no 2 - wednesday, july 27, 2011

8/6/2019 No 2 - Wednesday, July 27, 2011

1/37

SELECTED NEWS AND VIEWS

COLLECTED BY YE KYAW SWANo 2 - Wednesday, July 27, 2011

This is the combination or the continuation of the blog namedhttp://mahathuriya.blogspot.com/News,Views & Opinions

Wednesday, June 27, 2011 NO 2

Prologue

Sometimes the ruled could overwhelm the ruling class and it could itself create the new

ruling class. But, in many cases, the ruled in general could not overthrow the old ruling

class completely and conclusively so that the new ruling class must be formed by

means of sharing power with the old ruling class and the ruled.
http://mahathuriya.blogspot.com/https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/f64ba309d689542a2c508379c7dec8210b86df9bd401e44c473d5a1e315316770https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/f64ba309d689542a2c508379c7dec8210b86df9bd401e44c473d5a1e315316770https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/f64ba309d689542a2c508379c7dec8210b86df9bd401e44c473d5a1e315316770https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/f64ba309d689542a2c508379c7dec8210b86df9bd401e44c473d5a1e315316770http://mahathuriya.blogspot.com/


2/37

Examples of the classical revolutions in world history are the 1789 French Revolution,

the 1848-50 European Revolutions, the first abortive Russian Revolution of 1905, and

the Russian Revolution of 1917 which had created socialist centralization economy and

a single party system that had attempted to abolish capitalism and freedom from theworld.

The political consequences of the above said classical revolutions had shown the proof

that the feudal society could not be transformed into capitalist society without having

been both politically and economically formed its class structure to have the full

strength to be born as the capitalist society.

Apparently the history had revealed that all those classical revolutions in examples were

ended up in coups d'tat and the autocratic feudalism only went forward onto the stage

of the political power of the society concerned. There was no exception for the Lenins

Soviet Russia. The proletariat dictatorship of V.I Lenins totally wrong theoretical

outlook to Marxs political ideology in general and in essence, and Marxs political

lessons taken from French society and French revolutions were also negated and

neglected by Lenin.

Thus, instead of democracy and capitalism, Lenins Russia went backward to Feudalism

and autocracy in the name of socialism. That is to be called the restoration of the

autocratic feudal society or the slipping back to the feudal autocratic society. Lenin had

dragged back Russia into the dark age by coup d'tat as Napoleon Bonaparte and his

nephew, Napoleon the III of French and Czar Nicholas II of Russia in 1905 had done,

though there might be differences in historical and economical values in each of the

cases. The point is that all the revolutions themselves failed and ended in coups d'tat,and the societies went into the hands of the new feudal landlords.

In short, after Lenin, there were Stalin to Gorbachev in Russia and Mao Zedong to Deng

Xiaoping in China. Many mini Stalins and Maos had appeared in various parts of the

world both in power and not in power. The twentieth century was put into motion


3/37

mostly under the ideological influences of Marxism-Leninism or Communism-Socialism.

It was but just a so-called Marxism-Leninism. In fact, merely the Leninism had been

taken the major role to make political influence by force in that century.

Marx was only an academician and one of the greatest historians, for that case, Lenin

or Mao could never be matched.

In the years approached toward the twenty first century, such a name known asModern Reformations came out to the front line of our global society. Gorbachev ofRussia and Deng Xiaoping of China, the two great reformists, had attempted to change

their societies by means of reformation. They had both attempted to extricate their

societies from the hell like ocean of complete darkness in socialist economy together

with totalitarianism.

However, Deng selected the economic reform as his first and basic priority when

Gorbachev chose the path in favor of political reform. It was because Russia had more

problems than China and Russia at that time was also a super power rivaling with USA.

In addition, Russia had its eastern bloc and its own socialist empire.

In my view, modern reformations are how the reformers had taken the lessons from

history especially over such classical revolutions of the past. The lessons are not only

political but also economical indeed. Eventually, what Karl Marx said was correctly and

pragmatically interpreted by those two leading reformers in this modern time.

Only because of the economic crisis, there became mass-uprisings, can be called them

as revolutions. So, how to prevent or how to cure the economic crisis is the key point of

how to evade the evils of such a type of classical revolution reincarnating into ourmodern societies.

Sunday, July 10, 2011


4/37

Refs:

- A History of Modern France Volume 1: 1715-1799 by Alfred Cobban

- V.I.Lenin Biography by David Shub (1948)

- Selected Works Volume 1 by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels

- A History of Europe by H.A.L. Fisher 1936

- Deng Xiaoping -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping

- Mikhail Gorbachev -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachev

Collectors Items

- STATEMENT BY DEREK MITCHELL - Ambassador-designate, U.S. SpecialRepresentative and Policy Coordinator for Burma - JUNE 29, 2011

- Thailand's general election - Lucky Yingluck- New US Defense Chief Optimistic About Defeating al-Qaida - July 09, 2011- Life after Capitalism - Opinion - Robert Skidelsky- US, Chinese Military Chiefs Discuss Maritime Disputes, Other Issues -VOA News - July 11,2011- Principles of U.S. Engagement in the Asia-Pacific - Testimony of Kurt M. Campbell -January 21, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaopinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaopinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaopinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachevhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachevhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachevhttps://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachevhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping


5/37

STATEMENT BY DEREK MITCHELLAmbassador-designate, U.S. Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma

BEFORE THE U.S. SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEEJUNE 29, 2011

Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you

today as the Presidents nominee to serve as the Special Representative and Policy

Coordinator for Burma with the rank of Ambassador. I appreciate the confidence that

President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have shown in me by this nomination.

As you are well aware, Burma is a nation rich in history, rich in culture, and rich in

possibility. At the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia, Burma sits on sea lanes,

natural resources, and fertile soil that create the conditions for potentially unlimited

development.

It is therefore particularly unfortunate that while much of Southeast Asia has become

more free, prosperous, and globally interconnected in recent decades, Burma has been

the outlier. Burma remains a country at war with itself and distrustful of others. With a

government that has chosen for several decades to distance itself from the outside

world, Burma now is the poorest country in Southeast Asia and a source of greatconcern and potential instability in the region. Although rich in natural and human

resources, nearly a third of Burmas population lives in poverty. Hundreds of thousands

of its citizens are internally displaced and thousands more continue to seek refuge and

asylum in neighboring countries largely due to the central authoritys longstanding

conflicts with and systematic repression of the countrys ethnic minority populations.

Over 2,000 political prisoners languish in detention, while Burmas military continues to

routinely violate international human rights.

Overall, the average Burmese citizen lacks fundamental freedoms and civil rights.

Although the Burmese government has claimed a successful transition to a disciplined,

flourishing democracy, a political system that exhibits anything close to recognizable

standards of representative democracy remains to be seen. I am encouraged that the

new President of Burma speaks of reform and change, but the pathway to real national


6/37


7/37

such progress so we may calibrate our dual-track policy appropriately. I believe we

should be prepared to respond flexibly and with agility to opportunities available in

Burma and according to evolving conditions on the ground.

If confirmed, I will also conduct extensive consultations with key stakeholders both

inside and outside government, at home and abroad. My objective will be to implement

U.S. law faithfully and coordinate efforts to advance the common international

objectives of bringing about in Burma the unconditional release of all political prisoners,

respect for human rights, an inclusive dialogue between the regime and the political

opposition, including Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic groups that would lead to national

reconciliation, and Burmas adherence to its international obligations, including all UN

Security Council resolutions on nonproliferation. To date, in my view, the inability of key

members of the international community to coordinate their approach to Burma has

undermined the effective realization of our shared objectives.

Mr. Chairman, I believe I have the right mix of skills, experience, and regional expertise

to carry out fully the congressional mandate for this position. My first job in Washington

was in the foreign policy office of the late Senator Ted Kennedy, where I learned the

importance of congressional oversight, particularly on international issues of uniqueinterest to Members and the American people. I have more than 20 years of experience

studying and working on Asia from various perspectives both inside and outside of

government, from within the United States and in Asia itself. For eight years, I led the

Asia division at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) International

Security Program and established CSIS Southeast Asia Initiative. I currently serve as

the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Affairs, where

I have been responsible for overseeing U.S. security policy and strategy throughout

East, Southeast, South, and Central Asia.

My first visit to Burma was in 1995, when I traveled to Rangoon with the National

Democratic Institute for International Affairs and met with government officials,

international NGO representatives, and political party leaders, including the remarkable

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. I made subsequent visits, which solidified my appreciation for


8/37

the richness of the countrys history and culture as well as the tragic limitations of its

political and economic development.

3

I retained a keen interest in Burmas affairs in the years since, and co-wrote an article

in the journal Foreign Affairsin 2007 that outlines a new U.S. policy approach to the

country not dissimilar to results of the Obama Administrations 2009 policy review.

Mr. Chairman, I know you take a particularly keen personal interest in the situation in

Burma, as do many others in Congress, throughout our country, and around the world.

It is a country of unique interest to me as well. It would be a great privilege to serve

my country as the first Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma. If

confirmed, I will bring the full weight of my diverse experience, personal contacts,

understanding of Asia, and strategic instincts to this position. I will consult closely with

you and other Members of this Committee and in the Congress to fulfill the mandate of

this position in the interest of the United States and toward the betterment of the

people of Burma.

Thank you for considering my nomination. I look forward to your questions.

Ref:

http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Mitchell_Testimony.pdf
http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Mitchell_Testimony.pdfhttp://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Mitchell_Testimony.pdfhttp://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Mitchell_Testimony.pdf


9/37

Thailand's general electionLucky Yingluck

Even copying their opponents policies has done the ruling party little goodJun 23rd 2011 | BANGKOK| from the print edition

WITH little more than a week to go before polling day on July 3rd, it is clear that the

opposition Pheu Thai (PT) party will win more seats than any other in Thailands 500-

strong parliament. This will mark an extraordinary comeback for the unofficial leader of

PT, Thaksin Shinawatra, a former prime minister ousted in a military coup in 2006 andnow living in exile in Dubai as a fugitive from Thai justice. Some even predict that PT

may win an outright majority, though a hung parliament looks more likely. But in Thai

politics merely winning an election is not enough; whether PT gets to form a

government is another matter entirely.


10/37

The surge of enthusiasm for PT owes a lot not only to Mr Thaksins enduring popularity

among Thailands rural poor, but also to the dizzying rise of the official party leader, his

younger sister Yingluck, who was unknown only a month or so ago. When Mr Thaksin

picked her to lead PT into the election many dismissed it as a quixotic, even bizarre

gesture. It turns out to have been a stroke of genius.

The 44-year-old businesswoman has never held or campaigned for political office

before. Yet she behaves as if she has been doing it all her life and has completely

wrong-footed her main opponent, Abhisit Vejjajiva, the prime minister and leader of the

Democrat Party that heads the ruling coalition. At the start of the campaign the two

rivals were just about even. It is mostly Ms Yinglucks bravura campaigning that has

opened up the gap. Mr Thaksin described his younger sister as his clone. In fact, she

brings her own qualities and attributes to the campaign, drawing in people beyond the

PT base.

A fresher face even than the relatively youthful 47-year-old Mr Abhisit, and a woman

campaigning in the very male world of Thai politics, she has injected a buzz and

excitement into the election. Her seasoned, pragmatic campaign managers have

exploited her looks and easy-going nature to the full. She, for her part, has played the

perfect candidate by sticking closely to her sound bites and smiling ceaselessly at the

camera.

As to her policies (not that her adoring supporters care), she has promised to continue

the populist economic programmes of her brother when he was prime minister from

2001 to 2006. She promises, for instance, to give free Tablet PCs to about 1m new

schoolchildren and to raise the minimum wage. But, aware that triumph for Mr

Thaksins party will undoubtedly rile those (such as the army) who got rid of him in a

2006 coup, she has struck a conciliatory tone. She vows that there will no revenge for

the coup, and that she wont rush into devising amnesties for Mr Thaksin. For all the

enthusiasm of his red shirt supporters, he remains a divisive figure.

Even with the advantages of incumbency, the Democrat Party has floundered. Their

rather bewildered campaign manager concedes that the timing of Ms Yinglucks

candidature, pretty much on the day the campaign began, was brilliant. She stole the


11/37

headlines and has never looked backand a month is just long enough to remain an

exciting novelty while avoiding serious scrutiny. Some mutter that she could yet have to

answer to charges of perjury arising from the sale of Mr Thaksins telecoms company

five years ago, but that will have to wait until after July 3rd.

In contrast to the smiley-feely Ms Yingluck, Mr Abhisit and his deputy and finance

minister, Korn Chatikavanij, are both Oxford-educated technocrats, less polished at

working a crowd. Mr Abhisit has looked less stiff on the stump than in past elections,

though it doesnt come naturally. One recent afternoon, he walked the length of a

market in Bangkok, shaking hands, posing for photos with vendors and residents, a

yellow garland draped around his powder-blue shirt and windbreaker. Supporters

foisted gifts on him; cakes, flowers and the odd baby. He smiledbut it might as well

have been a wince. Arriving at a community centre where former drug addicts had

gathered on plastic chairs, he launched into a detailed analysis of why Mr Thaksins

hardline policies against dealers did not work. He lost the audiences attention.

It does not help that the Democrat Party has proposed a lot of similarly populist

economic policies to PTs. In the scramble for votes, especially among Mr Thaksins core

constituency of poorer supporters, the Democrat Partyagainst its better instinctshas

also made a lot of expensive promises. It is offering subsidies for rice farmers and its

own version of a hike in the minimum wage. One academic commentator, Thitinan

Pongsudhirak, has called this campaign the race to the populist bottom. Mr Korn has

costed PTs populism at a whopping 2.06 trillion baht ($68 billion) in the first year, but

the Democrats arent doing so badly either. These promises of largesse alienate their

traditional supporters in business, nervous about having to pay for the new wages, and

do Ms Yingluck no damage.

The minnows will decideFor all the focus on Mr Abhisit and Ms Yingluck, if neither wins an outright majority of

seats, then it will (as usual) be Thailands smaller parties that play a decisive role in a

hung parliament. None has any ideology; they will simply haggle for ministerial posts

and local pork.


12/37

Bhumjaithai, a vehicle for Newin Chidchob, a banned politician and former Thaksin

henchman, could come third, perhaps with 40 or so seats. The party says it will stick

with the Democrats, its current partners, and is leery of PT. Another party, Chart Thai

Pattana (CTP), is courting both main parties and may well join PT in a flash. Other

parties lack the numbers but could add some ballast, particularly if PT is nervous about

fraud cases that might disqualify MPs. One tiny party is led by a retired general, Sondhi

Boonyaratglin, leader of the coup in 2006, and so an unlikely ally for Thaksinites. But

there are no permanent enemies in Thai politics.

And then there is Mr Thaksins old foe, the powerful army. Besides staging the 2006

coup, it was instrumental behind the scenes in the formation of the present

government. It has promised to stay in its barracks. But a close result and the ensuing

horse-trading might tempt it to meddle againespecially if it looks as if Mr Thaksin is

on his way back.

Ref:

http://www.economist.com/node/18866885?story_id=18866885

..
http://www.economist.com/node/18866885?story_id=18866885http://www.economist.com/node/18866885?story_id=18866885http://www.economist.com/node/18866885?story_id=18866885


13/37

AsiaJuly 09, 2011

New US Defense Chief Optimistic About Defeating al-Qaida

Photo: AP/Paul J. Richards, Pool

USMC Gen. John Allen, left, and Gen. David Petraeus, incoming CIA Director, greets former CIADirector and new U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as he lands in Kabul, Afghanistan,

Saturday, July 9, 2011.

Newly appointed U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta is on a previously

unannounced visit to Afghanistan, his first since taking over the defense post on July 1.

He says he is optimistic about defeating al-Qaida, and that victory over insurgents in

Afghanistan is "within reach."

In the aftermath of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, Panetta says the United States

is closer than ever to "strategically beating" al-Qaida, crippling the terrorist group's

ability to stage mass attacks.


14/37

Panetta took over at the Pentagon this month after leading the CIA for two and a half

years. Speaking with reporters traveling with him to Kabul, he said that if the United

States keeps up the pressure, al-Qaida will no longer be able to conduct significant

operations. "I think now is the moment - now is the moment - following what happened

with Bin Laden, to put maximum pressure on them, because I do believe that if we

continue this effort that we can really cripple al-Qaida," he said.

The U.S. defense secretary said that information gained during the raid that killed bin

Laden in Pakistan, plus other intelligence the U.S. has collected over years, has resulted

in an "active pursuit" of between 10 and 20 terrorist leaders.

Visiting Kabul for the first time since he left the Central Intelligence Agency, Panetta is

expected to meet with the U.S. and NATO military commander in Afghanistan, General

David Petraeus, who will soon be returning to the United States himself, to take over

from Panetta as CIA director.

In addition, Panetta will meet with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry,

who also is leaving his post by the end of this month.

Those personnel changes closely follow the White House announcement that a phased

withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan is beginning, with 10,000 troops leaving by

the end of the year.

Pressure to reduce military spending due to the U.S. economic downturn is one of the

factors behind the troop withdrawals, but Panetta said he believes costs can be cut

without cutting America's military capability. "I do not believe that you have to choose

between fiscal responsibility and a strong national defense. I believe that we canachieve savings and have a strong defense force at the same time," he said.

The new defense secretary went on to echo his predecessor, Robert Gates, who

expressed concern that excessive cuts could "hollow out" the U.S. military.


15/37

The Pentagon chief also intends to meet with Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

The U.S. relationship with Mr. Karzai has been strained for years, and the Afghan

president has complained strongly about civilian casualties in his country caused by

coalition airstrikes. Panetta said he is optimistic that a new U.S. military and civilian

leadership team in Afghanistan can mark a new beginning in the nations' partnership.

Ref:

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-

Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.html
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/New-US-Defense-Chief-Optimistic-About-Defeating-Al-Qaida-125268919.html


16/37

Opinion

Life after capitalism

If capitalism means that money always talks, does the end of capitalism

finish our urge to listen to it?Robert Skidelsky Last Modified: 07 Jul 2011 17:51

Could capitalism have exhausted its potential to create a better life? [Reuters]

In 1995, I published a book called The World After Communism. Today, I wonder

whether there will be a world after capitalism.

That question is not prompted by the worst economic slump since the 1930s. Capitalism

has always had crises, and will go on having them. Rather, it comes from the feeling

that Western civilization is increasingly unsatisfying, saddled with a system of incentives

that are essential for accumulating wealth, but that undermine our capacity to enjoy it.
https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190


17/37

Capitalism may be close to exhausting its potential to create a better life at least in

the worlds rich countries.

By "better", I mean better ethically, not materially. Material gains may continue, though

evidence shows that they no longer make people happier. My discontent is with the

quality of a civilization in which the production and consumption of unnecessary goods

has become most peoples main occupation.

This is not to denigrate capitalism. It was, and is, a superb system for overcoming

scarcity. By organising production efficiently, and directing it to the pursuit of welfare

rather than power, it has lifted a large part of the world out of poverty.

Yet what happens to such a system when scarcity has been turned to plenty? Does itjust go on producing more of the same, stimulating jaded appetites with new gadgets,

thrills, and excitements? How much longer can this continue? Do we spend the next

century wallowing in triviality?

For most of the last century, the alternative to capitalism was socialism. But socialism,

in its classical form, failed as it had to. Public production is inferior to private

production for any number of reasons, not least because it destroys choice and variety.

And, since the collapse of communism, there has been no coherent alternative tocapitalism. Beyond capitalism, it seems, stretches a vista ofcapitalism.

There have always been huge moral questions about capitalism, which could be put to

one side because capitalism was so successful at generating wealth. Now, when we

already have all the wealth we need, we are right to wonder whether the costs of

capitalism are worth incurring.

Adam Smith, for example, recognized that the division of labor would make people

dumber by robbing them of non-specialized skills. Yet he thought that this was a price

possibly compensated by education worth paying, since the widening of the market

increased the growth of wealth. This made him a fervent free trader.

Today's apostles of free trade argue the case in much the same way as Adam Smith,

ignoring the fact that wealth has expanded enormously since Smith's day. They typically


18/37

admit that free trade costs jobs, but claim that re-training programs will fit workers into

new, "higher value" jobs. This amounts to saying that even though rich countries (or

regions) no longer need the benefits of free trade, they must continue to suffer its

costs.

Defenders of the current system reply: we leave such choices to individuals to make for

themselves. If people want to step off the conveyor belt, they are free to do so. And

increasing numbers do, in fact, "drop out". Democracy, too, means the freedom to vote

capitalism out of office.

This answer is powerful but nave. People do not form their preferences in isolation.

Their choices are framed by their societies' dominant culture. Is it really supposed that

constant pressure to consume has no effect on preferences? We ban pornography andrestrict violence on TV, believing that they affect people negatively, yet we should

believe that unrestricted advertising of consumer goods affects only the distribution of

demand, but not the total?

Capitalism's defenders sometimes argue that the spirit of acquisitiveness is so deeply

ingrained in human nature that nothing can dislodge it. But human nature is a bundle

of conflicting passions and possibilities. It has always been the function of culture

(including religion) to encourage some and limit the expression of others.

Indeed, the "spirit of capitalism" entered human affairs rather late in history. Before

then, markets for buying and selling were hedged with legal and moral restrictions. A

person who devoted his life to making money was not regarded as a good role model.

Greed, avarice, and envy were among the deadly sins. Usury (making money from

money) was an offense against God.

It was only in the 18th century that greed became morally respectable. It was now

considered healthily Promethean to turn wealth into money and put it to work to make

more money, because by doing this one was benefiting humanity.

This inspired the American way of life, where money always talks. The end of capitalism

means simply the end of the urge to listen to it. People would start to enjoy what they


19/37

have, instead of always wanting more. One can imagine a society of private wealth

holders, whose main objective is to lead good lives, not to turn their wealth into

"capital".

Financial services would shrink, because the rich would not always want to become

richer. As more and more people find themselves with enough, one might expect the

spirit of gain to lose its social approbation. Capitalism would have done its work, and

the profit motive would resume its place in the rogues' gallery.

The dishonoring of greed is likely only in those countries whose citizens already have

more than they need. And even there, many people still have less than they need. The

evidence suggests that economies would be more stable and citizens happier if wealth

and income were more evenly distributed. The economic justification for large incomeinequalities the need to stimulate people to be more productive collapses when

growth ceases to be so important.

Perhaps socialism was not an alternative to capitalism, but its heir. It will inherit the

earth not by dispossessing the rich of their property, but by providing motives and

incentives for behavior that are unconnected with the further accumulation of wealth.

Robert Skidelsky, a member of the British House of Lords, is professor emeritus of PoliticalEconomy at Warwick University, author of a prize-winning biography of the economist JohnMaynard Keynes.A version of this article first appeared onProject Syndicate.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera'seditorial policy.

Source: Project Sydicate

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/201176105512730267.html

.
https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a86121563a1763e1708261547f01e32fbd875d0c3c3314ab13af5d6989c2acf9a0a0b5064b97ccf92423a5af22e32016d853ac1a632833b742e4568c15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a86121563a1763e1708261547f01e32fbd875d0c3c3314ab13af5d6989c2acf9a0a0b5064b97ccf92423a5af22e32016d853ac1a632833b742e4568c15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a86121563a1763e1708261547f01e32fbd875d0c3c3314ab13af5d6989c2acf9a0a0b5064b97ccf92423a5af22e32016d853ac1a632833b742e4568c15190http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/201176105512730267.htmlhttp://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/201176105512730267.htmlhttp://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/201176105512730267.htmlhttps://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a86121563a1763e1708261547f01e32fbd875d0c3c3314ab13af5d6989c2acf9a0a0b5064b97ccf92423a5af22e32016d853ac1a632833b742e4568c15190


20/37

AsiaJuly 11, 2011 VOA News

US, Chinese Military Chiefs Discuss Maritime Disputes, Other Issues

Gen Chen (R) said he had found common ground in talks with Adm Mullen

The top military commanders from the United States and China say they held "candid"talks Monday about territorial disputes in the South China Sea and other contentious

issues.

The official Xinhua news agency quoted Chinese armed forces chief Chen Bingde saying

the two also discussed cyber security, China's military development and the attitude of

some U.S. politicians toward China.

Admiral Mike Mullen is in Beijing on a four-day visit, the first by a U.S. military chief ofstaff since 2007. Xinhua quoted Chen saying the two found "a lot of common ground"

but had "different opinions on certain issues."

Mullen said after his arrival in Beijing Sunday that he is worried about China's disputes

with the Philippines and Vietnam over competing territorial claims in the resource-rich


21/37

South China Sea. China says the United States should stay out of the disputes.

Washington recently reaffirmed its commitment to a mutual defense treaty with the

Philippines.

The United States has also declared a national interest in maintaining free navigation

through the South China Sea, which carries vital sea traffic between Northeast Asia, and

Europe and the Middle East.

Speaking Sunday at Beijing's prestigious Renmin University, Mullen said the United

States is, and will remain, a Pacific power. But he said the regional and global

challenges facing the U.S. and China are too large and too vital to be blocked by

misunderstandings.

Mullen also called for greater openness from China's growing military. He said that

"with greater military power must come greater responsibility, greater cooperation and

just as important, greater transparency."

During his visit, Admiral Mullen is due to visit Chinese military bases outside Beijing. His

meetings are also expected to deal with stalled nuclear disarmament talks with North

Korea, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and confidence building measures between China and

the United States.

China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan all claim territory in the

South China Sea, with most of those claims centered on the potentially energy rich

Paracel and Spratly island chains. China's claim is the largest and it has issued sharp

warnings in recent weeks, including threats of military action, to enforce its claims.


22/37

Ref:

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.html

Ref: ( pics)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14097503

US-China spat over South China Sea military exercises

..
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.htmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14097503http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14097503http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14097503http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.htmlhttp://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/US-Chinese-Military-Chiefs-Discuss-Maritime-Disputes-Other-Issues-125331783.html


23/37

Testimony of Kurt M. CampbellAssistant Secretary of State

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsU.S. Department of State

Before theSubcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Senate Foreign Relations CommitteeJanuary 21, 2010

Principles of U.S. Engagement in the Asia-PacificMr. Chairman, Senator Inhofe, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you very

much for inviting me here today to testify about the vital importance of Asian- Pacific

countries to the United States and the key aspects of our engagement strategy with the

region.

There should be no doubt that the United States itself is a Pacific nation, and in every

regard -- geopolitically, militarily, diplomatically, and economically -- Asia and the Pacific

are indispensable to addressing the challenges and seizing the opportunities of the 21stcentury. Senator Webb, as you have eloquently noted, The United States is a Pacific

nation in terms of our history, our culture, our economy, and our national security. As

the Asia-Pacific century emerges, defining the new international environment, the

United States must enhance and deepen its strategic engagement and leadership role in

the region.

Our economic relationships demonstrate the mutual importance of the interactions

between the countries of the Asia-Pacific and the United States. The region is home to

almost one-third of the Earths population. The Asia-Pacific accounts for almost one-

third of global GDP and is a key driver for technological innovation. American and Asian

economies are growing increasingly interdependent while assisting the global economic

recovery.


24/37

Despite significant economic growth and vitality, the Asia-Pacific region is home to

many of the most pressing security challenges of the modern era. What is most often

absent in our discussion about the Asian miracle are the challenges posed by uneven

growth, poverty, and weak and ineffective governments. Hundreds of millions have yet

to benefit from the fruits of the Asian miracle, and income inequality continues to strain

the capacity of governments to respond. Perhaps the most significant unintended

consequence of the Asian miracle has been the acceleration of greenhouse gases into

the atmosphere. Asias densely populated littoral nations will likely suffer as climatic

variations target the region. Compounding these challenges is the proliferation of

weapons of mass destruction, extremist groups in Southeast Asia, unresolved territorial

disputes, and growing competition over energy and natural resources.

The severity and transnational nature of these challenges demand collective action and

American leadership. They also suggest a need for America to enhance, deepen, and

sustain our engagement to seize opportunities and minimize risk.

Renewed Engagement Generates Results - Let me now take this opportunity to brieflylist the steps we have undertaken over the past year to step up and broaden U.S.

engagement in the region. First, we have newly reengaged in the region through visits

of our senior leadership and attendance at high-level meetings. Our attendance hasproduced concrete results that further U.S. strategic interests. In November, President

Obama spent 10 days visiting Japan, Singapore, China, and South Korea, strengthening

U.S. leadership and economic competitiveness in the region, renewing old alliances, and

forging new partnerships. Under the leadership and guidance of President Obama,

Secretary Clinton, and Secretary Geithner, we hosted the first U.S.-China Strategic and

Economic Dialogue in July 2009, and we will have follow-on discussions in 2010. The

dialogue set a positive tone for the U.S.-China relationship, while underscoring

challenges and opportunities to enhance that relationship. We continue to build theU.S.-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership, which would provide a framework to

broaden and deepen the bilateral relationship. Secretary Clinton has visited the region

four times. Her first overseas trip as Secretary last February and her subsequent trips in

July, November, and earlier this month bolstered bilateral relationships and enhanced

U.S. ties to multilateral organizations.


25/37

The renewal of high-level engagement is producing tangible results. President Obamas

November trip included participation in the 17th Annual Asia-Pacific Economic

Cooperation (APEC) Leaders meeting in Singapore, important for U.S. trade since APEC

members account for 53 percent of global GDP, purchase 58 percent of U.S. goods

exports, and represent a market of 2.7 billion consumers. APEC leaders endorsed the

Pittsburgh G-20 principles and agreed to implement the policies of the G-20 Framework

for Strong, Sustainable, and Balanced Growth, further expanding the global

commitment to achieve more balanced growth that is less prone to destabilizing booms

and busts. They also put forward a strong statement of support for concluding the

Doha Round in 2010 and agreed to reject all forms of protectionism. In addition,

Leaders agreed on core principles to promote cross-border services trade that will

provide a strong basis for our efforts to facilitate and promote trade in services in the

Asia-Pacific region. Leaders also pledged to make growth more inclusive through APEC

initiatives that will support development of small and medium enterprises, facilitate

worker retraining, and enhance economic opportunity for women. Finally, Leaders took

steps to ensure environmentally sustainable growth in the region by agreeing on an

ambitious plan to address barriers to trade and investment in environmental goods and

services.

President Obama also attended the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)Leaders Meeting, the first ever with all 10 ASEAN members represented, providing a

clear demonstration of renewed U.S. engagement with Southeast Asia. Secretary

Clintons July trip included meetings with regional foreign ministers at the ASEAN

Regional Forum (ARF) in Thailand and the signing of the Treaty of Amity and

Cooperation (TAC) with ASEAN nations. Her November visits to the Philippines,

Singapore, and China included attendance at APEC Ministerial Meetings and meetings

with allies and regional partners that further solidified relationships and deepened U.S.

multi-lateral engagement.


26/37

Let me turn to another area of renewed engagement: Burma. Mr. Chairman, your

leadership on this issue has been instrumental in changing our policy and initiating

steps to engage the Burmese junta. As you are well aware, the Administrations formal

review of U.S. policy towards Burma reaffirmed our fundamental goals: a democratic

Burma at peace with its neighbors and that respects the rights of its people. A policy of

pragmatic engagement with the Burmese authorities holds the best hope for advancing

our goals. Under this approach, U.S. sanctions will remain in place until Burmese

authorities demonstrate that they are prepared to make meaningful progress on U.S.

core concerns. The leaders of Burmas democratic opposition have confirmed to us their

support for this approach. The policy review also confirmed that we need additional

tools to augment those that we have been using in pursuit of our objectives. A central

element of this approach is a direct, senior-level dialogue with representatives of the

Burmese leadership. Since I testified before you on the subject late last September, I

visited Burma November 3 and 4 for meetings with Burmese officials, including Prime

Minister Thein Sein, leaders of the democracy movement, including Aung San Suu Kyi,

and representatives of the largest ethnic minorities. In my meetings, I stressed the

importance of all stakeholders engaging in a dialogue on reform and emphasized that

the release of political prisoners is essential if the elections planned for 2010 are to

have any credibility.

Finally, I want to underscore the Obama Administrations commitment to stepping up

our engagement with Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Island nations. Secretary

of State Clinton was en route to Papua New Guinea, New Zealand and Australia last

week, but the pressing need to help organize U.S. assistance to Haiti led her to

postpone that visit. Her trip builds on her meeting with Pacific Island leaders in

September 2009 in New York, with all parties committing to work together to address

climate change and other transnational issues. The U.S. Permanent Representative to

the United Nations, Ambassador Susan Rice, has met regularly with her Pacific Islandcounterparts to share views and build cooperation on key issues before the United

Nations. Within weeks of assuming my current responsibilities, I traveled to Cairns,

Australia, to represent the United States at the Pacific Island Forums Post Forum

Dialogue of key partner countries and institutions. Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd


27/37

chaired the proceedings, which focused on improving the coordination and effectiveness

of development assistance efforts in the region.

U.S. Principles for Engagement in the Asia-Pacific Region The Asia-Pacific region is ofvital and permanent importance to the United States and it is clear that countries in the

region want the United States to maintain a strong and active presence. We need to

ensure that the United States is a resident power and not just a visitor, because what

happens in the region has a direct effect on our security and economic well-being. Over

the course of the next few decades climate change, proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction, and widespread poverty will pose the most significant challenges to the

United States and the rest of the region. These challenges are and will continue to be

most acute in East Asia. This situation not only suggests a need for the United States to

play a leading role in addressing these challenges, but it also indicates a need to

strengthen and broaden alliances, build new partnerships, and enhance capacity of

multilateral organizations in the region. Fundamental to this approach will be continued

encouragement of Chinas peaceful rise and integration into the international system. A

forward-looking strategy that builds on these relationships and U.S. strengths as a

democracy and a Pacific power is essential to manage both regional and increasingly

global challenges.

With the positive outcomes of renewed engagement as a backdrop, I would like to

discuss a series of principles that will guide our efforts moving forward. Intrinsic to our

engagement strategy is an unwavering commitment to American values that have

undergirded our foreign policy since the inception of our Republic. In many ways, it is

precisely because of the emergence of a more complex and multi-polar world that

values can and should serve as a tool of American statecraft. Five principles guide the

Obama administrations engagement in East Asia and the Pacific. In her January 12speech in Honolulu, Secretary Clinton detailed the five principles for how we view the

Asia-Pacific architecture and U.S. involvement evolving. These include the foundation of

the U.S. alliance system and bilateral partnerships, building a common regional

economic and security agenda, the importance of result-oriented cooperation, the need

to enhance the flexibility and creativity of our multilateral cooperation, and the principle


28/37

that the Asia-Pacifics defining institutions will include all the key stakeholders such as

the United States.

For the last half century, the United States and its allies in the region Japan, the

Republic of Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand have maintained security

and stability in East Asia and the Pacific. Our alliances remain the bedrock of our

engagement in the region, and the Obama Administration is committed to

strengthening those alliances to address both continuing and emerging challenges. The

United States, therefore, must maintain a forward-deployed military presence in the

region that both reassures friends and reminds others that the United States will remain

the ultimate guarantor of regional peace and stability. There should be no mistake: the

United States is firm in its resolve to uphold its treaty commitments regarding the

defense of its allies.

Our alliance with Japan is a cornerstone of our strategic engagement in Asia. The May

2006 agreement on defense transformation and realignment will enhance deterrence

while creating a more sustainable military presence in the region. The Guam

International Agreement, signed by Secretary Clinton during her February 2009 trip,

carries this transformation to the next stage. As part of our ongoing efforts to assist the

Government of Japan with its review of the Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF)Agreement, a high-level working group met in Tokyo in November and December, and

the Government of Japan is continuing its review. In addition to our focus on these

issues, we are working to create a more durable and forward-looking vision for the

alliance that seizes upon Japans global leadership role on climate change and

humanitarian and development assistance programs, to name a few. As we approach

the 50th anniversary of the alliance, we will work closely with our friends in Japan to

think creatively and strategically about the alliance.

We are also working vigorously with our other critical ally in Northeast Asia, the

Republic of Korea, to modernize our defense alliance and to achieve a partnership that

is truly global and comprehensive in nature. Building off the Joint Vision Statement


29/37

between Presidents Obama and Lee Myung-bak, we are committed to creating a more

dynamic relationship that builds on our shared values and strategic interests. We look

forward to the Republic of Koreas growing international leadership role as it hosts the

2010 G-20 Leaders Meeting.

Japan and the Republic of Korea have been key partners in our joint efforts to maintain

peace and stability in Northeast Asia and, in particular, to denuclearize North Korea

through the Six-Party process. The process suffered serious setbacks in 2009 with North

Korea carrying out a series of provocations including its April 5 missile test and its May

25 announcement of a second nuclear test. As President Obama said, North Koreas

actions blatantly defied U.N. Security Council resolutions and constitute a direct and

reckless challenge to the international community, increasing tension and underminingstability in Northeast Asia. However, the international communitys unified response to

North Koreas provocations is another example of the fruits of U.S. engagement. The

U.N. Security Council, led by our Five-Party partners, unanimously condemned the

DPRKs provocative actions and passed UNSCR 1874, introducing tough sanctions

against North Koreas weapons and proliferation finance networks. When North Korea

began to show renewed interest in dialogue later in the year, the United States sent

U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Policy Ambassador Stephen Bosworth to

Pyongyang on December 8 for discussions with North Korean officials about the nuclearissue. In these discussions, the DPRK reaffirmed the importance of the Six-Party Talks

and the September 2005 Joint Statement on the verifiable denuclearization of the

Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner. We did not, however, reach agreement on

when and how North Korea will return to Six-Party Talks, a matter that we will continue

to discuss with Asian partners early in 2010.

Our deep and sustained engagement with China continues to yield progress onimportant international issues, such as the global economic recovery, climate change

policy, and efforts to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. However, we obviously do not

see eye-to-eye with China on every issue, as evidenced by our discussions on human

rights and concerns over Chinas opaque military modernization and exclusionary


30/37

industrial policies. We will continue to address these issues through continuous and

frank dialogue, seeking out Chinese cooperation on areas of mutual concern while

directly addressing differences. A recent example of this approach is our engagement

regarding Googles troubling allegations regarding intrusions and the routine accessingof human rights activists e-mail accounts by third parties. U.S. officials have

emphasized the importance of China's addressing the concerns raised by Google as well

as the importance of Internet freedom as a central human rights issue.

We need to recognize Asias importance to the global economy. Close U.S.-Asian

economic cooperation is vital to the well-being of the U.S. and international economic

order. However, as President Obama noted in his recent trip to Asia, We simply cannot

return to the same cycles of boom and bust that led us into a global recession. The

United States and Asia need to emphasize balanced growth and trade.

It is worth highlighting that four Asian economies (China, Japan, the Republic of Korea,

and Taiwan) are now among our top-twelve trading partners. Today, the 21 APEC

economies purchase almost 60 percent of U.S. goods. Taken as a group, ASEAN is also

a large and critical trading partner. The strong Asian participation in APEC, the WTO,

and the G-20 reflects the increasing importance of Asian economies and their centralityto strengthening the multilateral trading system and maintaining our economic

recovery.

Continued integration of the economies of this region will create new business

opportunities, benefitting workers, consumers, and businesses and creating jobs back

here in the United States. Despite strong export growth to the Asia-Pacific, the United

States share of the total trade in the region has declined by 3 percent in the past five

years. To reverse this trend, we will continue to work with the Congress, stakeholders,

and the Republic of Korea to work through the outstanding issues of concern so we can

move forward on our bilateral free trade agreement. We will also enter into negotiations

of a Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, as President Obama announced to APEC

leaders in November. As the Administration stated when it announced its intention to


31/37

launch these negotiations, we intend to work in partnership with the U.S. Congress and

stakeholders to shape a high-standard, broad-based regional agreement that will serve

as a potential platform for economic integration across the region. This is an exciting

opportunity for the United States to engage with some of the fastest growing

economies in the world as well as to update our approaches to traditional trade issues,

address new issues, and incorporate new elements that respond to 21st-century

challenges.

The U.S. commitment to democracy and the protection of human rights is an intrinsic

and indispensable aspect of our character as a nation and our engagement in the Asia-

Pacific region. Let me be clear, the promotion of democracy and human rights is an

essential element of American foreign policy. It is part of who we are as a people. We

believe human rights are not only core American values, but universal values. These

values are a force multiplier in a region where democratic norms are on the ascent. We

believe that citizens around the world should enjoy these rights, irrespective of their

nationality, ethnicity, religion, or race. The United States will continue to speak for

those on the margins of society, encouraging countries in the region to respect the

internationally recognized human rights of their people while undertaking policies tofurther liberalize and open their states. As President Obama said in his speech on the

way forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan, We must promote our values by living them

at home -- which is why I have prohibited torture and will close the prison at

Guantanamo Bay. President Obama has eloquently stated that our willingness to speak

out on human rights and other democratic values is the source of our moral authority

and courage.

In order to ensure that human rights and the development of the rule of law and civil

society remain strong pillars of our engagement, we will continue to adopt new and

creative approaches that seize the opportunities of a dynamic information age. The

freedom to speak your mind and choose your leaders, the ability to access information


32/37

and worship how you please are the basis of stability. We need to let our partners in

the region know that we will always stand on the side of those who pursue those rights.

Democratic governance is rapidly evolving within Asia; advancing human rights,

freedom, and democracy is critical to alleviating poverty and conditions that catalyze

extremism. Sustained economic growth requires governments that are transparent,

non-corrupt, and responsive to the needs of their people. Our strategy is to maintain

pressure on local decision-makers to improve governments human rights records while

cooperating closely with international and non-governmental organizations involved in

monitoring and reporting on human rights.

As the Asia-Pacific region evolves, so should our own approach to multilateral economic

and security cooperation. The President stated in Tokyo that we aim to participate fully

in regional organizations, as appropriate, including engaging with the East Asian

Summit. Secretary Clinton spoke in Honolulu of the need to enhance the flexibility and

creativity of our multilateral cooperation. We plan to consult with allies and partners in

the region and with Congress on how the United States, working with our Asian

counterparts, can join and shape the regions evolving multilateral bodies. Strong,

multilateral links to Asia can help ensure that the United States remains a critical part of

this dynamic region.

Multilateral engagement can be an effective way to address our efforts to deal with

transnational security challenges such as climate change, pandemics, or environmental

degradation. For example, steps taken by APEC and ASEAN to improve cooperation

among regional emergency management agencies is an important step in light of the

spate of recent natural disasters that have battered the region. Multilateral efforts are

also proving effective in addressing new transnational threats such as terrorism, piracy

that threatens our sea lanes, and traffickers who exploit women, children, laborers, and

migrants.

In 2011, the United States will host APEC for the first time in 18 years, providing us

with unique opportunities to demonstrate our commitment to and engagement in the


33/37

region, shape the organizations agenda in ways that reflect our values, and will help

U.S. businesses and workers to compete on a more level economic playing field in this

dynamic region. Through APEC, we will continue to advance regional economic

integration, reduce barriers to trade and investment in the region, and help rebalance

the Asia-Pacific economies. Working with ASEAN, the U.S. will seek to streamline and

strengthen the ASEAN Regional Forums (ARF) institutional processes and create a more

action-oriented agenda, especially with respect to transnational and non-traditional

security challenges.

Conclusion

The United States faces a number of critical challenges in the coming years in its

engagement with Asia. These include rising and failing states, proliferation of weapons

of mass destruction, critical global issues like climate change, violent extremism in some

parts of Southeast Asia, poverty and income disparity. The essential ingredient in

meeting these challenges is United States leadership. We need to play an active role in

helping the countries of the region to enhance their capacity to succeed. The region is

vital to U.S. interests not only in the Asia-Pacific context, but also globally. We are a

vital contributor to the regions security and economic success. The Asia-Pacific region,

in turn, has a profound impact on our lives through trade, our alliances, andpartnerships. As the region continues to grow and as new groupings and structures

take shape, the United States will be a player, not a distant spectator. Under President

Obama and Secretary Clintons leadership, we are ready to face these challenges. We

look forward to working with Congress and this Committee to seek opportunities to

influence positively the future direction of the region.

Thank you for extending this opportunity to me to testify today on this pressing andvitally important issue. I am happy to respond to any questions you may have.

Ref: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/01/134168.htm

..
http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/01/134168.htmhttp://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/01/134168.htmhttp://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/01/134168.htm


34/37

Epilogue

WAR IS ONLY A CONTINUATION OF STATE POLICY BY OTHER MEANS.GENERAL CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ (1780-1831)

Clausewitz continued to say thatWar is not merely a political act, but also a realpolitical instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by

other means. #

He also said that war is the means and the means must always include the object in our

conception. Thus, in other words, war is the continuation of political means with an act

of violence. #

In his definition of war, Clausewitz said again that war therefore is an act of violence

intended to compel our opponent to fulfill our will. #

So, when the political means collapsed, the means of war would take place as the other

means of political instrument to initiate to accomplish the strategic policy of the nation.

To end the war or to prevent the war, however, we have to use diplomacy between or

among the nations. It is in time of peace, alliances or adversaries, to manipulate their

foreign policies to achieve their goals in trade or in security, would be into practice of

diplomacy for the sake of their own national interests.

But diplomacy itself is very sensitive and subtle. Some strategic policy issues could not

be solved within a few years. The several meetings of the head-ofstates or diplomats

or special envoys could not gain the result perfectly and immediately. Sometimes, facts

finding alone would take times a lot.


35/37

In certain extraordinary cases, Secret Diplomacy or Quiet Diplomacy is unavoidable and

obligatory rather than Gun-boat diplomacy which is backed by threat of force or Public

diplomacy which makes use of publicity.

The entire story of the Nixon-Kissingers historic diplomacy with Mao Zedong had

apparently revealed how Sino-US relationship was successfully rebuilt and how China

became the international figure and how the balance of power was reshaped and

revitalized in new designs but with the old mantras. It was the great example of the

exercise ofSecret Diplomacy between US and China successfully well before the globalsociety.

Quiet Diplomacy is in other words known as Preventive Diplomacythat is the range ofpeaceful dispute resolution approaches mentioned in Article 33 of the UN Charter. One

form of diplomacy which may be brought to bear to prevent violent conflict or to

prevent its recurrence is Quiet Diplomacy. *

When one speaks of the practice of quiet diplomacy, definitional clarity is largely

absent. Multiple definitions are often invoked simultaneously by theorists, and the

activities themselves often mix and overlap in practice.*

The following, though not intended as an exhaustive list, provides a brief overview of

the primary options for quiet diplomatic engagement for the prevention of violent

conflict: good offices, special envoys,facilitation, mediation, conciliation,

adjudication and arbitration. *

Diplomacy describes the conduct of international relations through the interaction of

official representatives of governments or groups. It encompasses a broad range of

activities and approaches to exchanging information and negotiating agreements which

vary widely according to the actors and situations involved.*

For the purposes of this typology, we distinguish such activities from coercion or the

use of force thus excluding sanctions and military interventions from consideration


36/37

while acknowledging that non-coercive diplomacy may well take place in contexts

where these factors are present.*

So, if the issue is not concerned with Article 33 of the UN Charter, Secret Diplomacy

should be considered as the most appropriate technique.

As sanctions issues are becoming at major consideration, practical engagement should

be silent and secret. Public diplomacy should be totally set aside and the most

appropriate technique should be Secret diplomacy. It is because the genesis of the

issue is not the sanction but the relationship.

Let me say again that diplomacy itself is very sensitive and subtle. As the political

means collapsed, the means of war would take place as the other means of political

instrument, similarly, if or when the diplomacy would be collapsed, the war might come

into place.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

References:

- Carl Von Clausewitz On War Volume I #- Craig Collins and John Packer - Options and Techniques for Quiet Diplomacy

(2006) *

- Henry Kissinger White House Years

Wednesday, July 27, 2011 NO 2Prologue and Epilogue are contributed by YE KYAW SWA


37/37

Collectors Items

- STATEMENT BY DEREK MITCHELL - Ambassador-designate, U.S. SpecialRepresentative and Policy Coordinator for Burma - JUNE 29, 2011

- Thailand's general election - Lucky Yingluck- New US Defense Chief Optimistic About Defeating al-Qaida - July 09, 2011- Life after Capitalism - Opinion - Robert Skidelsky- US, Chinese Military Chiefs Discuss Maritime Disputes, Other Issues -VOA News - July 11,2011- Principles of U.S. Engagement in the Asia-Pacific - Testimony of Kurt M. Campbell -

January 21, 2010

SELECTED NEWS AND VIEWS

COLLECTED BY YE KYAW SWA

No 2 - Wednesday, July 27, 2011
https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190https://www.btunnel.com/index.php/1010110A/46a8612156280e73a3698366107b0efd63b49b561a347e1bba02ae5b758a88bfe2a5e2bf185698d7ef657fbeb429e02509d605ed422e082fa403fe4e8d37eefe6d73bfb14264b02e15190

no 2 - wednesday, july 27, 2011

Documents