Re-thinking Region: U.S.-Southeast Asian Relations in the Twentieth Century

Abstract

More than twenty years ago, historian Robert McMahon pointed out that studies of U.S.-Southeast Asian relations with a “broad, regional focus” remain “surprisingly rare.”1 His observation came in the bibliographic essay accompanying his own contribution to this sparse field, and his book remains one of precious few examples. As Kenton Clymer demonstrates in the opening essay in this Roundtable, it remains the case that few scholars study U.S. relations with countries in Southeast Asia other than Vietnam and the Philippines. The U.S. war in Vietnam, and the immediate and lingering effects of U.S. imperialism in the Philippines rightly attract significant attention. Scholars have produced compelling and sophisticated works about these topics, and continue to do so. However, contributors to this Roundtable demonstrate that the region as a whole, as well as individual countries and topics within it, deserve more study. It is easy to claim that under-studied topics deserve more attention as a way of providing representation, and presenting a fuller story. But these essays contribute far more than rounding out our knowledge—they speak directly to some of the liveliest discussions in the history of U.S. foreign relations, nudging us to think in new ways about those topics. It is fitting that U.S. relations with Southeast Asia should prompt such a rich set of essays. The authors of these essays all have intellectual commitments and training as both U.S. and Southeast Asian historians. The influence of Southeast Asian history shows. Southeast Asia is a region defined by diversity; by shifting and unstable borders; by imperialism and its intersection with race; by long-held ideas about how sovereignty and the right to rule are established, often rooted in deep religious faith; by the vibrancy and inequality of a thriving production for and trade with the global market. Historians of Southeast Asia remain constantly aware of the limits of their knowledge, too. Even the rare historian who can focus on a single country is unlikely to be able to master even half of the languages commonly spoken in that one space. Southeast Asianists are used to building a whole from the contributions of many.