Stability In Asia Research Articles

A Japanese perspective of Asia's currency crisis

The latest currency crisis in Asia clearly shows that the traditional exchange rate policy of pegging to the dollar is no longer consistent with macroeconomic stability in Asia's developing countries, and that they should peg closer to the Japanese yen. The weakening yen since mid‐1995 was a major factor triggering the crisis in Asia which has led to a further depreciation of the yen. Severing the vicious circle between economic deceleration in Asia and a weakening yen is crucial for the Asian economies to recover. Japan can help Asia as well as itself by pursuing a policy mix of stimulating domestic demand and pushing the yen up against the dollar.

Cambodia: Lasting key to Southeast Asia's stability

Despite many positive changes inside Cambodia in recent years, it remains the region's weakest spot: It is caught forever between Vietnam's slow but inexorable expansion southward and westward over the centuries, Thailand's historic instinct to play hostile neighboring elements off against each other as a means of guaranteeing its own survival, and gigantic China to the north. With Russia and the United States now over the horizon, China, Japan, and India emerge as the regional powers to conjure with. Only time will tell whether the prospering Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in fact represents a new regional force of history that can overcome the centrifugal pressures within the region and withstand the pressures of the age‐old regional powers. If the answer is positive, Cambodia may remain a regional problem within the bosom of ASEAN. But if ASEAN founders, Cambodia could once again become a threat to the peace of the region and engage the attention of the international community.

Energy consumption trends in high growth Asian economies before and after 1986

In 1986, world oil prices declined sharply. Lower oil prices have been favourable to economic growth and price stability in Asia. However, oil consumption has also been growing rapidly in developing Asian countries including those dependent on imported oil. The increasing dependence on oil as a source of energy since 1986 is a striking reversal of the previous trend. In their pursuit of rapid industrialization, Asian countries have neglected energy conservation and diversification strategies. Unless energy policy is redirected, countries like Korea, Thailand and the Philippines could be seriously hurt by a sharp rise in oil prices. An increase in oil prices is almost inevitable in the next few years.

India and Asia: Changing Perspectives

Inaugurating the Asian Relations Conference some thirty-five years ago, Jawaharlal Nehru had mused that both India and Asia were poised on the threshold of a new period of history–a watershed dividing two epochs of endeavour. The colonial world was crumbling and old empires were being transformed into young nations. The dynamic continent of Asia was slowly finding itself again and stirring to take its place. In the years immediately after India's independence its foreign policy was informed and marked by a strong Asian consciousness. The transition from this Asian phase to global concerns has disturbed many Indians as it is felt that it was only due to its Asian orientation that newly independent India was able to carve out for itself a prominent role in world affairs. However, it is useful to remember that when imperialism was establishing itself India was the hub of its power. Colonial control of China or Iran hinged on it. It is difficult to escape the conclusion then, that Nehru's consciousness was shaped more by anti-imperialist fervour and not merely conditioned by a vague awareness of an Asian identity. To many persons Asia today is just a geographical expression—a continent which unlike Europe or Latin America is not dominated by a single culture. The term Asia is used by most non-Asians to mean diverse things; “Asia” is usually distinguished from the Islamic World, and China and Japan are excluded. It is easy to exaggerate the strength of cultural bonds that unite the Asians. The vast Asiatic continent has seen the flourishing of at least three major civilizations—Indian, Sinic and Islamic. These divisions are further complicated by ethnic and racial differences and not much useful purpose can be served by trying to base programmes for peace and stability in Asia on this elusive shared heritage and kindred identity. In the aftermath of the Second World War there was a keen desire on the part of the Asian countries to work together, to confer together and to look to one another to accelerate the process of decolonisation and to consolidate their newly won independence. This was undoubtedly due to a feeling that the Asian countries might still be exploited or dominated by Europe or countries elsewhere. Against such a backdrop, India could not be ignored. Nehru strove throughout his life to build and reinforce an Asian personality inspite of many obstacles so that the Asian nations may be better equipped to grapple with complex challenges they were confronted with. He was not entirely successfic! in this heroic ettdeasour. There is 110 point in lanienting over the failure. That phase is over. What should be remembered and emphasised is that the Indo-centric Asian policy was not born of some idle fancy of a whimsica1 leader but had emerged from the material facts of life. The international scene has altered considerably with the passage of time and Indlan perspectives on Asia hare changed correspondingly. To many of us it seems, at times at least, that todays problems are quite different front the challenges of yesteryears. We cannot solve out individual or regional problems unless we look at them in a global perspective. What then remains of the concept of Asia?

Stability in Asia

Stability in Asia

Changing Patterns of Security and Stability in Asia.

Changing Patterns of Security and Stability in Asia.

The Reunification of Korea: Problems and Prospects

THE DIVISION of Korea ranks high among the world's seemingly intractable problems, though the issue tends to simmer beneath the surface of world political consciousness most of the time, only erupting occasionally with sufficient violence to command close attention. Yet the circumstances of the division, and the fact that it is embedded in a set of antagonistic alliances involving all the major powers-at a geographical point where the borders or crucial interests of all converge-make it essential that we examine the issue very carefully. The starting point of this article is the belief that unification is desired by most Koreans, North and South, that it is highly desirable in the overall interests of peace and stability in Asia, and finally-though many would dispute this-that it is a realizable goal. The analysis that follows is based on study of the available public record and reflection over a period of years on the Korean question, supplemented by talks with responsible officials concerned with the unification issue in Seoul in February 1980 and in Pyongyang in May 1980. Korea in 1980 had a population of approximately 54 million-37 million living in the South and 17 million in the North. In the aftermath of the Korean War of 1950-53, about 10 million people were separated from members of their family by the military Demarcation Line, with no contact or communication possible, neither direct nor by mail or telephone. The severance was the more deeply felt as the Koreans were deeply homogeneous, with a continuous existence as a united people going back at least 1300 years and a history of outstanding cultural achievement prior to the imposition of Japanese colonial rule in 1910. But, despite the weight of this common cultural tradition, sharp differences have accrued under the circumstances of division. The South, fiercely capitalist, is tied by treaty to the United States (1953) and Japan (1965), while the North, which is distinctly non-capitalist and is commonly described as either socialist or communist, has treaties with both China and the Soviet Union, both dating from 1961. The South still has about 39,000 U.S. troops plus a U.S.-controlled nuclear weapons stock

Changing Patterns of Security and Stability in Asia and Southeast Asia in a Changing World

Changing Patterns of Security and Stability in Asia and Southeast Asia in a Changing World