1. The Iraqis are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
2. The Libyans are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
3. The Syrians are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
Comeon guys, give me a break. It is just power, control and geopolitics for the US. They don’t actually care two hoots about the people suffering from their (the US) plans…
Thanks for the pick-up Ken. My general point about the US is not so much about whether it has indulged in colonialism – it did, but on a much lesser scale- but that it has a record of both immense creativity and immense destruction in terms of global norms and governance. The larger point is that China’s refusal to abide by the ruling shouldn’t be read as some kind of mortal blow to progress on global governance . Major powers are often egregious offenders but that doesn’t mean the structures of a liberal world order are dissolving.
Statements such as that the US contribution to the betterment of humanity has been ‘staggering’ are the stuff of US presidential campaigns. They don’t belong on academic websites purporting to offer analysis of international affairs. It is with some surprise that, later in this post, one comes upon the author’s call for Australia to become an independent actor, because the espousal of the ‘betterment of humanity’ argument betrays a sepoy mentality still common among Australians. Judging from the content of the bulk of this post, the author no doubt doesn’t share this mentality.
One can readily imagine such a claim about America’s contribution passing the tender lips of Hillary Clinton some time in the next few months. Those same lips conveyed to the hapless people of Libya a few years ago the imperious command to ‘capture Gadhafi or kill him’. It is hard to say what betterment of humanity followed once the Libyans had obeyed this command, choosing the second option that their American mentor had held out to them.
The United States never departed from the League of Nations, because it had never joined in the first place. Some countries did both join and leave, such as Japan, whose membership lasted from 1920 until 1933. Its departure was Japan’s response to an unsympathetic League of Nations survey of Japan’s depredations in Manchuria. Woodrow Wilson, whose brainchild it was, naturally wanted the US to be a League member, but he was unable to carry Congress with him.
Whether through the workings of exceptionalism, manifest destiny or some other pro-American supernatural force, the US did indeed ‘reject European colonialism’, but oddly it did not also reject American colonialism into the bargain. Otherwise, thousands of Filipinos would not have died resisting the Americans who had arrived in Manila intent on harvesting the fruits of their victory in the Spanish-American War of 1898.
Had the US not itself become a colonial power, Guantanamo Bay, occupying a precious corner of Cuba, would not have been available in 2001 for another US experiment in the betterment of at least a certain breed of humanity.
Dr Raymond makes a lot of sense in what he says about the South China Sea. I am not yet inclined to be optimistic, however, just because ‘many in China know the nine-dash line to be unjustifiable’. It matters rather how many powerful people in China are prepared to abandon the specious reasoning that lies behind the nine-dash line and to cope with the enormous loss of face that this will entail.
I have often argued that Indonesia should take a stronger position on this issue. Otherwise, any suggestion that Indonesia is the leader of ASEAN must be deemed nonsense. But the Foreign Ministry’s sheepish reaction to the arbitration decision that its website has displayed over the last twenty-four hours, best characterised as ostrich-like, prompts one to believe that Indonesia still doesn’t grasp that the nine-dash line is opposed to the interests of all ASEAN countries, whatever its eventual implementation may do for freedom of navigation, trade and other global questions.
“In Bangladesh and so many other places, extremists want to destroy multi-cultural and multi-religious societies”.
I have a problem with this premise, maybe it is just me…
Is Saudi Arabia governed by extremists? Are the Maldives governed by extremists? I could go on and on and on….
Source: http://bit.ly/29C1641 The law prohibits the practice by Maldivian citizens of any religion other than Islam, and the Constitution precludes non-Muslims from voting, obtaining citizenship, and holding public positions. The president, who is required to be a Sunni Muslim, is the “supreme authority to propagate the tenets of Islam.”
My “problem” is that (I believe) we have no tools to define extremism… Which means that it is left to each of us to “define” what is extreme. There are “clear to most people” examples at one end of the spectrum… What about the “centre” or “Centre Left”.
For me – and probably me alone – The Maldives (along with many others) are at the most severe end of the spectrum and the Ma Ba Tha do not belong “in” the spectrum. They are the KKK of Buddhism…. There is no ISIL in Buddhism, except within the mind of one that wants to create one.
I guess if Cambodia were part of the Golden Triangle they’d know what kind of cash crop never fails in the global markets, quite on the contrary according to a recent report regardless of the trade cycle .
Don’t put words into my mouth. I am stating the obvious. Remember this joke about international politics: when two small countries have a dispute, the dispute disappears. When a big state and a small state are in dispute, the small state disappears. When two big countries are in dispute, the United Nations disappears. Just like the USA in the past, China ignores the UN. The Philippines has to rely on the US military might to counterbalance China.
Now did u mean since China is powerful, then they can get anything they want? That the Philippines or any country should give whatever China is claiming because they have no match at all? The PH is clearly know that they have no match when it comes to power that’s why they let the international law speak and decide.
Excellent article. These brave, skillfull, modern minded young activists can certainly be sure of one thing : Prayut will make a disastrous mess. He is offering nothing but a turning back of the clock.
I don’t understand why Australians are so concerned about the state of the relationship. The Indonesians don’t seem to care too much about what other people think. There is recent history of aggression over Asean fishing boats, the executions, spats with close Asian neighbors over minor spats, resistance to pressure from Singapore to prosecute companies responsible for last years fires, the warship naming controversy, and so on.
Why do Australians persist in thinking they can have more than a small influence on this very large and very fragmented society, where international relations seems entirely based on internal politics?
Most investors are looking to access the very large consumer markets rather than establish export capacity using cheap labor. There are problems with productivity, education, rent seeking, regulation, rule of law etc which far outweigh the gains from cheaper labor. The reason for much offshore invest manufacturing is to counter government import barriers and access local markets.
The Chinese import many workers- rumored to be tens of thousands have been building nickel smelters. The Chinese are only concerned about making a buck so there must be something about the cheap labor that doesn’t appeal.
Indonesia is not an Islamic state and investors don’t give a hoot about religion. Now, rule of law they do worry about… its hard to stay out of jail at home if you are constantly be shaken down.
Not all investment is about squeezing the local population for every drop of blood that can be had.
Unfortunately speaking it is not simply Cambodia where speaking out is sometimes an invitation for those who fell threatened to kill outspoken persons. It is stretching the imagination too far that Kim Ley was murdered by a Cambodian worker who had been working in Thailand and to whom Kim Ley owed US$3,000 (which is a lot of $$$$ for a Cambodian migrant worker in Thailand).
You are fortunate and priviledged to have lived in such a wonderful country for so long.
Agreed there has been a considerable amount of development and prosperity in the last 20 years. Not all have benefited regardless of class or income.
Certainly those like you who have spent such a long time in and around Thailand wouldn’t need to read the excellent reports from Andrew Walker or the idealistic retakes of Marc Saxer to know that the lead up to the conflict is more involved than a rich vs poor interpretation.
Jokowi may be a small-town kampung Javanese but he is a graduate of Gajah Mada University, one of the Indonesia’s top universities. He attracted at some stage the attention of Luhut Panjaitan, a very wealthy TNI retiree who is no man’s fool.
It is irrelevant how much Jokowi has pocketed. He has been wealthy enough to have his children educated overseas.
Jokowi has some attractive qualities, such as being prepared to fly economy class. But he doesn’t need Mr Cohen’s support.
“China took Paracel [back] by force from Vietnam because VN’s claim of the Paracel is based on its successor claim from its French colonial master who took it from China during the Qing era. But the French have never granted the Paracel to VN”: Paracels never belong to China, it just came there as a state in 1909. Vietnam actively administered Paracels at least since 17 century (a lot of historical documents, maps can easily accessed now). The word ‘back’ has no meaning here. Furthermore, French claimed Paracels on behalf of Annam (can be checked easily) and it ceded to Vietnam after the first Vietnam war (“On 8th June [1956]….The French Chargé d’Affair called on the Department of Foreign Affair…. maintained that the Francd had ceded Paracels ….. to Vietnam…”http://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/Interface/ViewImage.aspx?B=553110)
The map in the article displays an incorrect line for Vietnnam’s EEZ claim. Vietnam’s EEZ claim and continental shelf claims are shown on page 5 of this submission to the UN
The Philippines military is a joke. Without USA, the Philippines can’t do a thing. China is a paper tiger. PLA have not fought a war for more than two decades, last time against Vietnam and suffered heavy casualties. PLA dare not antagonize USA. USA does not want to engage China. Nothing will happen in the South China Sea except bluffing.
Well, vichai n, then i can only suggest you to ordain as a forest monk and withdraw from the world to find some hope for yourself as Red (PT/UDD/etc) and Yellow (DP/military/PDRC/etc) are the only significant political and social forces existing in Thailand.
Given that i have lived here for 23 years, not in a nice expat condo in Sukhumvit, but for the vast majority of those years in Thai communities, and that my job as a photographer and writer has brought me to many corners in this country, especially also areas of social problems, i am quite confident to say that yes, i am aware of quite similar progress of people from different regions. I do not just get my information by reading papers, studies and statistics – i do see things by myself as well.
It is not a question of good fortune, but of improved state services for people, and access to for wide sectors of the population, improved distribution of wealth, and simply things that are called development over the past decades to a point that Thailand is now classified as a upper middle income country with very solid middle classes. Thailand does have pockets of poverty, but it is not a country with wide spread extreme poverty as you can easily see in the countries i have mentioned.
Yes, i am aware that corruption is endemic in Thailand. While the Yellow discourse and propaganda may be centered around corruption and morality, it is not the root cause of the Red/Yellow conflict. I would suggest to read Marc Saxer’s work on the transformation crisis, Andrew Walker’s work on urbanized peasants, and the work of so many other scholars on contemporary Thailand, and you can see that what led to the conflict is far more complex than a simple poor vs. rich analyses.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Major powers behaving badly
1. The Iraqis are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
2. The Libyans are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
3. The Syrians are benefitting from the US “betterment”?
Comeon guys, give me a break. It is just power, control and geopolitics for the US. They don’t actually care two hoots about the people suffering from their (the US) plans…
Major powers behaving badly
Thanks for the pick-up Ken. My general point about the US is not so much about whether it has indulged in colonialism – it did, but on a much lesser scale- but that it has a record of both immense creativity and immense destruction in terms of global norms and governance. The larger point is that China’s refusal to abide by the ruling shouldn’t be read as some kind of mortal blow to progress on global governance . Major powers are often egregious offenders but that doesn’t mean the structures of a liberal world order are dissolving.
Major powers behaving badly
Statements such as that the US contribution to the betterment of humanity has been ‘staggering’ are the stuff of US presidential campaigns. They don’t belong on academic websites purporting to offer analysis of international affairs. It is with some surprise that, later in this post, one comes upon the author’s call for Australia to become an independent actor, because the espousal of the ‘betterment of humanity’ argument betrays a sepoy mentality still common among Australians. Judging from the content of the bulk of this post, the author no doubt doesn’t share this mentality.
One can readily imagine such a claim about America’s contribution passing the tender lips of Hillary Clinton some time in the next few months. Those same lips conveyed to the hapless people of Libya a few years ago the imperious command to ‘capture Gadhafi or kill him’. It is hard to say what betterment of humanity followed once the Libyans had obeyed this command, choosing the second option that their American mentor had held out to them.
The United States never departed from the League of Nations, because it had never joined in the first place. Some countries did both join and leave, such as Japan, whose membership lasted from 1920 until 1933. Its departure was Japan’s response to an unsympathetic League of Nations survey of Japan’s depredations in Manchuria. Woodrow Wilson, whose brainchild it was, naturally wanted the US to be a League member, but he was unable to carry Congress with him.
Whether through the workings of exceptionalism, manifest destiny or some other pro-American supernatural force, the US did indeed ‘reject European colonialism’, but oddly it did not also reject American colonialism into the bargain. Otherwise, thousands of Filipinos would not have died resisting the Americans who had arrived in Manila intent on harvesting the fruits of their victory in the Spanish-American War of 1898.
Had the US not itself become a colonial power, Guantanamo Bay, occupying a precious corner of Cuba, would not have been available in 2001 for another US experiment in the betterment of at least a certain breed of humanity.
Dr Raymond makes a lot of sense in what he says about the South China Sea. I am not yet inclined to be optimistic, however, just because ‘many in China know the nine-dash line to be unjustifiable’. It matters rather how many powerful people in China are prepared to abandon the specious reasoning that lies behind the nine-dash line and to cope with the enormous loss of face that this will entail.
I have often argued that Indonesia should take a stronger position on this issue. Otherwise, any suggestion that Indonesia is the leader of ASEAN must be deemed nonsense. But the Foreign Ministry’s sheepish reaction to the arbitration decision that its website has displayed over the last twenty-four hours, best characterised as ostrich-like, prompts one to believe that Indonesia still doesn’t grasp that the nine-dash line is opposed to the interests of all ASEAN countries, whatever its eventual implementation may do for freedom of navigation, trade and other global questions.
Tolerance in the time of terror
“In Bangladesh and so many other places, extremists want to destroy multi-cultural and multi-religious societies”.
I have a problem with this premise, maybe it is just me…
Is Saudi Arabia governed by extremists? Are the Maldives governed by extremists? I could go on and on and on….
Source: http://bit.ly/29C1641 The law prohibits the practice by Maldivian citizens of any religion other than Islam, and the Constitution precludes non-Muslims from voting, obtaining citizenship, and holding public positions. The president, who is required to be a Sunni Muslim, is the “supreme authority to propagate the tenets of Islam.”
My “problem” is that (I believe) we have no tools to define extremism… Which means that it is left to each of us to “define” what is extreme. There are “clear to most people” examples at one end of the spectrum… What about the “centre” or “Centre Left”.
For me – and probably me alone – The Maldives (along with many others) are at the most severe end of the spectrum and the Ma Ba Tha do not belong “in” the spectrum. They are the KKK of Buddhism…. There is no ISIL in Buddhism, except within the mind of one that wants to create one.
Why Cambodia’s rice industry needs a new strategy
I guess if Cambodia were part of the Golden Triangle they’d know what kind of cash crop never fails in the global markets, quite on the contrary according to a recent report regardless of the trade cycle .
A primer on the Philippines-China showdown
Don’t put words into my mouth. I am stating the obvious. Remember this joke about international politics: when two small countries have a dispute, the dispute disappears. When a big state and a small state are in dispute, the small state disappears. When two big countries are in dispute, the United Nations disappears. Just like the USA in the past, China ignores the UN. The Philippines has to rely on the US military might to counterbalance China.
A primer on the Philippines-China showdown
Now did u mean since China is powerful, then they can get anything they want? That the Philippines or any country should give whatever China is claiming because they have no match at all? The PH is clearly know that they have no match when it comes to power that’s why they let the international law speak and decide.
Thai youth activism rekindling hope
Excellent article. These brave, skillfull, modern minded young activists can certainly be sure of one thing : Prayut will make a disastrous mess. He is offering nothing but a turning back of the clock.
‘What a piece of work is a man!’
Great job, Sara! Congrats.
The future of Australia-Indonesia relations
I don’t understand why Australians are so concerned about the state of the relationship. The Indonesians don’t seem to care too much about what other people think. There is recent history of aggression over Asean fishing boats, the executions, spats with close Asian neighbors over minor spats, resistance to pressure from Singapore to prosecute companies responsible for last years fires, the warship naming controversy, and so on.
Why do Australians persist in thinking they can have more than a small influence on this very large and very fragmented society, where international relations seems entirely based on internal politics?
The future of Australia-Indonesia relations
Most investors are looking to access the very large consumer markets rather than establish export capacity using cheap labor. There are problems with productivity, education, rent seeking, regulation, rule of law etc which far outweigh the gains from cheaper labor. The reason for much offshore invest manufacturing is to counter government import barriers and access local markets.
The Chinese import many workers- rumored to be tens of thousands have been building nickel smelters. The Chinese are only concerned about making a buck so there must be something about the cheap labor that doesn’t appeal.
Indonesia is not an Islamic state and investors don’t give a hoot about religion. Now, rule of law they do worry about… its hard to stay out of jail at home if you are constantly be shaken down.
Not all investment is about squeezing the local population for every drop of blood that can be had.
Dissent and death in Cambodia
Unfortunately speaking it is not simply Cambodia where speaking out is sometimes an invitation for those who fell threatened to kill outspoken persons. It is stretching the imagination too far that Kim Ley was murdered by a Cambodian worker who had been working in Thailand and to whom Kim Ley owed US$3,000 (which is a lot of $$$$ for a Cambodian migrant worker in Thailand).
Red and Yellow in Germany
You are fortunate and priviledged to have lived in such a wonderful country for so long.
Agreed there has been a considerable amount of development and prosperity in the last 20 years. Not all have benefited regardless of class or income.
Certainly those like you who have spent such a long time in and around Thailand wouldn’t need to read the excellent reports from Andrew Walker or the idealistic retakes of Marc Saxer to know that the lead up to the conflict is more involved than a rich vs poor interpretation.
What’s next for Jokowi’s Indonesia?
Jokowi may be a small-town kampung Javanese but he is a graduate of Gajah Mada University, one of the Indonesia’s top universities. He attracted at some stage the attention of Luhut Panjaitan, a very wealthy TNI retiree who is no man’s fool.
It is irrelevant how much Jokowi has pocketed. He has been wealthy enough to have his children educated overseas.
Jokowi has some attractive qualities, such as being prepared to fly economy class. But he doesn’t need Mr Cohen’s support.
Vietnamese fishermen versus China
@ nguoi phan bien
“..this area is also within China’s EEZ based on its possession of the Paracel…”: It’s still doubtful if any feature of Paracels is entitled for an EEZ (even the largest, Woody, has no potable water: http://www.shtong.gov.cn/node2/node70393/node83885/node83891/node83899/node83901/userobject1ai121797.html, no arable land: http://www.viet-studies.info/kinhte/LineWithNineDashes_Dyer.htm..)
“China took Paracel [back] by force from Vietnam because VN’s claim of the Paracel is based on its successor claim from its French colonial master who took it from China during the Qing era. But the French have never granted the Paracel to VN”: Paracels never belong to China, it just came there as a state in 1909. Vietnam actively administered Paracels at least since 17 century (a lot of historical documents, maps can easily accessed now). The word ‘back’ has no meaning here. Furthermore, French claimed Paracels on behalf of Annam (can be checked easily) and it ceded to Vietnam after the first Vietnam war (“On 8th June [1956]….The French Chargé d’Affair called on the Department of Foreign Affair…. maintained that the Francd had ceded Paracels ….. to Vietnam…”http://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/SearchNRetrieve/Interface/ViewImage.aspx?B=553110)
Vietnamese fishermen versus China
The map in the article displays an incorrect line for Vietnnam’s EEZ claim. Vietnam’s EEZ claim and continental shelf claims are shown on page 5 of this submission to the UN
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/vnm37_09/vnm2009n_executivesummary.pdf
and on page 5 of this submission
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/mysvnm33_09/mys_vnm2009excutivesummary.pdf
No country around the SCS has any maritime claim that is anywhere near as excessive as China’s so-called “Nine-dashed Line”.
A primer on the Philippines-China showdown
The Philippines military is a joke. Without USA, the Philippines can’t do a thing. China is a paper tiger. PLA have not fought a war for more than two decades, last time against Vietnam and suffered heavy casualties. PLA dare not antagonize USA. USA does not want to engage China. Nothing will happen in the South China Sea except bluffing.
Red and Yellow in Germany
Well, vichai n, then i can only suggest you to ordain as a forest monk and withdraw from the world to find some hope for yourself as Red (PT/UDD/etc) and Yellow (DP/military/PDRC/etc) are the only significant political and social forces existing in Thailand.
A Red rage and Duterte
Does RD have a direct line to Utrecht? Or does the Party have the man there on such a short leash that his views don’t matter?
Red and Yellow in Germany
Given that i have lived here for 23 years, not in a nice expat condo in Sukhumvit, but for the vast majority of those years in Thai communities, and that my job as a photographer and writer has brought me to many corners in this country, especially also areas of social problems, i am quite confident to say that yes, i am aware of quite similar progress of people from different regions. I do not just get my information by reading papers, studies and statistics – i do see things by myself as well.
It is not a question of good fortune, but of improved state services for people, and access to for wide sectors of the population, improved distribution of wealth, and simply things that are called development over the past decades to a point that Thailand is now classified as a upper middle income country with very solid middle classes. Thailand does have pockets of poverty, but it is not a country with wide spread extreme poverty as you can easily see in the countries i have mentioned.
Yes, i am aware that corruption is endemic in Thailand. While the Yellow discourse and propaganda may be centered around corruption and morality, it is not the root cause of the Red/Yellow conflict. I would suggest to read Marc Saxer’s work on the transformation crisis, Andrew Walker’s work on urbanized peasants, and the work of so many other scholars on contemporary Thailand, and you can see that what led to the conflict is far more complex than a simple poor vs. rich analyses.