 1/24/07 2:07:57 PM 1/24/07 2:07:57 PM 32 Seo-Hang Lee US$79
billion, surpassing the latters amount with the United States. Such increases in
intra-regional trade volume along with strengthened economic interdependence
are expected to contribute to a stable security environment in the region.3
However, conicts and challenges likely to aect regional peace and security
remain, some of which can be attributed to the legacy.
Strengthening ASEANKorea Co-operation in Non-Traditional Security Issues
Carolina G. Hernandez INTRODUCTION Within the ASEAN plus Three process,
the ASEANSouth Korea economic, functional, and political relationships remain
the weakest vis--vis those of ASEAN, China, and Japan. Both China and Japan
have forged their own free trade agreements/comprehensive economic co-
operation packages with ASEAN. In contrast, despite an agreement to start free
merchandise trade starting in 2006 having been reached, South Korea has yet to
complete ongoing talks with ASEAN on free cross-border investment and trade in
services.1 Political relations between ASEAN and China are also at an all-time
high, particularly with the much-diminished Chinese assertiveness on the South
China Sea issue. This has been capped by the conclusion of the ASEANChina
Reference(s):
Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea in Phnom Penh on
2 November 2002. Furthermore, Japan has sustained its long history of mutually
benecial economic and political co-operation Chap4.indd 41 Chap4.indd 41
1/24/07 2:08:24 PM 1/24/07 2:08:24 PM Reproduced from ASEAN-Korea
Relations: Security, Trade, and Community Building, edited by Ho Khai Leong
(Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2007). This version was
obtained electronically direct from the publisher on condition that copyright is not
infringed. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior
permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Individual articles are
available at 42 Carolina G. Hernandez with ASEAN when it marked the thirtieth
year of bilateral relations in 2003. On the other hand, South Korea and ASEAN
agreed in 2000 to include an exchange of views on political and security issues in
the region in their dialogue. The gap between ASEANs relationship with China
and Japan on the one hand and South Korea on the other is even more notable
in the security eld. This is despite the fact that security issues are included in
their dialogues . Although ASEAN is concerned about the proliferation of nuclear
weapons on the Korean Peninsula, this issue is not as great a priority as the
post-11 September 2001 anti-terrorism endeavours. This overarching concern
with terrorism is surprising given that the ASEAN states do not conform to the
overweening priority given by the United States predominantly military response
to international terrorism. Nevertheless, ASEAN states have since stepped up
their security co-operation with enhanced information and intelligence sharing,
among other measures, in order to combat terrorism. SinoASEAN security co-
operation, most notably SinoFilipino security co-operation, has been stepped up
in recent years. Given that the Philippines is the oldest U.S. ally in the region, this
is not surprising. The Beijing and Manila military and defence establishments
have agreed on a number of condence-building measures, and China has
agreed to provide security assistance to the Philippine military. The perceived
growing security co-operation between the two countries has created further
diculties in the PhilippineAmerican relationship following the premature pull-
out of the Philippine humanitarian contingent from Iraq in 2004. Washington felt
slighted by these two developments for understandable strategic reasons. On the
other hand, Japan has sustained a series of workshops and symposiums on
security co-operation with ASEAN since 2003. These include workshops on
maritime safety and security, military modernization and weapons of mass
destruction (WMD), international terrorism, transnational crime, environmental
and natural disasters, peace making, peace keeping, peace building, and post-
conict reconstruction, as well as institutional arrangements to enhance security
co-operation. It has also conducted coast guard capacity-building programmes
with a number of ASEAN states so as to promote regional maritime safety and
security. Similarly, South Korea signed an anti-terrorism co-operation pact with
its ASEAN dialogue partners in July 2005. In so doing, it has enhanced the South
Korean and ASEAN security co-operation. In all of these ASEAN plus Three
developments, South Korean participation continues to lag behind, especially in
security co-operation and non-traditional security (NTS) issues where co-
Reference(s):
operation among new parties Chap4.indd 42 Chap4.indd 42 1/24/07 2:08:24 PM
1/24/07 2:08:24 PM 43 Strengthening ASEANKorea Co-operation in Non-
Traditional Security Issues appears to have been stepped up in recent years (for
example, in combating pandemic diseases, including HIV/AIDS, Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome [SARS], and avian u).
ASEANKorea Co-operation in the Development of New ASEAN Members Le
Dinh Tinh INTRODUCTION The fact that the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) ocially became Dialogue
Partners at the Twentyfourth ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM) in Kuala Lumpur
in July 1991 did not surprise regional commentators. It had been widely known
that no eort was spared to gear this bilateral relationship onto higher planes.
Many researchers, including Kwon Yul, state that this relationship has witnessed
consistent growth over the past four decades.1 It should also be noted that this
success largely derives from the complementarities between both sides.2 There
are undoubtedly common interests and potentials for further development
between Korea and ASEAN. More importantly, KoreaASEAN co-operation has
led to the adoption of an inclusive approach, which attaches importance to the
development of the new members of ASEAN, namely Cambodia, Laos,
Myanmar, and Vietnam (CLMV for short). This chapter argues that such an
approach is not only benecial to the new members of ASEAN, the other ASEAN
members, and Korea, but also East Asia as a whole. Chap8.indd 103 Chap8.indd
103 1/24/07 2:09:50 PM 1/24/07 2:09:50 PM Reproduced from ASEAN-Korea
Relations: Security, Trade, and Community Building, edited by Ho Khai Leong
(Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2007). This version was
obtained electronically direct from the publisher on condition that copyright is not
infringed. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior
permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Individual articles are
available at 104 Le Dinh Tinh IS ASEAN A RELEVANT PARTNER? The ASEAN
leaders summit in Bali in October 2003 rearmed the commitment to establish
by 2020 an ASEAN community consisting of three pillars: the ASEAN Economic
Community, the ASEAN Security Community, and the ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community.
Reference(s):
IV. PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS
o Differences in population and religion
This photo represents the diversity and coming together of citizens all over
Southeast Asia. As you can see, it seems like their differences do not hinder them
from learning new things and from being a good citizen to one another. Peace, unity
and humanity may be the keys to improve, not only our relationship with our
fellowmen, but to people all over the world (may be possible) and build a
harmonious one.
Reference(s):
o Sense of ownership:
In this image, you can say that these two people are pointing to each other as
if they are putting the blame on one another. Making this very simple, for
example, relating this to a small group formed to make a certain project in
school. The lack of ownership is represented by an uneasy task to which no
member of the group is willing to take responsibility over, thus resulting to an
incomplete and unsuccessful fruit despite of the hard work of the other group
members in doing and finishing their share of tasks. Simply put, lacking of
ownership is refusing to take the responsibility over something so that
whatever the result will be is theyre then considered unaccountable.
Reference(s):
o High knowledge among each other
The image above may be represented by two ASEAN members (for

example). As we can see, although they seem to be a little the same due to
the similarity of figures included in the circle, they treat them differently;
different in a way that both nations have established what we call a priority.
Combining their concerns and organizing them by addressing them in a what
is the leading priority order can create a new and different figure (middle) that
acknowledges both and attending to their concerns.
5.) SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, & RECOMMENDATION

As an association formed by different countries, ASEAN may be subjected in
encountering many and diverse conflicts arising from the different parts of the world.
One country, being a member of ASEAN may be facing lots and lots of problems to
which they found complicated to deal with. The rising of population in my opinion, may
Reference(s):
be the leading problem of all, though countries may be ranked according to the number
of their population.
A country is not qualified to be called a state if there are no inhabitants living therein,
because people are part of a state, and in a democratic country, people make an island
a state. Being called a state is not just an identity to be carried for it also bears duties
and responsibilities that must be practiced by the citizens of it. The government or the
rulers of a state are the ones who are responsible in making and setting standards in
order to give their people their needs and wants. Yes, we are all aware of what are the
basic needs of a human in order for him to live: food, clothing, shelter. It cannot be said
that food may be found everywhere because some foods are nothing but then
inedible. Nowadays, money controls all. Unlike the old times to where one can found
fresh, clean food in some fruit-bearing trees, drink clean waters from some bodies of
water. Simply put, all is consistently well that time because everything is available
everywhere, for free. Comparing it to how the world goes now. If you were to ask every
single person living today of what will their need be to be able to sustain their daily
needs, yes, money says it all. Monies can make you afford buying your primary needs
and continue to survive and go on with life, and frankly, sometimes even right, rules and
justice can be bought.
Going back to what has been mentioned earlier in this chapter, rulers and/or the
government are the ones who set up standards in order to attend to their people.
Though we are all bound to follow those standards and rules set, were not deprived in
all aspects all the time. Why do you think theres this issue called, overpopulation? In
some countries, theyre implementing a rule to where a family can have no more than
one child. Theyre using this kind of practice to lessen the growing population of their
state. But most countries do not have this kind of rule, thats how overpopulation is
introduced.
Most Americans believe in the saying, the more, the merrier. This can be true
especially during and mostly referring to having a big celebration, because you get to
enjoy and share everything with everyone, but will it still be the same when you only
have limited resources? I dont think so. One must consistently satisfy his need in order
for him to live...for a very long time. So what would be the effect if the number of
consumers increase and get to share these limited resources? Simple. There will be
others who cannot and will not be able to have their share in the resources provided,
while some will greedily possess others shares all for their own or what we call shortage
will occur.
Security is also a need of people. Rules and regulations are established in order to
protect and keep the harmonious living of everyone. Keeping the citizens safe in all
aspects is the reason why laws were made, although not all people abide and follow
these. Laws can only be said to be followed if the act is visible and noticeable,
therefore, laws may not or cannot sometimes control our freedom to express our
opinions and what we should be thinking towards something very unusual to us that is
Reference(s):
why theres this thing we usually call, discrimination. Discrimination can take place
everywhere anytime. Some people may be subtly discriminating over a thing.
Being different is good, most people say because it is makes a person outstand
among others. Outstand in the sense that one is able to be easily distinguished over
others, may it be because of his/her features, characteristics, name, background, or
religion. But sometimes, these differences are used by some in order to make a person
feel like an outcast in the society. Though ASEAN members come together to be
treated as one, it does not necessarily mean that theyre all should be the same in many
aspects, because there may also be barriers that whats keeping them in between.
The religions of ASEAN countries are: Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism.
This shows that even their differences when it comes to their faith, culture, norms, etc.
can/may bring some conflicts that must be overcome first and that should be considered
in taking their steps to success. Success is not just a one step ahead to be achieved. It
takes a lot of hard work, motivation, knowledge, and experience of an individual.
Therefore, in an association, success can be reached by combining these
characteristics and attitudes of each individual and an effective and efficient teamwork.
But how can they be called efficient as a team? Delegating tasks may be a way to do
and achieve things that need to be done simultaneously. Though, these tasks may not
always be easy which usually result to the fear of one to own the responsibility over
such. Most people do not want to be held accountable for something that has a
potential/possibility to become a fail. Some are just not all right in encountering
something that will cause them too much stress, and later on give up. This may hinder
the association from progressing and taking another step forward.
Another is the effectiveness of an organization/association, which also plays an
important role. You could be wondering, how could this be achieved? Its simply through
a good and open communication. A good communication may establish a good and
harmonious relationship with one another. In an association, like the ASEAN, a good
communication may be a big help in giving knowledge and addressing to each
concerns.
With all of these cultural challenges, creating a peaceful community is not an easy task.
ASEAN has focused on building economic development, but there is more than looking
for money, buildings, roads, and modern equipment. It is important for society as a
whole to be concerned with the health of each persons body and mind. Social conflict
begins when citizens do not have healthy minds. Educating the general public about
social differences, including cultural and religious beliefs and practices will improve
good communication and strengthen economic development.
Reference(s):

SEO - ASEAN, Growing and Changing Together As ONE.

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

SEO - ASEAN, Growing and Changing Together As ONE.

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Subject: International Negotiation Date: Nov.

ASEAN, growing and changing together as ONE.

o Ownership, according to MacMillan Dictionary, is a legal possession of

o A knowledge based economy is an expression coined to describe trends in

Opinion: "Connectivity key to sustainable ASEAN Community" by S.

The meeting had tasked me as the Asean Humanitarian Assistance Coordinator,

Asean countries could contribute to reconstruction efforts in Japan by sending

The various regional mechanisms in Asean, such as the Asean-Japan Strategic

The ASEAN-China Relationship by S. Pushpanathan China Brief Magazine, 7 May

Key Players for Global Economic Growth

SG Interview by 21st Century Business Herald Singapore, 11 October 2004

please click here for the Chinese version of the interview

(2) 21st Century: Please provide an update of the AFTA?

ASEAN would purchase more Chinese goods

The Summit endorsed the contribution of Japan to ASEANs economic development

In order to realize the ASEAN-Japan comprehensive economic partnership (CEP),

Japan will help to set up a Malaysia-Japan International University in Kuala Lumpur to

Changing Security Environments in Northeast Asia: A Korean View Seo-Hang

o Differences in population and religion

The image above may be represented by two ASEAN members (for

5.) SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, & RECOMMENDATION

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen