Malaysia-Brunei Ties: Cooperation in Oil and Natural Gas Sector

After jointly investing in the exploration of the CA2 deepwater oil block in the waters off Brunei, Malaysia and Brunei recently agreed to step up the bilateral cooperation in the oil and natural gas sector. Petronas (Malaysian state-owned oil and gas company) and Brunei National Petroleum Company (Petroleum Brunei) signed the memorandum of understanding (MoU).
The MoU on the work on the joint demarcation and survey of the land boundary will also be finalized under the framework of the production sharing contract. This is another positive move taken by countries in the South China Sea to explore oil resources after the cooperation of Vietnam and the Philippines with US and British oil companies in exploring oil resources and offshore drilling. Considering that Malaysia and Brunei have the experience of cooperation in deepwater oil drilling, it is believed that the big-scale oil exploration endeavor this time will bring about a new model for the exploration and development of resources in the South China Sea.
Resources in South China Sea
The idea of the two countries to jointly develop the resources in the South China Sea is still pending the actual implementation for the time being. In order to facilitate the administrative work, we suggest Malaysia and Brunei to set up a joint venture company to reach a consensus of cooperation and joint investment in developing offshore resources in northern Sarawak and Brunei. The proposal to jointly develop resources in the South China Sea is a groundbreaking idea to expand the scope of the economic development in the two countries and a feasible way to further develop the bilateral ties of Malaysia and Brunei.
Malaysia and Brunei are inseparably related both in terms of geographical location and historical background. To work together with Brunei in developing resources is always an important goal in Malaysia's endeavor in expanding and developing its ties with foreign countries. As the dispute over the sovereign right in the South China Sea is becoming increasingly complex and superficial, the idea proposed by leaders of Malaysia and Brunei to jointly develop deepwater resources undoubtedly offers another possibility to resolve the dispute. The close relationship between Malaysia and Brunei has seen some changes in recent few years. One of the most important factors causing the changes is the escalation of the race for resources in this region and the sovereignty dispute over islands in the South China Sea. As sovereignty disputes between China and Vietnam, as well as the Philippines, become increasingly intense, the United States has also "officially" made a bid by stationing its aircraft carrier at Cam Ranh Bay. This move taken by the Pentagon also indicated the intention of the Obama administration to extend its influence to Southeast Asia. As the United States is "marking its territories" in the South China Sea, Southeast Asian countries are also compelled to seek their allies and partners for economic cooperation to ensure their continuous economic growth and political influence. Such a development has inevitably led to the changes in the bilateral ties between Malaysia and Brunei.
Meanwhile, in view of the rapid development of Indonesia's economic and trade sector, there are also scores of tourism cooperation projects in the west coast of Borneo for Malaysia and Indonesia to explore. The two countries have also engaged in cooperation in exploring or even drilling oil fields and this trend has been particularly obvious over the past few years. This has facilitated the Malaysia-Brunei cooperation in exploring oil resources. The Malaysian and Brunei governments have agreed to step up their cooperation in the sector of natural resources. Since it involves the complicated process of border demarcation, the task has been entrusted to the Joint Brunei-Malaysia Land Boundary Committee. Once the survey is done and the exploitation of offshore oil resources commences, there will be a new round of race for resources in the South China Sea.
Political and Economic Ties
Malaysia is undergoing economic transformation; while the world economy is showing a trend of slowing down and the second round of economic recession has already started. Thus, in the past one year, the Malaysian government has endeavored to promote the so-called "external exploration" policy.
Malaysia hopes to strengthen and boost its political and economic ties with other countries in this region by working together in exploring and distributing resources. At the same time, Malaysia also hopes to locate new investment destinations in a bid to ease the mounting pressure caused by the slow economic growth in the country. The agreement on the bridge construction signed by Malaysian and Brunei Governments will get the two countries ready for more cooperation in exploring resources in the future.
Joint Communique
Nevertheless, there is also a blind spot in the Malaysian government's policy toward Brunei. The border demarcation is a matter concerning territorial sovereignty of the two countries and it is expected that there will be lots of practical difficulties ahead. An earlier rumor about "exchanging oil blocks with sovereign right over Limbang" is actually an implication of border demarcation. Fortunately, Malaysia and Brunei immediately agreed on joint investment and development of the CA2 deepwater oil block off Brunei and debunked the rumor. Anyway, it is only until recently that a new opportunity arose to make this cooperation project possible through a Joint Communique, a result of the earnest efforts taken by both Malaysian and Brunei governments. This shows that there are more rigorous tests awaiting the policy of joint development of oil resources.
In the face of the many difficulties in the cooperation plan and the possibility of triggering a new round of conflicts over the islands in the South China Sea, leaders of Malaysia and Brunei have timely proposed the idea of cooperation package which includes cooperation in trade, investment, defense, finance, and transportation. Such an idea can make the plan to develop the resources in the South China Sea less sensitive. At the same time, the plan can also be an important bid to further develop the Malaysia-Brunei relations. This kind of broad vision and policy mind-set will lead us to the right path towards bright prospects of our national development.
The joint development of the CA2 oil block is a greatly profitable plan and expected to generate multi-billion dollar profits to both countries in the next 40 years. The profits should exceed this amount if we take other oil by-products into account. Setting up a joint venture company to explore and develop the abundant oil resources in the deep sea off northern Sarawak and Brunei using modern corporate approach will at least reduce the red tape in bureaucratic procedures.

China and Future of Asian Security Order

Since 2010, the success or failure of peace settlement of conflict in the South China Sea has become a hot issue of concern to the international political community. From 18 to 23 July, the negotiation between China and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) (over territorial dispute in the South China Sea) finally reached a breakthrough.
Based on the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, ASEAN and Chinese officials have reached a diplomatic agreement on a set of guidelines that can help to promote the creation of a mutual trust, mutual cooperation mechanism to implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.
Sovereignty Claim
Although this mutual cooperation mechanism will not change respective country's position on the sovereignty claim of maritime rights and islands in the South China Sea, but as we look at this breakthrough from all perspectives, the signing of this agreement has carried with it great significance.
First, after the relationship between China and Southeast Asian countries went through a round of crisis last year, the signing of the Guidelines now ushers a new turning point for China and Southeast Asian countries to move toward the right direction in resolving the conflict in the South China Sea. Second, despite the fact that the cause that led to the crisis in the South China Sea in 2010 was very complicated, but the arrival of the turning point this year has reflected the fact that China has the ability to digest and resolve crisis and turn crisis into opportunity. Third, more importantly, the signing of this ‘Guidelines’ agreement also signifies that Asian countries have the ability to use their own method to deal with one another's disputes and to establish an Asian regional order among them.
Presence of US forces in Asia
The presence of the US forces in Asia is an objective reality and the presence of the US forces in Asia is viewed by ASEAN member countries as a necessity force to ‘balance’ China. As such, very often, the US factor tends to make the construction of an Asian regional security order more complex. To China, the presence of the United States in Asia is something China cannot avoid but yet the presence of it is not at all that bad. While the presence of the United States in this Asian region has increased the difficulties of China in handling issues relating to Asia, the presence of the United States in Asia has also made China becoming more rational in handling regional affairs.
From historical perspective, the establishment of any form of regional order, especially the establishment of regional security order has never been an easy one. Most of the regional security orders that people see now were in fact achieved through wars. For example, the formation of the European security pact cannot be separated from the two world wars. The security alliance pact between the United States and Japan and the security alliance pact between the United States and South Korea are also inseparable from the past wars. Apparently, it is comparatively easier to establish new security order in post-war period.
War is a matter of life and death. Very often, in the post-war period, countries can discover many favorable conditions to form a new security order. In Europe, the two world wars have brought immense disaster to mankind. This disaster nevertheless led countries to reach a consensus on the need to establish a common security order to avoid future war. But in the process of building the European security order, the United States has played a leading role. After the Second World War, the United States has become the world leader acceptable by all the countries in Europe. Meanwhile, the United States also has the ability to play such a role using his massive economic power and military strength. In addition, development of the Cold War has also helped the United States to ascertain and establish its world leadership. During that period, Western Europe faced a strong Soviet Union; they needed such a similar strong US leadership to withstand their external threat. The Cold War that persisted for as long as half a century has highly institutionalized the security order in Europe and in the United States (mainly reflected in North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO]). After the Cold War, the United States and Western Europe are able to expand the NATO mechanism to cover the whole of Europe.
Western Security Order Derived From Long Period of War
Similarly, the security alliance partnership between the United States and Japan as well as between the United States and South Korea alliance pact were also formed in the post-victory period of the United States. After the defeat of Japan in the Second World War, the United States took control of Japan for the then Japan did not have any independent diplomacy. To a very large degree, the US-Japan security alliance after the Second World War was arranged by the United States single-handedly. Although Japan is the main participant in the US-Japan security pact, Japan does not have very much say in it. The security pact signed between the United States and South Korea is also quite similar. South Korea has no difficulty to accept the US leadership and allow the US troops to be stationed in South Korea because South Korea's security threat comes from North Korea.
However, in many ways, the kind of security order formed after the ‘post-victory’ period did reflect many internal inequities. Regardless of whether it is the European security order, or whether it is the alliance pact signed between the United States and Japan or the alliance agreement signed between the United States and South Korea, the United States is in a position to command absolute leadership. While on one hand, the leadership status of the United States is useful for the establishment of new security order, but on the other hand, member countries within the security pacts must accept the US leadership. Yet for the United States to maintain its leadership status, there are some basic prerequisite and conditions the United States must observe. First, there is the cost of war to bear. Second, there is the external threat to face. Third, the openness of the US leadership with the system and the ability of this leadership to accommodate the interests of the members within the group or security pact must adhere. If substantial changes occur in these conditions, the fundamental basis of such security order will be threatened.
After the end of the Cold War, NATO is able to continue and survive and expand by relying on its expansion range. At the same time, it might be that the security threat coming from Russia has also helped in the cohesion of NATO. In the case of the alliance pact between the United States with Japan and with the alliance pact between the United States and South Korea, there were certain periods of time when these alliance pacts between them becoming loose due to the lack of external threats. During certain period, the outcries of the people in South Korea in demanding the US troop withdrawal from South Korea were very high. In Japan, during Japan's Democratic Party leader Hatoyama's tenure as the Prime Minister of Japan, Hatoyama has also proposed the establishment of an East Asian Community in order to pursue equality status of Japan with the United States. Nevertheless, in recent years, North Korean has been viewed as the threat of both Japan and South Korea. Behind the security alliance pact of Japan and South Korea with the United States, these three countries have now considered China as their external threat.
In addition, a region's geopolitical environment can also have a unique impact on that particular region's security order. Such geopolitical impact is most obviously manifested in North America. In North America, the natural environment of the United States in that particular region makes the United States holding a dominating and supremacy position and so the United States has naturally become the leader in North America. It is also apparent to all that the North American security system is a kind of highly hierarchical dependence type of security system. In all aspects of strength and capability, whether it is Mexico or Canada, these two countries cannot be compared with that of the United States. These two countries also do not have any ambition to challenge the United States. Coupled with the openness of the US system itself, North America has developed a more natural regional security order than other regions in the world.
In Asia, the construction of the regional security order does not follow such a pattern. In the first place, unlike Europe, Asia has not gone through the type of prolonged war that Europe has gone through in the past. Moreover, even when there were wars in Asia, the wars did not produce any ‘victor’ similar to that of Europe. In the 1930s of the last century, Japan had wanted to establish the Japanese Imperial order though the use of war, but Japan's ambition ended in failure. While we can China was the ‘winner’ or ‘victor’ after Japan's defeat, but in reality, China neither had the concept nor thought to establish a regional security order similar to that of the western countries. This was in addition to the fact that China did not have the ability and sufficient power to do so too. Due to the development of the Cold War, the US-Japan and US-Republic of Korea alliance were formed. In this regard, it was also quite impossible for a regional security order be formed in Northeast Asia to include all the countries in that region then. On the contrary, due to the fact that the security pacts signed between the United States and Japan as well as the security pact signed between the United States and South Korea have all viewed China as their potential external threat, the security order in the Northeast Asian region is in fact an ‘insecure’ security order. Under the current situation, for a security order to be formed in the Northeast Asian region, it must satisfy the following two conditions. First, China has to accept the regional security order led by the United States; and at least for the minimum, China must not challenge such a regional security order led by the United States. Second, the United States must accommodate China's interest to a certain level. However, these two considerations are rather unstable. As such, as of today, the Northeast Asian region still faces the challenge to form a regional security order that can include the need of both China and the United States.
ASEAN Regional Security Order
However, ASEAN is a special case. It is a successful non-western regional security order. While western security order has set conditions for its formation, there is no such condition exists among ASEAN member countries. For example, although there are sporadic conflicts among ASEAN member countries, however, within ASEAN there is no breakout of war in magnitude comparable to the type of war that happened in Europe in the past. As such, within this ASEAN regional group, there is no ‘winner’ or ‘victor’ of wars or conflicts. Moreover; the Southeast Asian region also does not have a natural leader similar to that of the United States in other regions of the world. Although among the ASEAN member countries, Indonesia is a natural big country within the Southeast Asian region, but in term of Indonesia's internal strength and external influence towards other countries in Southeast Asia, the status of Indonesia is far less from such a position that can be compared with that of the United States in North America. Moreover, although at different period of time, Southeast Asia also faced some external threat, but these threats were far less serious than the situation in Europe or Northeast Asia.
Under such conditions, the countries in Southeast Asia embarked on a non-western path and established a non-western regional security order for themselves. After the formation of ASEAN, due to the fact that ASEAN's security order is different from that of the western style secur ity order, ASEAN has all along been viewed as a regional forum with no real significant power or even carried any significant meaning. However, on practical level, ASEAN is no less insecure than any region (including Europe) since the end of the Cold War. As stated above, the security order within ASEAN is neither imposed by external force nor that was its security order ascertained or formed by a strong and forceful leader outside the ASEAN region. As such one can also hold the view that the creation and development of this regional security order in ASEAN in fact hold more democratic features than other regions. As a matter of fact, the contact, discussion, consensus and trust building mooted among all ASEAN member countries as well as the ultimate institutionalization and legalization of the work of ASEAN are the main security features of this regional grouping in Asia.
Post-Cold War Scenario
After the Cold War, ASEAN has also faced many challenges. But ASEAN accepted and succeeded to face such challenges. At certain period of time, ASEAN thought that the most effective means to maintain ASEAN's regional security was to exclude the involvement of all external big nations. Later on, ASEAN leaders realized that the exclusion of great powers into the Southeast Asian region was not realistic for it did not meet the interest of ASEAN. In this regard, ASEAN has successfully transformed into an inclusive regional forum, and has gradually established an inclusive regional security cooperation framework within the Asian region. The most outstanding achievement of ASEAN is that ASEAN has succeeded to accommodate China, Japan and South Korea from the Northeast Asian region into ASEAN's annual summit and forum. Of late, ASEAN has also included the participation of the United States in its ASEAN Regional Forum. At this year's forum held in Bali, China and ASEAN reached a non-binding guidelines and agreement for the implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. This is one of the achievements of ASEAN in dealing with regional affairs.
Historians in the future will say that this ‘Guidelines’ agreement reached between China and ASEAN is a starting point of a new China-ASEAN regional security order. In the formation of this regional security order, China will play a key role in it. If the China factor is ignored, then the talk of a new Asian regional security order would be impossible to achieve.
As a rising Asian power, China is destined to play a major role in Asia's regional security order. This is regardless of what other people's subjective wish of Asia's regional security order will be. How China acts will determine whether Asia can form a certain kind of regional security order or not. From what is happening now, it is obvious that China has gradually used its own method to successfully integrate itself into the Asian regional security order that uses ASEAN as its fundamental base. China's choice is not only consistent with China's national interests. China's choice is also more in line with ASEAN's interests. However, this process is not easy. For China, this is a challenge. China must learn, adapt and take up the responsibility to shoulder the duties entrusted along the process.
China's transformation of behavior in dealing with other countries has comprehensively reflected the non-western concept of Asian feature. In China's relationship with ASEAN countries, like all other big countries, China's initial response was refusal. But very soon, China accepted the multilateralism nature of ASEAN and within this multilateral framework; China played an active role in it. In this kind of multilateral relationship, China also made effort to stress on putting multinational economic relations with ASEAN first; and then later on expanded to other areas, including the security fields. Now, through trade and economic relations, China and ASEAN countries have gradually built mutual trust with each other and have begun to engage in various aspects of institutionalized constru ction. Although China and ASEAN have already achieved the implementation of free trade through the signed China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement, China still puts its focus on building up economic relations with all ASEAN member countries. Of particular note is that the reason why ASEAN is able to accommodate China is because China has chosen to be accommodated by ASEAN. In this regard, China is different from some other major powers which are only interested to fight for leadership role within the ASEAN framework. After China joined ASEAN's friendly pact, China has no intention to fight for leadership role, but instead, China acknowledges and supports ASEAN's leadership role. In this regard, the behavior of China and the action taken by China pose a striking contrast of the behavior of the United States. It is obvious that the United States has begun to assert its leadership role in this ASEAN region once the United States joins ASEAN as part and parcel of its partnership body. In fact, while welcoming the participation of the United States into the ASEAN mechanism, at the same time, ASEAN countries also keep close watch and concern of the US behavior within the ASEAN framework.
On the other hand, based on China's foundation on trade and economic ties with ASEAN countries, China already has the condition to establish a regional security order with ASEAN. As compared with the western culture, China's culture has never been one that will put a lot of emphasis on maintaining regional security order. On regional security matter, China has always been very cautious. Although the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea was discussed in 1992, it was only in 2002 that China has agreed and signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea with all ASEAN member countries. Then it was after nine years that ASEAN and China finally signed the agreement to implement the ‘Guidelines’ of the Declaration. This newly signed ‘Guidelines’ pertaining to the South China Sea conflict is an assurance of peace and security to the South China Sea, a piece of ocean that has multiple party disputes over the sovereignty of its islands and maritime resources. The next step for China and ASEAN to do is to start carrying out negotiations and working on the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea so that it can have legal binding.
Although the ‘Guidelines’ signed between China and ASEAN still does not have any legal binding, and although the close cooperation between China and ASEAN and sovereignty dispute in the South China Sea are two different issues, but after all, the provision of this ‘Guidelines’ has already paved way for a good start to resolve the pending conflict in the South China Sea in a more peaceful manner. In resolving disputes between countries, the West tends to use hard power and military policy. Yet unlike the West, China is more inclined to create a friendly atmosphere first and the later on, try to find a peaceful solution to resolve the sovereignty disputes.
South China Sea Conflict
After China's reformation and opening up, China did not waste very much time and had applied peaceful settlement means to resolve its border conflicts between Russia, Vietnam and other countries. This achievement of China is rare in the West. We have reason to believe that although the South China Sea territorial conflicts can be more complicated that China's border issues with other countries and although in the South China Sea conflict, there are constantly some external forces beyond the region trying to interfere with the already complicated conflicts in the South China Sea, we have reason to believe that China, a country that is able to accept past mistakes as its learning experience is bound to find some peaceful means to resolve the issues in the South China Sea.
At a higher level, people can also believe that unlike the West that uses force, ‘external threat’ and supremacy leadership to establish regional security order, China and Asian countries are capable to clearly establish its own distinctive regional security order embedded with Asian characteristics. If the western security order is a manifestation of the western culture, then the emergence of the Asian security order must by default also reflect the embodiment of Asian culture. In more than a century in the past, although Asian countries (including China) have, in varying degree, influenced by the western culture, but with the emergence of countries with long history of civilization such as China and India, Asia will eventually return to Asia. Asia will eventually establish an Asian regional security order that truly belongs to Asia.

ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting

The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Foreign Ministerial Meeting is going on in Bali, Indonesia. This Meeting plans to come out with a new Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The intention of it is to resolve the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea. As the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea island is widespread and complex; adding to the fact that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and China's Foreign Affairs Minister Yang Jiechi will also be attending the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) to be held in Bali on 23 July, one can expect the issue of territorial dispute between China and ASEAN countries to be raised and debated. In this regard, this round of ASEAN Ministerial Meeting which has already drawn widespread attention has indeed carried with it a significant meaning for all concerned countries.
Interference of External Forces
Originally, the plan and hope for this round of ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting was for ASEAN to search a right direction and path as well as to look for the role that ASEAN should play in the international arena as a regional grouping. But unexpectedly, in recent months, the territorial dispute over the islands in the South China Sea suddenly emerged with the interference of external forces. There were even incidents whereby the confronting countries involved in the conflict had the tendency to resolve the territorial dispute between them by military force. Yet such a development has in turn led ASEAN member countries to, without any intent, produce a certain degree of consensus. In the first place, due to the special geographical location of the South China Sea, countries surrounding this patch of regional water which includes China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan have put forward different interpretation of claims pertaining to the sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea.
The interpretations by different countries over the islands ownership have in turn led to overlapping of claims among them. According to the principles of the Law of the Sea, the overlapping maritime claimants can in fact be resolved through negotiation and demarcation of maritime zone. However, in the case of the South China Sea, it is not easy for the demarcation of territorial waters to come out with any kind of good arrangement. This is because the numbers of main claimant bodies involved in the maritime territorial dispute in the South China Sea are quite a lot. Moreover, the level of overlapping claim of islands and maritime waters by these countries are also varied in different degrees or levels.
Maritime Demarcation Issue
Second, if countries intend to use some kind of demarcation agreement to resolve maritime conflict it will usually mean that the involved countries are willing to more or less make certain degree of mutual concessions or compromise on how the maritime demarcation should be settled. However, between China and Vietnam and between China and the Philippines and even between China and Malaysia, each and every country involved in the South China Sea island dispute does not show any obvious signs of compromise. Some involved countries have even deployed military vessels to protect their claimed territorial islands. As such, at this round of ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting, the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea that ASEAN member countries intend to come out is but a framework to vigorously promote the idea of using negotiation as means to resolve the territorial dispute and conflict. Such a proposal is bound to heighten the territorial dispute between China and ASEAN countries.
Territorial and Jurisdictional Dispute
If ASEAN member countries come out with the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea unilaterally among themselves, what can happen during the following ASEAN Regional Forum is the possibility for China to engage in aggressive debating war with the Philippines and also with Vietnam. In the past, at the meeting held between China and ASEAN member countries to discuss "how to handle the potential conflict in the South China Sea", China and ASEAN did issue a joint statement that said: "In the territorial claim regions, relevant countries should consider the possibility to adopt a mutually beneficial cooperation framework to resolve the territorial dispute in the South China Sea."
The statement also said that "military force should not be used to resolve the territorial and jurisdictional dispute in the South China Sea." When such a proposal was jointly announced by both China and ASEAN during that period, the use of words in the announcement was filled with peaceful compromised terms. It was considered then that China and ASEAN countries have finally attained positive and fruitful result deemed useful to defuse the potential conflicts in the South China Sea. But in fact, such a joint declaration does not carry with it any legal binding. Moreover, the conclusion of that meeting between China and ASEAN also did not really touch on the actions and behaviors already taken by some involved countries which have gone ahead to take unilateral action to develop the islands which they claimed ownership. Such a joint declaration by China ASEAN then has now become a time bomb affecting the peace and security in the South China Sea.
Concept of Joint Development
So far, the concept of joint development of the resources in the South China Sea is still worthy of this region's effort to promote further. Participants of the ASEAN Foreign Minister Meeting held in Bali should offer a variety of concrete and feasible solutions on this joint development of resources concept and to encourage all the relevant countries building more consensus on this idea. Furthermore, even all relevant countries have the desire to implement the concept of joint development of resources in the South China Sea; they should still approach the planning and consideration of it from different angles and perspectives. This is because the sea area of the South China Sea is quite vast and the claims as expressed by involved countries are all different. As such, at this very moment, it can still be a bit more difficult to streamline the whole South China Sea region as one unified common development zone which can allow the involved countries to proceed and carry out full-fledge cooperation to jointly develop the resources there. However, if through some kind of international cooperation, China and all the involved ASEAN countries can come out with different demarcation zones, then it is more feasible for involved countries to engage in joint development of resource projects in the South China Sea region. The scope of cooperation can begin with small point and later on expand to larger surface. Depending on the different maritime zones in the South China Sea, the main cooperation bodies can carry out joint resource development projects either using bilateral or multilateral approach as warranted. In addition, countries in the South China Sea can also specify the type of marine resources such as oil and gas for the involved countries to carry out specific joint cooperation development projects.
Of note is that after the United States made a deliberated attempt to intervene in the South China Sea dispute, ASEAN countries are shrouded in the shadow of its powerful neighbor. The main reason for the United States to forcefully making its presence in wanting to get involved in the South China Sea oil exploration activities is that the United States wants to use such an approach to threaten the Beijing authority. Its intention is to force China and Vietnam as well as China and the United States to move to the negotiating table. This is also because when the US and Canadian companies, which have traditional cooperation ties with these ASEAN countries overheard that the United States might not rule out the possibility to use force in the South China Sea, these companies might be encouraged to take bold step to engage in joint resource development projects with Vietnam and the in the South China Sea knowing that they have the subtle backing coming from the United States. In this regard, when the United States deploys its military supremacy chips in the South China Sea, such chips can at least be used for the US companies to get involved in the joint resource development projects with countries in the South China Sea region. By so doing, the United States will not end up with not getting any concrete benefits from it.
Of late, the defensive actions taken by the Philippines and Vietnam over their respective territorial rights for islands in the South China Sea have become more and more aggressive. This especially so when the Manila Government has now included the Karajan Islands in the South China Sea as its administration district and considered the Islands as an integral part of the Philippine territory . Under such delicate circumstances when countries involved in the territorial dispute in the South China Sea islands have continued to insist on their respective claims for their islands in the South China Sea, even the situation between China and the Philippines will not immediately develop into a sword crossing confrontation, we trust Vietnam will not keep its silence for long.
Resolving Controversial Issues
The theme of the ASEAN Foreign Ministerial Meeting held on 21 July should go more specific into the controversial issues pertaining to the South China Sea. And China's "just in time" action will definitely trigger the old issues pertaining to the unilateral development of islands by some countries surrounding the South China Sea. There is no way for these old problems to avoid being discussed. To resolve the conflict of interest in the South China Sea once and for all, there is a possibility that some ASEAN countries must give the suggestion for ASEAN to sign an Convention with Beijing on the joint development of resources in the South China Sea, or to work on the areas in the South China Sea that can carry out joint development projects. Yet once the countries involved begin to touch on the real issues, quarrels and fights over the real issues can even be more serious than before. In the end, there is no end to the fights and quarrels over the territorial dispute in the South China Sea.

Achievements of CAFTA

After 10 years of relentless efforts, the China-ASEAN Free Trade Area (CAFTA) was finally established on 1 January 2010. CAFTA is not only the very first free trade area established by China with other countries, but also the largest free trade area in the world. The establishment of the CAFTA marks the beginning of a zero-tariff era for a region formed by China and the 10 ASEAN member states, with a total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of approximately $6,000 billion and a total trade value of $4,500 billion.

As is well known, all strong countries will tend to become hegemonic. The development of China has certainly triggered fear and worries of some countries and this may affect the development in China and ASEAN. In fact, these worries are unnecessary. China has always practiced a good neighbor diplomatic policy while ASEAN has always been a good neighbor, good friend and good partner of China. Over the years, China and ASEAN have continuously deepened and expanded their cooperation in politics, economy, social culture, and other areas. They have been supporting each other and collaborating closely with each other in international affairs.

China wishes to strengthen its friendly cooperation with ASEAN member states to realize common development and prosperity and to expand the communications and cooperation in international and regional affairs. China is in support of the integration of ASEAN member states and supports ASEAN to continue its dominant role in the development of the East Asian cooperation. China is willing to promote the East Asian cooperation proactively. In the issue of South China Sea, China is willing to set aside dispute for joint development to make the South China Sea a "sea of friendship and cooperation" between China and ASEAN. China will also fulfill its pledge on peaceful emergence through mutual benefiting cooperation.

National Security

ASEAN is a neighbor of China. Strategically, ASEAN is a region related to China's national security. For ASEAN, China is another option in addition to Europe, the United States and Japan. China and ASEAN currently have extensive cooperation in many areas and dimensions. It is a successful relationship between neighboring countries. China and ASEAN will continue to expand and deepen their cooperation as they develop increasingly closer ties. China and ASEAN have had effective cooperation on matters such as anti-narcotics trafficking, counter terrorism, safety at sea, combating against smuggling and cross border crimes, preventing diseases from spreading and environmental protection.

Following the establishment of the CAFTA, China and ASEAN have opened up their service, trade and investment markets. The economic and trade cooperation between China and ASEAN has entered into a brand new stage of development. One of the objectives of the CAFTA is to create a new industry chain by opening up the markets to each other in order to improve the capability of the CAFTA and enhance the competitiveness of major CAFTA products in the international market. This requires timely coordination and reasonable division of work between both sides based on the ever developing and changing situation, so that the goal of achieving mutual benefiting and win-win results could be realized.

China's Trade and Investment in ASEAN

Since the implementation of the CAFTA in 2010, from January to July 2010, China's trade with ASEAN soared 49.6 percent to $161 billion. Out of this total, China's exports and imports with ASEAN rose 43.2 percent and 56.1 percent to $76.73 billion and $84.27 billion respectively.

China's investment in ASEAN has also increased rapidly. In the first half of this year, China's new non-financial direct investment in ASEAN soared 125.7 percent to $1.22 billion. The 10 ASEAN countries have become the destinations of Chinese tourists. Both China and ASEAN have become each others' major source countries of tourists. The year of 2005 recorded 6,594,200 mutual visits between China and ASEAN. The figures soared after the establishment of the CAFTA. There will be more than 10 million mutual visits between China and ASEAN and this will make a substantial contribution to the promotion of bilateral economic and cultural exchanges.

Advantages and Disadvantages

The ASEAN Plus Three youth exchange program has been launched in China. China has trained more than 6,000 professional talents for ASEAN countries. China and ASEAN help each other train professional talents and work together to promote technological exchanges and sharing among East Asian countries. There is a tremendous space for educational and cultural exchanges between China and ASEAN. China will further its cooperation with ASEAN countries in mutual recognition of academic qualifications and expanding bilateral student exchange by increasing the numbers of students studying overseas.

All in all, we see numerous advantages and no disadvantages in the establishment of the CAFTA. As long as all countries abide by their pledges and act in accordance with the agreement on dispute resolution mechanisms between China and ASEAN, both China and ASEAN will see a rapid economic development and realization of the goal of joint development. This will be a new chapter of excellence in the history of East Asia.

Malaysia's New National Defense Policy

Malaysian Defense Minister Ahmed Zahid Hamidi said that the Ministry of Defense would review the newly launched National Defense Policy in 2012. He said that the Defense Ministry would follow through the existing national defense policies and review them progressively in order to attain defense policy objectives that have been formulated.

National Defense Policy Covers Four Main Tasks
He said that currently the National Defense Policy covers four main tasks:

First: To educate citizens "all-citizen national defense" concept that combines the power of the government, NGOs, private sector, and people in a total effort to defense the country.

Second: To enhance and develop the capacity of the Armed Forces, while making effort to increase citizens' awareness of this national defense concept and a sense of patriotism.

Third: To cooperate with regional countries and to establish closer military diplomacy with them. Malaysia must consolidate bilateral defense cooperation with countries, which have already established strategic partnership ties with Malaysia.

Fourth: To set up a defense policy committee to oversee the task of defense policy formulation progress and to review the current National Defense Policy in 2012.

In delivering his address at the official launch of the National Defense Policy held on 9 November, Minister Ahmed Zahid stressed on the importance for the nation to develop a defense awareness mindset. He said that even if Malaysia processed top-notch weaponries, if Malaysia failed to develop a defense prevention awareness mind-set all the best weapon equipment would be of no use to the defense ministry.

He added: "I have visited a Middle East country in 1987. This Middle East country processed the most advanced military aircrafts. However, when internal war occurred in that country, the bed room of the national leader of this country was invaded by the rival army. It was only four hours after the attack on the national leader's residence that its most advanced fighter aircraft took off to defense the country."

Malaysia To Enhance Power of Modern Warfare
In addition to Defense Minister Ahmed Zahid, other officials who attended the launch of the National Defense Policy included Datuk Ismail Ahmed, secretary general of the Ministry of Defense, and General Tan Sri Azizan Ariffin, chief of the Armed Forces Staff.

Ahmed Zahid said that the main task of National Defense Policy must definitely be on achieving the goal to promote the modernization of the Armed Forces and to improve armed forces' combat capability. This was because the challenges of today's armed forces did not come from the traditional battlefield. On the contrary, the challenge of today's armed forces came from non-traditional emergency incidents such as on how to tackle and fight against the Somali pirates or how to carry out rescue missions to overcome natural disasters, and so on.

Minister Ahmed Zahid also pointed out the fact that Malaysia was located at the center of Southeast Asia. Malaysia's security would easily be affected by troubles or unrest that happened within this Southeast Asian region. As such every year, the Ministry of Defense would allocate $10million to establish a world food distribution and planning hub at the Subang Air Force Base, so that Malaysia could assume the responsibility as a regional disaster emergency relief center to distribute foods and goods to disaster victims.

China-Taiwan Issue To Be Resolved Peacefully

The newly released National Defense Policy points out that as long as the Taiwan Strait issue cannot be resolved completely, cross-straits tension can affect the stability of the Southeast Asian region. Malaysia hopes that mainland China and the Taiwan authorities can continue to make effort in finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict between them.

The National Defense Policy also states that no country in the 21st century can be immune from external conflict. The Policy says that in addition to issues relating to traditional national defense, countries also have to face the unlimited and borderless violence and crime.

US Remains Strongest Country in Asia Pacific Region
The National Defense Policy also states that to Malaysia, although China, Japan and the United States are the three major actors in the Asia-Pacific region, the United States remains the strongest country that can exert influence in the Southeast Asian region. As such, the bilateral defense cooperation ties between Malaysia and the United States is a measure that can protect Malaysia's security and economic growth.

The National Defense Policy says that through engaging intimate cooperation relations with Japan, South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines, Australia, and Singapore, the United States has indirectly enhanced the defense capability of countries surrounding the Southeast Asian region.
As far as China is concerned, the National Defense Policy says that, although holds the view that China does not consider ASEAN as a threat, however, China is also unwilling to see unstable situation developing in countries in the ASEAN region.

China is actively emerging as an economically and militarily strong power. China can play a balancing role in this region. This country (China) and Japan have very different defense operation mode. Malaysia must pay attention to the role that the economically strong Japan can play to stabilize the Southeast Asian region.

So far as Russia is concerned, although there are still many internal problems awaiting Russia to resolve, the National Defense Policy believes that Russia is now actively developing and increasingly its active role in the international community. The National Defense Policy believes that Russia is also one of the key nations that can affect the stability in the Southeast Asian region.

Resolving Nansha Islands Sovereignty Dispute Through Friendly Consultation
The new Malaysian National Defense Policy also points out that as it stands now; the sovereignty dispute among some countries over the Nansha Islands (Spratly Islands) is still unresolved. In the South China Sea, the Sulawesi Sea, Malacca Strait, and in other international waterway, Malaysia still has territorial disputes with neighboring countries. Among them the sovereignty disputes over the Nansha islands have involved Brunei, China, the Philippines Malaysia, Vietnam, and Taiwan. Fortunately, in November 2002, China and ASEAN have signed the "Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea" that stressed the need for all countries involved in the maritime sovereignty dispute along South China Sea to resolve the pending disputes through friendly consultations and peaceful negotiations.

The National Defense Policy also states that as for territorial controversies in the South China Sea, Sulawesi Sea, Straits of Malacca, Malaysia will resolve any such disputes or conflicts through diplomatic channel. Malaysia will act in accordance with the spirit of ASEAN.

Political Instability To Threaten Racial Harmony
The National Defense Policy further points out that Malaysia's domestic political situation is full of uncertain factors. It says that political instability in the country can pose threat to social issues and to inter-ethnic harmony.

The National Defense Policy feels that, although the government has signed the "Hat Yai Agreement" with the Malaysian Communist Party in 1989, although there is no major and serious security problem in the country, the government authority cannot feel complacent and relax over internal security issues. Malaysia must guard against the widening racial divide in today's political climate.

However, some politicians have continued to play with unbridled incitement to stir up sensitive issues to the degree of causing threat to the general public and affecting racial harmony and peace to the society.

The National Defense Policy points out that coupled with the above mentioned factors, the security situation in Malaysia can even turn worse if some NGOs seize the opportunity to stir up trouble.

Moreover, this newly launched the National Defense Policy also mentions the need for Malaysia to face the huge immigrant population seriously and squarely. This is because regardless whether the immigrants are legal or illegal, they will all exert a certain degree of influence on the Malaysian society.

According to the immigration records, Malaysia has 1.85 million foreign workers. Malaysia has become one of the top 10 countries in the world that depend heavily on foreign work force to grow.

The National Defense Policy points out that having a massive foreign worker community can bring threats, crimes, diseases, and cultural conflicts to the Malaysian society.

ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting

At the first expanded Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Defense Ministers' Meeting, which came to a close in the Vietnam capital of Hanoi, the sense of caution toward China, which is striving to expand its maritime interests, once again surfaced. Japan, the United States, South Korea and other nations expressed concern about the territorial dispute in the South China Sea, while China, which is attempting to strengthen its encirclement, maintained the viewpoint that the dispute is 'a problem between two nations' and would not budge from its position of refusing to engage in multilateral deliberations.

The First ADMM-Plus drew officials from 10 ASEAN members -- Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam -- and their eight dialogue partners -- Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Russia and the United States.

This was the first expanded Defense Ministers' Meeting for the ASEAN nations and also included officials from eight nations outside the ASEAN region including Japan, the United States, and China. The purpose of the meeting was to search for fields in which the nations can cooperate. Defense ministers from 18 countries clarified their opinions regarding security issues. During the meeting, at least seven nations, including Japan, the United States, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Australia mentioned the problem in the South China Sea and urged China, which is claiming sovereignty over the Spratly Islands and Paracel Islands, to reach a peaceful resolution based on international rules.

Arguably, leaders responsible for defending their countries and fighting wars know better than most the cost of allowing tensions to become conflicts. The importance of communicating clearly to avoid misunderstandings and building relationships that could prevent confrontation is preeminent among such leaders. Accordingly, the theme of the meeting is 'Strategic Cooperation for Peace, Stability and Development in the Region.' ADMM+8 leaders sought to avoid divisiveness between the United States and China over the South China Sea and currency valuation; between China and Japan over the Senkaku Islands; between China and Korea over North Korea; and over other tensions.

Practical Defense-Security Cooperation
Four years of preparation resulted in the five-hour official meeting to found a regional security structure to deal with new challenges, especially the issue of maritime security. What is the difference between the previous mechanisms and the ones that have just been established? What can the ASEAN community in general as well as Vietnam in particular expect from the ADMM-Plus model?

Acting contrary to the well-known Latin saying 'Si vis pacem, para bellum' -- 'if you want peace, prepare for war'-- the first ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus in Hanoi changed this advice to 'If you really want peace, be unanimous in keeping the peace!'

The world has rarely seen the heads of national security of 18 countries together, not to discuss wars, but to share views and to discuss the practical defense-security cooperation for peace, stability and development.

Joint Statement Avoids Mention of Maritime Problems
Defense ministers and representatives passed a joint declaration at the end of the meeting, showing their trust and determination towards a strategic cooperation for peace and stability in the region. They exchanged views on regional and international security and had voluntary briefing on their own national defense and security policies.

The participants focused their discussions on cooperation in five areas including humanitarian aid and disaster relief, military medicine, maritime security, counterterrorism, and peace-keeping operations. They also decided to assign defense senior officials to set up experts’ working groups to boost cooperation in the aforementioned prioritized areas.

The problems in the East China Sea and South China Sea, where tensions are increasing because of advancements by China, were the focal point at the expanded ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting. Each of the ASEAN nations made statements regarding the problems in the South China Sea, but those problems were not an official item on the agenda for the meeting and were not incorporated in the joint statement. This clearly leads to speculation that the ASEAN nations did not want to provoke China.

Vietnam is in a territorial dispute with China over the Paracel Islands, and a series of fishing boats have been seized in the ocean waters surrounding those islands. Even so, in talks between Japan and Vietnam, Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa appealed for cooperation between the two nations to deal with the problems in the South China Sea, but Vietnamese Defense Minister Phung Quang Thanh avoided making any direct reference to the problems.

At the overall meeting, each of the nations expressed their opinions in alphabetic order. Japan was the only nation to mention the problems in the East China Sea, but over half of the nations raised the issue of problems in the South China Sea. However, those statements were all limited to expressions such as 'it is important that we secure navigational freedom and the disputes should be peacefully resolved.

ADMM-Plus Starts Later, Arrives Sooner
ASEAN defense-security cooperation started after other fields of activity, but it has become a milestone on the race track to 'ASEAN community,' including the political-security community. From the preliminary ideas about ADMM-Plus at the first ADMM in 2006, with practical experience and strategic vision, with political determination and sense of solidarity for the past four years, ASEAN has been confident and active to create a new architecture for regional defense-security cooperation. In this process, ASEAN plays the lead role, and hopes to gather the capability and brain power to face all kinds of security challenges.

The meeting's joint communiqué has only eight concise points, but illustrates the entire strategic determination. The meeting concentrated on discussing the potential and orientation of the defense cooperation in the ADMM+ framework, and gained a consensus that the priority should be cooperation on non-traditional security challenges.

With the flexible structure of the ADMM, which is composed of the10 ASEAN member countries and eight dialogue partners, ADMM+8 is a promising cooperative mechanism. It is a strategic consultative forum aiming to create trust and general awareness and to define the fields suitable for defense-security cooperation.

What makes ADMM+8 different? It is the structure of the highest level of regional defense cooperation, with the power to orient and direct practical steps to resolve common security challenges, particularly the emerging non-traditional ones. It is a level playing field for all participants, and performs the function of harmonizing relations, building capabilities, and enhancing military cooperation among countries. It is a forum that is compatible with and complementary to the other current regional security structures, such as ASEAN+1, APT, ARF, EAS, and the Shangi-La Dialogue, to create a new security architecture in the region.

US Calls For Restraint
There were hopes for collaboration at this first meeting, but before the meeting, there were almost no expectations for anyone bringing up the problems in the South China Sea, which could easily provoke China. However, it was the United States that changed the casual atmosphere.

According to a source from the meeting, on the evening of 11 October, the US Government contacted each nation separately and urged each of the other nations to take measures to restrain China with regards to the problems in the South China Sea. During the meeting, Defense Secretary Robert Gates began by stating, 'Of particular importance is the problem of maritime safety,' and he then emphasized, 'Differences in opinions regarding territorial lands and territorial waters are becoming an issue for the safety and welfare of the region.'

The Obama administration, which is strengthening its participation in Southeast Asia, is emphasizing new deliberations on a security standpoint and stated just like the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum is important for the economy of Asia, the framework with ASEAN at the core is extremely important (in deliberations for the security field).

However, this does not mean that each of the ASEAN member nations, which are strengthening their relationships with China on an economic perspective, fully agree with the policies of the United States. Singapore and Malaysia, on their parts, voiced criticism of China's hard-line stance, Indonesia, which is a major nation in the region and other nations refrained from bringing up the problems in the South China Sea. The joint statement issued after the meeting did not mention the maritime problems and gave the impression that it would be extremely difficult to adopt policies against China.

Vietnam is the host nation this year for the ASEAN nations, and at a press conference after the defense ministers' meeting came to an end, Vietnamese Defense Minister Thanh applied the brakes to the territorial dispute issue so that criticism against China would not further increase. The problems in the South China Sea did not come up for discussion.

China Dodges Discussions
China did not openly oppose the action of the United States or other nations. China once again expressed its position that policy on territorial waters is outside the scope of multilateral talks and stated that this was explained at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), held in Hanoi in July. The situation in the South China Sea is stable. Right before the meeting, China released the crew of a Vietnamese fishing boat that it had seized in the South China Sea, and by doing so, China sent a sign that it is trying to ease tensions.

The expanded Defense Ministers' Meeting will be held once every three years, and the next meeting will be held in 2013 in Brunei. However, according to ASEAN Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan, 'Some of the member nations are of the opinion that the meeting should be held at least once every two years.' The issue is finding a way to mitigate security related friction in the form of drawing in China.

Fourth ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting

Vietnam is the rotating ASEAN Chair for 2010. The Fourth ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting has just been held in the Vietnamese capital, Hanoi. Before the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting convened in Hanoi, China has sent out a strong message to warn Vietnam and ASEAN that if Vietnam insisted on discussing the territorial dispute in South China Sea at the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting, China would not participate in the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus Partner Dialogue to be held later on.

The diplomatic circle in Hanoi was shocked that China would send out such a message to Vietnam and to ASEAN countries before the Fourth ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting convened in Hanoi.

China said that if Vietnam insisted on discussing issues relating to the South China Sea territorial disputes in any of the ASEAN meetings, including the ASEAN Defense Minister Meeting, China would not want to participate in ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus Partner Dialogue to be held later on.

Vietnamese Defense Minister Feng Guangqing who chaired the press conference said that the Fourth ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting did not address the issues relating to the territorial disputes on South China Sea. He was responded to China Press reporter's query on this issue.

Ever since Vietnam took over the ASEAN Chair this year, the relationship between Vietnam and China has turned into a stage of 'becoming tense internally but distancing apart externally.' Following China's sending out such a message to ASEAN, we can expect China's relationship with ASEAN over defense issue to tense up in the coming days.

Vietnam will host the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus Partner Dialogue. This ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting Plus Dialogue is expected to be held in October this year. Eight countries have become ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting's dialogue partners. They are Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Russia and the United States.

Has South China Sea Marine Territorial Dispute Become Internationalized?
Is response to China's accusation that Vietnam has 'internationalized 'or 'ASEAN-ized ' the South China Sea territorial dispute issue, a senior defense official from Vietnam defended that Vietnam was not the initiator to turn the South China Sea marine territorial dispute issue into internationalized or ASEAN-ized issue. He said: 'China should aware of the fact that marine territory and land territory are two different things. Marine territories are in the open seas and public waters. It will most frequently involve the strategic interests of many countries. As such, it is natural for the superpower to come forward and carry out strategic game. China should not hold the opinion that it was Vietnam that has internationalized the South China Sea territorial dispute issue.'

He stressed that bringing the South China Sea marine territorial right issue up at ASEAN meeting did not mean that ASEAN wanted to collectively confront China over the South China Sea territorial issue. Instead, ASEAN wanted to form a united front to discuss issues concerning regional security.

'We do not understand why someone would think that Vietnam wanted ASEAN to collectively confront China. Did Vietnam ever say that Vietnam want ASEAN to take collective military action on China over the South China Sea marine territorial conflict? Vietnam will adhere to the use of a harmonious approach to resolve this problem.'

Joint Simulation Exercise on Humanitarian Relief
Vietnamese Defense Minister Feng Guangqing who is also the chair for the 2010 ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting said ASEAN countries would, in the near future, carry out an 'ASEAN jointed simulation of humanitarian relief operations' exercise. This would allow ASEAN nations to have good preparation to cope with the threat of natural disasters.

In his opening remarks for the Fourth ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting, Vietnamese Defense Minister Feng Guangqing pointed that that since the inaugural of ADDM held in Malaysia in 2005, the defense and security cooperation of ASEAN countries has become more mature and closer as years went by.

He pointed out that 'having close and effective defense cooperation among ASEAN countries could create a stable region so that people in ASEAN can live in a peaceful, stable and sustainable regional environment.'

ASEAN Shares Common Interest
At this juncture a phenomenon was observed. This phenomenon is that among ASEAN nations there are indeed some ASEAN countries who feel that the South China Sea is of common interest to ASEAN as a whole. During the reporter's stay in Hanoi to cover the ADDM event and talked to some ASEAN nations' senior defense officials, these senior defense officials frankly acknowledged that as a matter of fact, they did share the common view that South China Sea was indeed a part of ASEAN. In addition, these officials also shared the view that South China Sea would also fall into the peripheral interest of countries near the ASEAN region. This is a very interesting finding because this phenomenon has reflected that the 'new ASEAN Spratly Islands' consensus is implicitly possible to form given more time. What is lacking is only an official declaration.

Basically, deep within us, we all agree that the dispute over marine sovereignty right in the South China Sea can shake the security and stability of ASEAN countries. This is because the South China Sea is located within the ASEAN sea waters. There is a political responsibility for all ASEAN nations to jointly safeguard the harmonious beauty of this part of the sea. China should understand that once the 'New ASEAN Spratly Islands' becomes an official consensus and exists as an institutionalized consensus; this shared solidarity on South China Sea does not mean that ASEAN is trying to challenge China.

Before leaving Hanoi, the writer of this report ponders upon this question: 'When a harmonious and united ASEAN body tries to use a harmony voice to discuss with China over the marine territorial dispute in South China Sea, what sort of threat can ASEAN pose to China? Why should China always be so resistant not wanting to talk about this issue? Why cannot China adopt a broad mindset to hear the harmonious voice of ASEAN?

Malaysia Becoming Foreign Criminals' Hideout

Malaysia's geographical location, along with its promising economic climate, political stability, freedom from any threat and riot, and attractive tourist destinations have drawn many foreigners' interest to visit this country for various purposes.

Unfortunately, all these uniqueness have also attracted foreigners here to seek an easy life; worse yet, foreign criminals have fled themselves to this country to escape from the pursue of the authorities of their own countries.

Effort of Preserving Harmony
Although these foreign criminals only make Malaysia as a hiding place and do not intend to set up their operation headquarters here to plot their illegal activities; even though cases like this are considered isolated cases, it should not be overlooked in the effort of preserving harmony, prosperity, security and public order in this country for the future.

It was right for the Defense Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, to make the revelation that Malaysia has now become a popular hiding location for foreign criminals. That was an early move to prevent the issue from becoming more thorny and serious.

In December 2009, the police successfully captured three men of Thai nationality, believed to be the members of the separatist groups in southern Thailand, and found a number of homemade bombs in an old house in Kampung Gebeng, Pasir Mas, Kelantan. The incident was one of the early alerts to the Malaysian authorities in relation to the threat of foreign criminals hiding in Malaysia.

US Report on Human Trafficking
We have also heard some unpleasant stories about the other countries' perception of Malaysia, such as the US Report on Human Trafficking 2009, which named Malaysia as one of the 17 countries with bad records of human trafficking activities, besides being a transit for drug trafficking syndicates.

We do not want to be persistently labeled as a hiding place for foreign criminals. It is not impossible for foreign criminals to flee into this country as they can slip through our many main entrances by sea, land and air.

Malaysia is surrounded by sea with the waters covering an area of 614 sq km, with a coastline of 4,492 km under maritime zone. This attribute also gives those foreign criminals a chance to easily flee into Malaysia if an organized monitor and control system is not in place.

This view was echoed by Dr Ravichandran Moorthy, senior lecturer of Strategic Studies and International Relations Program, School of History, Politics and Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanity, National University of Malaysia (UKM). He said, Malaysia has to take an initiative to boost up the confidence of the international community in the country's capability to eradicate regional violence, including the issue of becoming a hiding place for foreign criminals.

He said, the image of Malaysia had deteriorated in the eyes of the world when it was implicated as a transit of human trafficking and drug trafficking to other countries. Worse yet, Malaysia was further burdened with the need to handle the issues of illegal migrants, and abuse of visa by tourists and foreign students involving in illegal activities and crimes.

No doubt, at present, the issue of foreign criminals hiding in this country is still under control, but we must not adopt a half-hearted attitude. On the contrary, due attention must be paid to ensure the people's safety and public order in the future.

The enforcers -- the Maritime Enforcement Agency, the Marine Fisheries Department, the Customs Department, the Immigration Department and the Royal Malaysian Police -- should step up their concerted efforts to guard the entrances of the country from being penetrated by certain quarters.

Identifying Criminals
The existing deterrence operations to detect foreign criminals and outlaw elements can be done more effectively by collecting detailed information to facilitate the work.

At the same time, Dr. Ravichandran said, the Coast Guard of Coastal Countries participated by countries in this region was an advantage to benefit the work of identifying and gathering information about foreigners entering and leaving this country.

Information can be shared among countries to facilitate the work of identifying criminals wanted in a certain country. He believed foreigners, criminals especially, were always looking for opportunities to enter into Malaysia in whatever possible way.

Maybe it is rather difficult to distinguish whether they are wanted criminals or not as they are crafty in confusing the enforcers, for example, by using fabricated documents or visa.

Moreover, some foreign citizens from several countries such as Indonesia, India and Middle East, have similar look with Malaysians. Therefore, when they mingle with local people, chances are, there may not be any suspicion. Before this, some members of the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) entered into Malaysia to seek refuge to escape from separatist group in Indonesia.

Basically, Malaysia can play a role in providing asylum to foreign citizens seeking refuge and sympathy, as long as it does not jeopardize fundamental human rights or have any relation with crimes.

Strengthening National Security
To strengthen our national security to prevent penetration of certain quarters, Malaysia and countries in this region need to step up their cooperation to identify foreign criminals who make this country their hideout.

At present, countries concerned have had strategic cooperation and sharing in guarding the country borders from pirate activities in Malacca Straits, South China Sea and the waters of Sabah and Sarawak.

What we can be certain is, there is also a need to enhance Malaysia's capacity in preserving security and public order in the country by preparing sophisticated and high-technology assets such as multi-role aircraft and submarine to equip ourselves to handle any form of threat.

Malaysia-China Bilateral Agreements

Chinese Ambassador to Malaysia Liu Jian pointed out that one of the important tasks for the Chinese Embassy in Malaysia to do this year is to aggressively work on the implementation of many cooperation agreements signed between China and Malaysia when the Chinese and Malaysia national leaders paid official visit to each other's country in 2009.

Mutual Exchange of Visits
Liu Jian said: "In 2009, the fruitful mutual exchange of visits between Malaysian and Chinese national leaders has resulted in the sealing of several cooperation agreements. We cannot allow these agreements to stay at document or memorandum of understanding stage. We must make effort to implement all the consensus and agreements reached between the two countries."

Liu Jian said that Malaysia and China have made good use of the opportunity of the 35th anniversary celebration of diplomatic ties to realize mutual visits of Malaysian and Chinese national leaders to each other's country. During these exchange visits, both countries have signed many important documents and speed up the Malaysia-China bilateral development.

Trade Volume in 2009
According to Ambassador Liu Jian, the signed cooperation agreements between Malaysia and China have included financial cooperation. He said the bilateral trade volume between Malaysia and China was very high. This trade volume accounted for one fourths of China's total trade volume with ASEAN as a group. He said for 2010, Malaysia and China would ensure such smooth trade between the two countries would continue.

In 2009 during the global financial crisis, the trade between Malaysia and China was still able to reach the target of close to M$ 52 billion. It was the first time the Malaysian Government mentioned that China has become the largest importing country for Malaysia.

Ambassador Liu Jian also disclosed that the Chinese Embassy in Malaysia would continue to make effort to sustain high level visits between Malaysia and China. Among the high level visit will be the visit of Vice Chairperson of China's Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) Wang Zhaoguo' to Malaysia toward the end of March. He said exchanges in other fields also included political parties, parliamentarians and state counselors, ministers and government department officials. It was hoped that through official exchanges and cooperation, visiting officials from both countries could help to push the Malaysia-China relationship to a higher level and to bring more tangible benefits to both nations.

Ambassador Liu Jian said that another job for him to do was to promote more investment opportunities for both nations. He said since 2009, many Chinese trade delegations have visited Malaysia. They were interested in investing in Malaysia. At this moment some of these trade delegations have already signed some cooperation projects with Malaysian partners.

Domestic Demand of Goods
In 2009, Chinese tourists to Malaysia were 1.04 million. To Ambassador Liu Jian, tourism development between Malaysia and China was a good way to enhance understanding between the two countries. This would also include the exploration of business opportunities. Tourism could play a very good role to promote bilateral market and bilateral domestic demand of goods.
As for the bilateral cooperation in higher education, Chinese Ambassador to Malaysia Liu Jian pointed out that all along, China has maintained a positive attitude in the recognition of Malaysia's university degrees. He hoped that Malaysia could also fully recognize the qualifications of Chinese universities. He added that in 2009, although Malaysia and China have signed a higher education cooperation agreement, but between the two there were still a number of pending problems. These problems have included the mutual recognition of university degrees or issues relating to academic qualifications.

Nevertheless, having a signed agreement on higher education can allow both countries to base on principle and direction to make final decision. The positive meaning of having a bilateral higher education agreement cannot be underestimated.

Ambassador Liu Jian said in 2009, a total of 12,000 Chinese students have come to Malaysia for further study. These students have helped to promote the youth exchange activities between Malaysia and China.

Unilateral Action Island Disputes
As for the dispute over sovereignty right over the Nansha Island (South Spratly Island), Chinese Ambassador to Malaysia Liu Jian pointed out that China has always advocated the use of a peaceful and negotiation method to resolve the island disputes in order to avoid the conflicting issue from affecting the overall situation and relationship between China and concerned countries, including Malaysia.

China and Malaysia have reached a consensus on how to resolve the sovereignty conflicts over the islands. Both countries have agreed that in addition to using peaceful negotiation method to resolve the maritime sovereignty issue over islands along South China Sea, both countries have also requested neither party should take unilateral action on the island conflict to avoid complicating the case.

Assessment
It can be said that the reason why Malaysia and China could attain such good rapport was because the national leaders of both countries have attached great importance to care about the bilateral ties.

In addition to that the good relationship between Malaysia and China could not do without the active participation and support of the Malaysian media and the Malaysian public at large.

ASEAN To Play Intermediary Role in China-US Relations

The relations between China and the United States are one of the most critical concerns for both policymakers and scholars because of their importance as the deciding factor in the stability of the new world. Although it has been relatively weakened, the superpower position of the United States still continues to have an impact on the economy, politics, and military affairs of the world.

Meanwhile, the recent rise of China had and will continue to have a significant impact on other countries, particularly those in the region, including Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) member countries.

Cooperation and Competition
The relations between China and the United States have always have both cooperation and competition characteristics. However, the recent progress in the relationship has indicated that the two competing power centers for the world's order in the 21st century have had the tendency to trespass each other.

The competition has been manifested via a series of problems yet to be solved. For example, economically, the United States has protested against China for maintaining the exchange rate of the yuan so low that the trade balance is now leaned toward China, and the United States has also criticized China on copyright protection issues and quality control of goods products.

Politics and Military Affairs
In areas of politics and military affairs there are problems such as nuclear issues in North Korea and Iran, the aircraft crash on Hainan Island in 2001, the encounter between Chinese ships and the US Navy Impeccable on the South China Sea, and China's enhanced military capability. There are also other problems in the areas of human rights and freedom of speech, including Internet websites censorship.

The questions faced by ASEAN member countries are what should they do and how should they react in the current context, so that they can secure their maximum benefits.
First, it needs to be affirmed that ASEAN is not yet the power center of the world. It is only a "player" on the political map of the world and region. The role of ASEAN as a "player" in the region is most clearly expressed not on military or economic aspects, but whether this organization can "guide" the powerful "ogres" such as the United States, China, and Japan to accept the codes of conduct, and the legal framework for the common game in Asia, particularly in the Southeast Asian region.

The fact that China has signed the joint declaration between ASEAN and China on the conduct of all parties on the South China Sea, or the fact the United States participated in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in South East Asia after multiple delays, had proven the influence of ASEAN in the role of "engaging" the "big players" in the game on its own terms. Through this technique, ASEAN had put in efforts to ensure security and stability in the region, and helped member countries to focus on developing their economy and society.

Important Investors in ASEAN

It is obvious that the two-horse race between the United States and China will directly affect ASEAN member countries because both are important partners, or more correctly, primary partners in this organization. Economically, the United States and China are major trading partners, and important investors in ASEAN member countries.

In terms of politics and military affairs, both the United States and China have partners and allies in South East Asia. Therefore, any "problem" in the US-China relationship, if escalated to a military conflict (although the possibility is not high), would cause direct damage to ASEAN member countries. In that case, ASEAN cannot be in the "third-party benefit" position, but there

ASEAN Faces Conflicts

Looking on the good side, the Association of South East Asian Countries (ASEAN) represents a regional group with high diversity in social, cultural, and political aspects, but on the bad side, ASEAN is one of the most chaotic groups.

Organization's Aspiration
In its effort to push for a single, unified community within the next decade, ASEAN puts up a front as a highly unified organization, but behind the scene it is rife with conflicts, particularly the territorial disputes, which go against the organization's aspiration to become a single community.

For example, the claim over Sipadan Island by Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia; Indonesia's acrimony when a Malaysian website claimed that Jemur Island in the Malacca Strait is a Malaysia's tourist attraction; the claims over the Spratley Islands by Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Brunei.

Malaysian and Indonesian Acrimony
On top of that are the political and social conflicts and various other hurdles during the past four to five years, such as the forest fire in Indonesia that sent hazy smoke all over the region; the conflict over the water trade between Malaysia and Singapore; the extradition treaty issue between Singapore and Indonesia; the Malaysian and Indonesian acrimony when Singapore filled the sea with land to extend its shoreline and territory; the bad feeling between Singapore and Thailand regarding the Temasek Holding's issue [Shin Corp share purchase]; Thailand's southern unrest issue that undermines the relations between Thailand and Malaysia; the conflict between Thailand and Cambodia that culminated in the burning of the Thai Embassy in Phanom Pehn, Cambodia; and the latest issue that involved Thai-Cambodia border dispute in the Preah Vihear zone.

Evidently, during the past four to five years Thailand has been at the center of ASEAN conflict. These conflicts and disputes are no minor friction, for example, Indonesia's accusation that Malaysia stole its national dance (Pentet dance) or Malaysia's accusation that Singapore stole its national dish.

Preah Vihear Dispute
The Preah Vihear dispute is the most worrying among all disputes because it has caused some deaths and it seems difficult to resolve.

In the latest development, Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Phirom proposed an intermediary agency to mediate the disputes among ASEAN countries and to find a solution for the Thai-Cambodian dispute over the Preah Vihear zone.

It is unclear whether the agency that Kasit is prepared to ask ASEAN Summit's approval to set up will be an ad hoc body or a permanent agency to act as a mediator for disputes among ASEAN countries forever.

ASEAN Suggestions
If it will be a permanent agency, one has to say that the idea sounds splendid in words, but almost impossible to implement in practice for the following reasons:

First, ASEAN already has its mechanism for dispute resolution, although it is a lame duck because of the members' negligence and complacency. The channel for talk to resolve conflicts remains just that "talk," but no solution. Setting up another agency will be a waste of time and money and will point to ASEAN's incompetence. Kasit himself said that he had met and talked with Hun Sen last week and had explained the situation and cleared the misunderstanding. Since there is an agency to do this, why do ASEAN need another one to do the same task?

Second, if an agency to be set up will be tasked to directly resolve the disputes, ASEAN countries will immediately feel embarrassed and reluctant. They will fear that the agency will try to intervene too much in their internal affairs. ASEAN countries take their internal affairs seriously and accept no intervention.

Third, it is feared that the agency will not be neutral because a neutral body should comprise members from outside of the group, so as to maintain absolute neutrality. For example, the EU's effort to mediate the dispute between Russia and Georgia, both of which are outside the EU.

Changing Scenario and Resolution
More significantly, all ASEAN countries know that they can hardly find neutrality from any country among themselves because of the conflicts of interest.

For example, if Thailand and Myanmar are in dispute, the mediation agency, or the arbitrator, or whatever one may call it, which comprise the other eight remaining ASEAN member countries will be tasked to find the solution. The resolution from this agency might be mistrusted or not accepted by the disputing parties. If the resolution comes out in favor of Thailand, Myanmar might make noises and accuse the mediation body of bias for Thailand, which is ASEAN's key member. If the result favors Myanmar, Thailand might complain that some member countries in the mediation body have enormous, vested interest in Myanmar.

Yet, there is another worse case scenario: The Spratley Islands and Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. If this case is submitted to the mediating agency, one would immediately arrive at a deadlock because, if all 10 countries are represented in the Spratley Islands territorial disputes, half of the members of the mediating body must be counted out in a bid to maintain neutrality since Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Brunei are all making claim over the territory.

The aforementioned scenario is not pointed out with the aim to accuse any countries, but simply to show the tendency of a situation that can develop when there is a conflict of interest. ASEAN countries are challenged by conflicts of interest since its inception 40 years ago, not to mention the protracted conflicts that stem for the past history. One can clearly perceive how much ASEAN members harbor bad feelings toward one another.

The Road Ahead
Consequently, it can be said that ASEAN successfully and admirably fosters speedy economic development, but incredibly lags behind in political development. The latest ASEAN Summit saw only some progresses in the establishment of human rights agency, not because ASEAN structure is inimical to it, but ASEAN countries' national traits disfavor intervention into other member countries' internal affairs.

It is not far from the truth to say that ASEAN's nonintervention principle is the most disastrous construct that ASEAN has ever created. Dozens mediating agencies can be set up by ASEAN, but they will always fail to resolve any conflicts and disputes.