The South East Asia and Oceania Centre focuses on policy-relevant research with respect to the ten ASEAN states, East Timor and Oceania, including Australia and New Zealand. The Centre studies India’s bilateral and multilateral relations with states of the region with a view to providing contemporary relevance to India’s Look East policy. It has a futuristic-looking approach and examines the emerging trends in the regional security architecture. The Centre studies the potential for India’s enhanced defence cooperation (including maritime issues) and cooperation in non-traditional security issues with the region. It examines internal developments of countries in this region, especially political transitions and the role of the military, and their implications for India. The Centre seeks to promote Track-II institutional linkages with the region. Southeast Asia & Oceania Centre brings out a monthly newsletter – Insight Southeast Asia.
No posts of Books and Monograph.
Australia has a vital interest in preventing the Indian Ocean Region from becoming an arena of great power rivalry, including between India and China. The 2013 Defence White Paper clearly delineates the Indo-Pacific as an area of supreme importance to Australia. Developing a close strategic partnership with India is an important part of this strategy.
Maritime security in the Indo-Pacific (or the Indian Ocean–Pacific Ocean continuum) has acquired salience following the shift of the centre of gravity from the Atlantic. It has brought the focus onto the trade, resources and energy lifelines that run across it. The emerging power equations marked by an assertive China, a rising India, a resurgent Japan, together with a rebalancing United States make for a potentially turbulent region.
Problems common to many Asian states suggest a pattern of crisis in Asia. The evidence suggests that the root cause is the similarity in the patterns of political development of postcolonial states. In Asia such states have attempted to reconcile state strength and internal diversity by constructing a triangular balance between identity construction, hegemonic governance and economic development. Unfortunately, this fragile balance eroded as state structures matured and economies grew, which increasingly exposed countries to escalating crises of legitimacy and instability.
More than 16 years have passed since the government and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah faction, or NSCN(IM))
The objective of this article is to discuss defence cooperation between Malaysia and India in the post-Cold War era (1991–2012), mainly from Malaysia’s perspective. The article is divided into four parts. First, the historical background of Malaysia–India defence cooperation during the colonial period until the Cold War is discussed briefly. Second, defence cooperation in the post-Cold War period involving the three services (air force, navy and army) is examined. Third, certain issues in Malaysia–India defence cooperation are analysed.
Myanmar is in the midst of a phase of historic transformation, both in the domestic sphere and in its external relations. This time the change that is occurring is substantive, not cosmetic. The direction of the change has been largely established, although the pace could depend on the actual circumstances.
Burma’s two decades-old alignment with China, which was always an uneasy one, is being reordered to better reflect Burmese national interests. In an attempt to reach out to the West, partial democratisation has been permitted. The military remains highly influential in Burmese politics, but its desire to avoid the pitfalls of over-dependence on Beijing, together with confidence that separatist movements pose a lesser threat than in the past, have led to a loosening of political control.
Dr. Singh's article summarises parts of Myanmar's reform process. However, he misses out the historical background that led to the current reforms and he does not unpack some of the more complex factors in this process. This critique/response will try to complete the picture of the three top priorities of the Myanmar government: national reconciliation, ethnic peace and economic reforms.
1. In general terms, it is my impression that the author is far too optimistic about what recent changes in Myanmar can lead to. Power is still in the hands of the military and there is precious little a small group of National League for Democracy (NLD) assemblymen and women (seven per cent of the total) can accomplish. Besides, the November 2010 election was blatantly rigged, and there is no guarantee that the next election, in 2015, will not also be tampered with.
Dr. Udai Bhanu Singh astutely raises multiple questions in his article in order to trigger a debate. But his take on today's Myanmar is evident from the first paragraph (‘This time the change that is occurring is substantive, not cosmetic’) and the last paragraph (‘Myanmar is poised for change; incremental change will surely gather momentum once the dithering ends’). I hold a different perspective on the country's internal politics and external relations, which is reflected in the analysis.
