INTRODUCTION

The ultimate objective of writing this small book is to give the contribution on strategic studies, especially related to risk assessment analysis and early warning signal. A kind of strategic study with the objective of analyzing the trend in believed to take place in the near future, whether it would be a threat or positive trend.

The speculations or even rumors concerning the establishment of ASEAN DEFENSE FORUM (ADF) intended as the US military tool in South East Asia, should no doubt be underestimated, and therefore deserve special analysis and assessment as an event potential to undermine the countries in the ASEAN region and South East Asia in general.<>

That is the background the author to write down this book to elaborate in more detail the possibility of establishing ADF as the possible military pact under the influence of US. Though still speculative and colored by rumors, it cannot be underestimated as the information voiced coming from members of parliament and sources dealing with foreign affairs issues. Thus, I have come to the conclusion that the idea of ADF is not merely an intellectual discourse developed in the academic circle. But it would be potential to be an action plan undertaken by US and its allies in ASEAN.

And the foundation of US for building such kind of military alliance ala ADF at the regional level is already available. In US military scheme, there is so-called the Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict which is almost a fifth uniformed service with roles and missions both separate from and in support of the individual armed services and the Regional Commanders in Chief.

Under the scheme of Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, ADF can be engineered by US to get involved in such missions as clandestine surveillance, raids deep in enemy territory, or the rescue  of hostages and downed aviators. Since 1987, the Department of Defense has grouped all special operations forces under the joint command, the US Special Operations Command (SOCOM). These troops provide the US with many unique and flexible capabilities that are an important part of US national strategy.

If my estimate is correct that ADF would be possible as military alliance designed by US, the US special forces will handle this new-style SEATO by helping train them without attracting attention that a large conventional force would attract.

The experience show, a large US force presence often brings resentment. Special forces often operate with a low profile in such environment. Many of the critical battle fought during the Cold War in places such as South East Asia, Africa, and South and Central America were waged by small groups of SOF.

These operations used fewer resources and attracted less attention. Special operations can be conducted with unorthodox approaches that emphasize speed, stealth, secrecy, and deception and are many times more effective than a conventional approach based on firepower and mass maneuver.

This is the crucial side of the story prompting me to study this subject. Because under the scheme of Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, ADF can be used by US to multiply the effectiveness of conventional campaign of battle. This was exhibited recently in the Persian Gulf War as SOF, operating on land, sea and in the air, performed a variety of missions in support of the Allied coalition seeking to expel Saddam Hussein from Iraq.

Even in peace time, ADF under SOF scheme, can perform many valuable military and paramilitary missions such as conducting clandestine on-site reconnaissance, rescuing hostages, launching raids, capturing or preempting terrorists, training foreign forces, or conducting psychological operations and civil affairs missions in support of peace operations.

Referring to this kind of possibility, ADF technically can be implemented by US as not only military tool, but vulnerable for being used by US for its intelligence missions. Consequently, through ADF US have full access to control and monitor the military maneuver of ASEAN member countries.

In relation to this consideration, as the one having experience in journalism for 20 years as well as researcher in many LP3ES, Institute of Strategic Studies of Indonesia (LPSI), and our newly-born think thank the Global Future Institute (GFI) where I am trusted to be its first Executive Director, has made me aware that we as a nation should anticipate developments at the global level so as to prepare and secure the future-day Indonesia.

As the vision formulated by GFI, Indonesia must be the centre of the Global Future. It is indeed a dream, but as human being we must be determined to make the dream comes true. 

Finally, I and the other members of GFI are looking forward to the feedback from the readers.


Hendrajit
Jakarta 17 April 2007
 
 


United States under the George W. Bush presidency since the year 2000 onwards, Paranoid has seemed to be such an order of the day in directing her foreign policy and national security. The defense doctrine unofficially adopted by the duet Bush and his Vice President Dick Cheney, the US should use its military supremacy to establish an empire encompassing the whole world----a global Pax Americana.

One of the major means to realize this agenda, the US from the very beginning must make its military supremacy over other nations much greater, especially those considered as her serious rival and threat in the Asia-Pacific region. 

Under such circumstances, the reports have it that over the last few months the US policy makers on national security and defense in Washington have conducted high-level diplomacy urged to persuade her principle allies in South East Asia under the umbrella of ASEAN such as Philippines, Thailand and Singapore, to build up the military alliance in South East Asia named
ASEAN DEFENSE FORUM (ADF).

The interesting side of the story is that the Philippine, widely known as one of the US reliable ally since the War World Two, is being forced by the US to appear as the principle initiator of promoting ADF as the South East Asia-based military organ.

The fundamental question relevant to be answered whether ADF will finally lead to the building up of military alliance modeled on SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organization) existed in the era of Cold War between US on the one side, versus Soviet Union and People’s Republic of China on the other side.

Of course at the moment it is still too early to be confirmed. So far, there is no confirmation on the part of Foreign Affairs Department as well as members of Commission I of the Parliament (DPR). But one of the Commission I member of the parliament told the author that ever since ASEAN was established in August 1967, US in reality has serious obstacle to influence the major countries in South East  Asia like Indonesia and Malaysia.

As widely known, Indonesia and Malaysia are regarded as the big countries in terms of geography and more importantly, their population predominantly Muslim. But for the short term objective, foreign policy makers and high-ranking diplomats in Washington apparently have no choice but relying on Philippine to rally the support from the other ASEAN countries to build up ADF as the new-style SEATO for serving the strategic interest of Bush-Cheney administration and the Neoconservative faction in general.  

Several reliable sources have given the information that US policy makers have been lobbying Philippine to initiate the building up of ADF as military alliance and persuading the other members of ASEAN to solidify the possible defense alliance and security through the ADF mechanism for coordinating and communicating the similar steps among the members of ASEAN countries. The goal is clear: To influence the ASEAN Countries becoming pro-US military forces in South East Asia. As laid down by the Neoconservative faction under Bush-Cheney administration from the very beginning they took over the presidency from Bill Clinton in 2000, the tool for fulfilling their ambition for empire is military power.

Despite the fact that this information still needs to be further confirmed, there are several indications which justify this information. Firstly, over the last few months there were several members of the Indonesia’s parliament visiting Philippine. Was it related to the plan to build up the US-sponsored ADF? It has yet to be further confirmed.

But as a trend and seen from the intelligence analysis, it deserves to be monitored  its upcoming developments for the sake of risk assessment analysis and early warning signal dedicated to national interest of Indonesia as the key player in South East Asia region.

It is worthwhile to monitor further development of ADF as the possible military alliance among the ASEAN countries because it is closely connected with the strategic design behind the US War Plans as formulated in 1992, the last year of the presidency of George H.W Bush(senior) and also the end of Dick Cheney’s tenure as secretary of defense under the father of the incumbent US President George W. Bush. In other words, the ideas of ADF as US-influenced military alliance in South East Asia must be viewed in the context of a broad imperialistic context within United States itself.

ADF as part of US Strategic Design and War Plans

In March 1992 Pentagon officials leaked a 46-page Pentagon draft document formulated and prepared in 1992, which reflects the internal planning and strategies produced by the US military in facing the post-Cold War era. The Pentagon document states the United States’ first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a rival who may threaten America’s domination and hegemony of global resources in the post-Cold War era.

For fulfilling this strategic agenda, US military dominance must be maintained as the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role. Such military dominance implicates the preservation of such kind of military alliance on regional basis for extending the US hegemony like North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as the US primary instrument of western defense in Europe, or SEATO ever designed as US military tool in South East Asia during the Cold War era but finally turned to be ineffective.

In the run up to the ASEAN Regional Forum(ARF) conference in early August, it is not quite surprising if the rumors develop that Philippine is asked by the State Department and the Pentagon together with Thailand and Singapore as the sponsoring countries initiating the establishment of ADF.

In terms of regional defense strategy, it is necessary for the US endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. In this regard, South East Asia region is no doubt considered as the vital and strategic regions in terms of resources and security. Therefore, ADF would be prime of importance as the security tool of US not only in controlling South East Asia, but Asia Pacific in general.

Seen from this light, it is quite understandable if US would rely on Philippine as its reliable ally to persuade Indonesia, Malaysia and the other major ASEAN major countries in order to be cooperative with the US imperial ambition to dominate ASEAN through ADF.

Since the Cold War era between US on the one hand versus Soviet Union and China on the other, Philippine has been considered as US  as a reliable ally in Asia Pacific region. When Indonesia became the host country initiating the Asia-Africa Conference in Bandung, April 1955,  Philippine was the only Asian country insisting on taking sides with the US. As a consequent, Philippine stood against the aspiration of the majority of Asian-African countries rejecting the influence of two superpowers US and Soviet Union. The majority of Asian-African Countries were more committed to building the third force outside the influence of the US as well as Soviet Union in the cold war between liberal capitalism versus Communism.

Again, in connection with the possible ADF for extending the US hegemony in South East Asia, the role of Philippine will undeniably be very crucial. Because under the US scheme of new regional defense strategy, all the regions such as Western Europe, East Asia, South East Asia, or even the Former Soviet Union and the Middle East, should be integrated into the US-dominated global power be they militarily or economically.

In terms of defense and military doctrine, even In 1997, when Bill Clinton was still in charge of being president, his strategic adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski who has been considered as the few hardliner among the Clinton inner circle, had signaled the crucial points about the American Primacy and its Geo-strategic imperatives.

According the study conducted by Brzezinski sponsored by the Council on Foregin Relations (CFR), he points out that the establishment, consolidation and expansion of US military hegemony over Europe and Asia through Central Asia would require the unprecedented, open-minded militarization of foreign policy, coupled with an unprecedented manufacture of domestic support on consensus on this militarization campaign.

Seen from the time this study was published, it was still 3 years prior to the year 2000 where Bush won the presidential election taking over the Clinton presidency. Thus, the public do no have the imagination message Brzezinski tried to get across at the time by underlining the importance of the so-called unprecedented and open-minded militarization of foreign policy and unprecedented manufacture of domestic support on consensus on this militarization campaign.

But after the tragic event following the terrorism acts at Pentagon building in Washington and WTC building in New York on 11 September 2001, the public and the strategic analysts began to be aware that the effect of 9/11 terrorism in most general terms, was to allow the agenda developed since the 1990s by the Neoconservatives to be implemented. Meaning that it was only because of the 9/11 terrorism that enabled the agenda of the Neoconservatives becoming the policy of the United States of America.

The additional aspect of the US ambition to gain military control in South East Asia through the building up of ADF military alliance, is the growing fear of Bush’ administration over the strengthening influence of People’s Republic of China in the Asia Pacific region, especially in South East Asia.  US policy makers seem to become more and more worried and paranoid  over the current predictions and researches  conducted by several strategic study centers predicting and projecting the possible emergence of China as a new superpower in Asia Pacific.

Thus, the idea of ADF can be read as a preventive pre-emptive war launched by the US against China in the South East Asia and the Asia Pacific region in general. US authorities have the reason to be worried about the rapid development of China. China’s economic rise is certainly impressive. The economy’s growth—an average of 10% a year since 1990—is not really more remarkable than earlier rise of other Asian economies, led by Japan, but there is a principle difference. The huge size of China’s population at 1.3 billion must apparently be taken into serious consideration by the Neoconservatives in Washington, or at least be used as the pretext of strengthening the military build up and increasing the money devoted to military purposes.

Anticipating China as the US Potential Threat?

US Neoconservatives within the Bush-Cheney inner circle have seemed to be more and more paranoid when rereading the book written by Dr Samuel Huntington entitled the Clash of Civilization which projects that in the year 2010 the US and China will get involved in the war at the massive scale, and will be involving the other countries from Middle East and Central Asia. Under such circumstances, US authorities apparently get worried that countries of Asia Pacific, including the South East Asia region, will be dragged into the war, and be forced to take sides whether supporting US or China.

With such kind of fear and projection made by Huntington, logical if ADF will be designed by the US and its allies in South East Asia as a preemptive strategy to anticipate the worst case scenario where the US might be forced to take open confrontation against China in this region.

Referring to the scenarios predicted by Huntington and the other political scientists and strategists on the possible threat coming from China, it would be quite possible that the establishment of ADF might not be read as merely rumors or just speculations. Instead, it reflects the real design on the part of US to solidify the support from the American allies to neutralize the increasing domination of China in Asia-Pacific.

Let’s take a look at the preamble written in the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) (PNAC), a scheme and doctrine on US foreign policy which reflects the foreign policy agenda of President George W. Bush since the beginning of his presidency in November 2000. Through PNEAC preamble the US foreign policy is quite clear:

“Our first objective is to prevent the emergence of a new rival that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union.” Seen from this quotation, it can be concluded that US foreign policy was formulated by to contain any country considered by US strategic assessment might be the potential rival.

It is true that through the PNAC preamble is not quite clear yet who will be considered by the PNAC architects that will be the US potential rival. But later on, through private think thank The American Enterprise Institute(AEI), by which most of its members are the architects of foreign policy and national defense behind the Bush-Cheney administration, clearly mentions China as the principle enemy of US present and future.

Though basically the private think thank on strategy and national security, AEI in practice reflects the foreign policy viewpoint of the Bush administration. In other words, AEI is under the strong influence of the right wing Neoconservatives faction around the Bush presidency who have strongly influenced and determined the outcome of PNAC.

More strategically, PNAC and AEI have given the ideological justification and legitimacy over the aggressive foreign policy of President Bush. As explicitly written in The National Security Strategy of United States of America in September 2002: We are attentive to the possible renewal of old patterns of great competition. Several potential great powers are now in the midst of internal transition-most importantly Russia, China, and India.

It cannot be denied that in the Bush presidential team have developed specifically that China is not the only potential rival of US in the future, but Russia and India as well which are now still classified as among the developing countries. Accordingly, in an effort to increase its military capacity to face her potential rival such as China, India and Russia, US military must increase in size and enlarge its staging areas in many regions, including South East Asia. 

Just for your information, the PNAC and AEI network within the Bush administration in reality have been very influential in coloring and directing the course of foreign policy of Bush presidency. PNAC’ early members, including Elliot Abrarams, John Bolton, Eliot Cohen, Paula Dobriansky, Zalmay Khalilzad, Richard Perle, Peter W. Rodman, James Woolsey, and most signifincantly, Cheney, Libby, Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. All of them nowadays have become the central members of the New Bush administration.

PNAC Neoconservatives thereby took key positions in the vice president’s office, the Pentagon, and the(only semi-independent) Defense Policy board. Under the influence of the Neocon, the Bush administration provided an agenda for a more militarist, unipolarist, and imperialist foreign policy as expected by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his study in 1997 entitled The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geo-strategic Imperatives.

ADF in the Context of MPAT

Speculations and rumors concerning the US plan to  build up military force based in South East Asia by relying on Philippine and Singapore to initiate ADF, must be seen from the context of the Bush doctrine called preemptive-preventive strike to counter sufficient threat considered as threat to US strategic interest in all regions. Bush says: “The greater the threat, the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack. To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively.” 

The crucial aspect of the Bush doctrine is that US can attack another country even if uncertainty remains and even, more flagrantly, if US knows that the threat from the other country is not yet fully formed. In connection with this doctrine, the speculation over the possibility of building up the military alliance in ASEAN countries, can be read as part of the US strategy to contain the possible attack from China, or at least, to neutralize the growing influence of China in this region.

Despite the fact that the US strategic assessment is not yet fully accurate, that would not be very relevant. At least US can use this as the pretext for the military presence in South East Asia region. For backing up her military presence in South East Asia or the other region, US military strategists have prepared such kind of mechanism which enable US to recruit military cadres from Asia Pacific region potential to be cooperative or in line with the US military scheme based on the Bush defense doctrine of preemptive-preventive strike. One of them is the so-called MPAT program held by USCINPACT.

MPAT program provides periodic opportunities for a small group of military crisis action planners from nations with Asia Pacific regions interest to get together at workshop where they

1.    build personal and professional relationship

2.    become familiar with each other’ national planning doctrine/standing operating procedures/tactics, the techniques and procedures.

3.    become proficient in informing multinational level and coalition task force headquarters, and common crisis response planning and procedures.

MPAT initiative is best summarized as an effort to increase Multinational Force (MNF) and Coalition Task Force (CTF) Operational Level Headquarters Staff Capability, especially in planning expertise, to support Multinational Military Operations within the Asia Pacific region.

The goal of MPAT is to build a cadre of staff officers from throughout the region who can be called upon, particularly during an initial crisis response, to deploy to, and augment a Multinational Force Headquarters Staff. MPAT also provides these planners periodic opportunities to develop common staff planning procedures and to hone their requisite skill as multinational experts.

Seen from this MPAT program, US authorities, even long before the realization of ADF as the new-style SEATO in ASEAN, have prepared the foundation for getting together the high-ranking military officers from Asia Pacific region to work hand in hand under the US military scheme.
Through MPAT program, it might be possible for the US military officers and its intelligence operatives, to recruit as their “local military friend” in this region. And worst still, the MPAT program is vulnerable to be penetrated and infiltrated by the external interests. By becoming familiar with each other’ national planning doctrine/standing operating procedures/tactics and techniques, the US has an effective access to disclose and uncover the secrecy of military and intelligence of any country in the Asia Pacific region, including Indonesia.    

However, MPAT is suitable as the foundation for following up such kind of military alliance ala ADF and makes it real. Because MPAT in reality is a cadre of military planners from nations with Asia-Pacific interests capable of rapidly augmenting a Multinational Force (MNF) Headquarters established to plan and execute Multinational Coalition Operations in response to military operations other than war (MOOTW)/small scale contingencies (SCC).

Endangering the ASEAN Independence

The problem arises, if the ADF in the real sense will be designed as the military and security organ serving the US interest to contain China as well as the countries potential to be as US rival, in subsequent development ADF will bring about negative impact on ASEAN and Indonesia in particular.

1.    ASEAN as an independent political force since its inception is designed as the third force which is friendly on equal basis to either US and Soviet Union, with the existence of ADF at the behest of US, ASEAN in the future will no longer be an independent political force in the South East Asian region.

2.    Through the establishment of ADF designed and intended as the military alliance modeled on SEATO, the countries in ASEAN and South East Asia region in general, will finally be dragged into the military conflict at the massive scale in the Asia Pacific region such as Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, which are predominantly Muslim population.

3.    Under such critical circumstances, it would be possible to trigger dissatisfaction and anger on the part of radical Islam in this region. And in its subsequent development, will radicalize certain Islamic groups and gives enough ammunition to the radical Islamic groups to appear on stage and having significant influence. And more ironically, the radical Islamic groups which in reality have no roots and social base in this region, finally will be viewed by the general public as the hero and the idol among those considered as the opponent of US.

4.    The existence of ADF as US-influenced military alliance modeled on SEATO existed during the Cold War era, clearly has violated the spirit and aspiration of ASEAN since its establishment in August 1967.

5.    Viewed from the context of Indonesian national interest, the support toward the existence and role played by ADF on the basis of US scheme, finally will endanger an active and independent Indonesian foreign policy standing above all the conflicting countries involved.

Specifically in relation to the point five regarding the implication of ADF, for Indonesia, strategically speaking, will give the negative impact given the prediction made by Huntington. According to Huntington, in the situation where the war breaks out at the massive scale, the position of Indonesia in fact will be very strategic because of its possible neutrality. Why? First, Indonesia is a country predominantly Muslim but moderate and tolerant in character. Second, since its early days of her independence, Indonesia has been viewed as one among the developing countries rejecting to be dragged on into one orbit of interest be they United States or communist China and Soviet Union.

Based on this consideration, especially based on the assumption that Indonesian position in the international arena would be strategic in the context of US-China war in 2010 as predicted by Huntington, it is therefore logical if the existence of ADF will undermine the possible momentum of Indonesia to recover from the monetary crisis took place in the period 1997-1998.

US Imperial Ambition of Controlling the Malacca Strait 

Controlling and dominating the Malacca Strait seems to be regarded as the strategic steps in the eyes of US strategic planners behind the Bush-Cheney administration. The reason is quite clear: to contain and neutralize the influence of China in South East Asia region. That’s why several strategic analysts believe that the speculations concerning the possible establishment of ADF as the SEATO-style military alliance based in South East Asia, basically is based on fact and can be guaranteed its accuracy.

It might be admitted that even since the Bill Clinton presidency in the late 1990s where US administration was viewed as moderate and less militaristic, US remains convinced that China poses the most important long-range challenge to the US national security.

Seen from the perspective of  US policy makers on national security, by having the world’s largest armed forces, China’s People’ Liberation Army (PLA) of about 2.9 million men, China may pose the most serious medium-to long term challenge to US security interest in Asia.

According the US Foreign and Defense Policy Blueprint issued by The Heritage Foundation in 1996, China’s military spending could exceed US$200 billion by the year 2000. While in early year of 2006, the reports have it that China have spent its military budget US$35 billion, which is allocated to build its armed forces. Suspicion has developed that in reality China’s military budget is much bigger that it appears in public.

More fantastically, the China’s military build up is fully supported by China’s economic growth-an average of 10% a year since 1990. For a country with 1.3 billion population, it clearly shows that China have managed to generate prosperity to its people.

By way of this clear picture, it would be logical if foreign policy makers like Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney have the reason to be worried over the objective condition developed in China. Based on the assumption that China is able to maintain its economic growth around 10% a year, China can be predicted with certainty as the new emerging giant or superpower in the world standing on equal basis with US, or even much more powerful than US.

It is easy to be understandable that the global competition between US and China finally will enlarge its scope to South East Asia region. Under such circumstances, there would not be surprising if over the last few months the reports have it that US has exerted intensive pressure on Philippine as her reliable ally in this region, together with Thailand and Singapore, to persuade the rest of ASEAN member countries especially Indonesia and Malaysia, to establish ADF as the pro US military alliance modeled on SEATO in the past.

The triggering factor is the Malacca Strait which is now turning to be the battle ground among US, China and Japan for gaining influence and control in South East Asia. No wonder as we all know that Malacca Straits is one of the busiest strait in which about 50.000 vessel carrying one fourth of world trade commodities per year pass through the Strait. More importantly, nearly 38% of the world trade flow passes through the water ways, especially transportation of energy went through the Straits.

Understandable that US which has the imperial ambition to dominate all regions in the world, very much depends on safe passage through the Strait for their crude oil shipments from Middle Eastern Countries. Japan has the similar concern in terms of securing the safe passage through Strait.

It becomes the common secret that the China tankers have passed through the Malacca Straits in their journey to bring the crude oil from Middle East. Thus, like US, China also have similar strategic interest for securing the Malacca Strait free of any danger and threat so as to supply its energy to China.

On the other hand, at the initial stage, US which has the intention of strengthening its military influence in South East Asia, realizes that the Malacca Strait has become the nerve center of China. Consequently, gaining control over Malacca Straits will be decided as the strategic step to tame China in South East Asia. In this regard, establishing ADF as the US security tool is just one tactical move to contain the potential threat of China in dominating South East Asia region.

According to the strategic calculation made by those conducted strategic studies, by gaining control and influence in Malacca Strait militarily, it means that US would manage to contain and tame the influence of China in South East Asia, both at the same time, would be the next step to gain its control in Asia Pacific.

The US fear over China is quite serious. As seen from the increasing growth in the military budget as shown above as well as its constant economic growth around 10% a year, it no doubt reflects China’s growing wealth and prestige, along its rising shipments of oil and other commodities.

In monitoring political and economic development in China, US also is as worried as in the defense field. In August 2006, when Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez visited China, he explicitly expressed its great deal of appreciation to the China as having success story economy model in the world, with the capacity of reducing poor people from 300 million to just 30 million for a generation.

But there is much more strategic aspect of the Chavez visit to China namely the bilateral cooperation on energy. Especially the agenda related to the increasing investment of China in Venezuela which has rich oil resources through projects cooperation in oil, telecommunication, agricultural, railway. And in more concrete terms, Chavez expects to enlarge the participation of several Chinese companies in oil exploration in several Venezuelan areas.

It is indeed a threatening development for Bush administration and the Neoconservatives faction in Washington given the fact that China has been viewed by the White House as its potential rival. Worst still, geographic position of Venezuela is considered as the “backyard” of United States.

At the international level, China has also managed to rally support from Russia and the other Central Asian countries under the umbrella of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). As the strategic alliance, SCO may create an obstacle to US in gaining its control over oil resources in this region.

Therefore, in an effort to counterbalance the SCO strategic alliance as well as to contain China at the broad scale, US made strategic cooperation with India. In July 205, the two countries signed treaty cooperation on defense for 10 years. The concession reached it seems beneficial both for US and India. India, for instance, agreed to secure the Malacca Strait for the sake of US interest. As a reward, US agreed to give assistance for developing her economic force, technology, and military.

Even much more interesting to tell, with the great deal of support, India developed the so-called project seabird, namely the project building the air force base, arsenal, missile and harbor in Kawar, with the total budget of U$13 billion. What a fantastic amount of money.  

Through the concession with India, it is now clear that the Malacca Straits has become the big stake for US. And for that purpose, US is willing to buy India quite expansive in return of the Indian support to secure the Malacca Strait.

Imagine, it is now estimated to have 63.000 ships passing through the Malacca Straits to bring ¼ of the total of the world trade flow and ½ of world trade of oil energy. 9.4 million barrel crude oil passes through the Malacca Strait, where the economy in East and South East Asia so much depend on safe passage through Straits. Understandable that Japan, China, Korea, Taiwan, and even Middle Eastern countries, have the competing interests in the Malacca Strait.

It would be logical if in an effort to anticipate this unfavorable condition, US has the eagerness to make strategic cooperation with Indonesia. Even in the US plan to build ADF, the Indonesian support will be much more needed than Thailand, Singapore or even Philippine. Indonesia, with the population of 250 million and its geographical spreads from Russia into United Kingdom, of course has much stronger bargaining position, at least in theory.

It is the strategic meaning of the Bush visit to Indonesia on 20 November 2006, where US tried at the maximum level to bring Indonesia as the American orbit in South East Asia. US finally seems to realize, despite the role of Philippine and Singapore as well as Thailand as the US allies, that these three countries have no strong bargaining position in South East Asia let alone ASEAN.

No wonder if US high-ranking government officials, with untiring effort, intensively persuade Indonesia .In July 26, 4 months before the Bush visit to Jakarta, the US Navy offered Navigational Safety Equipment System such as Radio Detecting and Ranging (RADAR). Even a year before in 2005, US had signaled its intention of giving technical assistance for navigational safety in the Straits. The pretext put forward by US is easily predicted: to help Indonesia combating terrorists in the international waterways.

The interesting side of the story is the role played by Singapore in the international maneuver to gain influence of the Malacca Strait. In terms of controlling the Strait as the battle ground among the major countries such as US and China, Singapore has showed its clear stance by supporting the strategic interest of US dominating the South East Asia region.

In May 2004, for instance, Singapore surprisingly had urged US to play military role in the Malacca Strait. Even more surprisingly, Singapore urged Indonesia to allow the US military presence to increase the navigational safety patrol in the Strait.

Several sources told the author that due to the full support of Singapore, US has come to the decision not only to counterbalance the influence of China in the Straits, but for much bigger agenda, to build the military base in the Malacca Strait as her staging area.

Its Relations to ADF    

Seen from the perspective of US-China global war and the US intention of adopting the preemptive-preventive war doctrine laid down by Bush and his Neoconservatives faction in White House, the speculation over the US plan to build ADF as the new-style SEATO in ASEAN deserves to be monitored intensively.

Several members of parliament suspected that the establishment of ADF is the effort on the part of US to mobilize support from the countries in South East Asia region as a preemptive strike against China.

For those who are involved in the history of ASEAN since its inception, the establishment of ADF is clearly against the spirit of Bali Concord II. Because ASEAN as an association of South East Asian members countries is prohibited to get involved in the global war between two superpowers. ASEAN is basically a loose organization which has no tendency to be an alliance on the basis of ideology.

However, observing the pretext used by US in helping Indonesia combating terrorism in the Malacca Straits, it is therefore reasonable if several sources suspected that the establishment of ADF is also used as the momentum to destroy the Muslim forces claimed by US as the radical Islam in favor of violence means and terrorism acts.

But as far as the Indonesia is concerned, even if ADF is being designed by the US and its allies in ASEAN such as Thailand, Singapore and Philippine, at the practical level would not be as easy as the people imagine given the possible strong resistance from the nationalist wing as well as the Muslim factions  coming from the political parties as well as military.

In response to the US maneuver in South East Asia to contain China, in its subsequent development, will bring about a negative impact for Indonesia in the sense that It may aggravate the fight between the nationalist versus the Socialist. If it happens, it would be great disaster and leading to the national destabilization given the fact that both camps have network within their respective political parties as well as mass-organization. Even within the military, the police, and the mass media.   

Japan as the Principle Enemy of China

In dealing with the imperial motives of US to revive its military supremacy in all regions, the role of Japan as the US longtime ally since the post-World War II seems to be very crucial especially in the eyes of Asian countries suffered as the victims where their respective countries were occupied by Japanese military.

There are growing suspicions and fears developed that even an effort to realize its imperial mission in Asian regions, the Neoconservatives forces behind the Bush-Cheney administration will not only be permissive to, but facilitate the building up of Japanese military strength as long as Japan remains committed to the US-Japan security arrangement as laid down after the World War II.   

More crucially, the domestic side of Japan itself is still conducive toward the atmosphere of ultra-nationalism. Indeed, if love of country is called patriotism, the word nationalism in Japan could imply a desire and willingness to see one’s country prevail over others.

That is the crucial side of Japan where in the World War II in 1939-1945, widely known as part of the fascistic military regime taking sides with Adolf Hitler of Germany and Benito Mussolini of Italy. Nowadays, despite the strategic alliance crafted with United States under the umbrella of US-Japan security arrangement, Japan remains to be suspected by the major Asian countries to preserve its ambition reviving herself as the future superpower acting as the deputy sheriff of US in Asia Pacific region.

The countries suffered as the victims like China and Korea during the Japanese occupation in Asia, are still sensitive and quickly leading to highly emotional response of whatever Japan did like writing history books to justify her political stance in the Second World War or deny the facts that Japanese imperial army organized the sex slaves during the Japanese occupation in Asia.

The event usually provoking the public controversy is the visit of Japanese Prime Minister to Japan’s most important State Shinto Shrine Yasukuni. Yasukuni was condemned by the World community where the State Shinto religion and the symbols of Japanese culture are being used to lead the nation into war. It is the place that brings together the emperor, religion, the military, technology, traditional Japanese culture, rice and other symbols.

Yasukuni is not only the place where the dead are honored, but also a place where there is an attempt underway to give new birth to old ideas. Just take a look, as a leaving example, at the main event of the autumn festival at the big shrine, where priests usher hundreds of Japanese, overwhelmingly over the age of fifty into inner recesses to honor the 2.5 million Japanese who have died in various wars over the course of the past century, including those killed in the World War II. Ironically, what the Americans call Class A war criminals are among them. All these names are listed and kept on record for posterity.      

Seen from the objective condition developed in the present day-Japan, some experts believe they still detect an implicit and unknowing drift toward nationalism that is more important than any conscious embrace of Emperor-worship. The breeding ground for reviving nationalism and militarism in Japan becomes more and more conducive given the fact that the conservatives in Japan have not cleaned themselves.

The Japanese Ultranationalist Much Stronger

The Japanese conservative forces apparently have never gone through the process of reflection that the Germans went through after World War II. Worse still, as reported through several studies and research, under the cover of an American alliance, the conservative elites have a sort of gridlock on the Japanese political systems.

According to several findings written by historians and political analysts, the people who are leaders of the establishment of the postwar period do not really represent a change of heart or a real break in motivation and outlook, whereas in Germany they did.

Movies are also part of the effort to spread old ideas. Even in early 1990s, a Japanese-made movie was showing called simply 2-26. As widely known through history books written on the role of Japanese military, February 26 was the date in 1936 when a group of young military officers staged coup against Japan’s civilian government. Believing apparently falsely, that they were acting on behalf of the Emperor, they charge into the homes of government ministers in the middle of the night and assassinated them. The young officers thought the ministers were resisting the Emperor’s will. Although their coup attempt was put down by more senior Army officers, it represented one step in the military consolidation of power and the launching of World War II.

What is worthwhile to observe attentively is that, through this movie, depicts the instigators as the young heroes. When they gun down a cabinet minister in front of his wife and family, they stand at attention and salute, their white gloves rising in unison. The moral message of the movie story is quite clear: the young military officers staging a coup are just a bit misguided but their fundamental mission is correct. They are nice guys, but they are betrayed by their generals. In short, they are martyrs. But essentially, that the film is militaristic propaganda.

But the vast majority of the Japanese in the theater, almost all of them under forty-five, see the movie through its bitter and totally predictable end. The younger Japanese may overtly reject anything that smacks of old-school right wing nationalism, but they are undeniably fascinated nonetheless.

The possible revival of Japanese ultra-nationalism leading to militarism as she was in the World War II, apparently still triggers fear among the major Asian countries. The emerging giant China is the one that needs to be reckoned with. In such a way that even after the state of visit of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to China and the other way around, the suspicion remains developed that the Japanese maneuver to get closer to China is more motivated to gain confidence from the Asian countries that Japan deserves to be the new emerging superpower in this region, but in essence still under the scheme of the Neoconservatives force in Washington.

William J. Holstein in his book “Japanese Power Game, What it means for America, finds out that uses the word nexus to describe how some elements of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), bureaucracy, business elite, military, and the Yakuza underworld to create a powerful right wing force.

The fact that leaders of the criminal underworld enjoy links with prominent politicians is not as shocking as it would in United States. The LDP and the government used Yakuza to crush the left wing during the 1950s and 1960s. Even some of the Japan’s most powerful men owe their grip on power to the underworld.

One problem in analyzing this right wing is that the distinction between clearly criminal elements and purely political groups blurs. There are some right wing groups that limit themselves to policy debates, whereas the other believe in acting violently to achieve their goals.

Overall, more than 80% of all right wing groups have Yakuza connections with the LDP men, including Kakue Tanaka and Yasuhiro Nakasone, and they are believed to be a major source of funding for some political leaders.

What binds all these shadowy groups and factions together is their commitment to the imperial system, called tenno sei. Unlike Britain, where the issue of the royal family’s status is firmly resolved, the questions of the Emperor’s divinity and his supposedly direct descent from the Sun Goddes more than two thousand years ago are very much alive in Japan until now.

The other vulnerable side if the story is that, the education policy of Japanese government is to teach the people how Japan can have more power than the other peoples. In the eyes of Japanese intellectuals this is wrong, because this kind of education system will be the seeds of allowing them to believe Japan is number one. Japan is the best. against other people. It would be the precondition of Japan to do wrong against other people.  

When the breeding ground for reviving ultra-nationalism or even militarism is still quite possible in Japan, it is questionable whether her alliance with US would be intended to serve her imperial ambition to dominate the Asian region like in the past. As such, her alliance with US is more logical rather than China, as the latter has the similar ambition to be the leading country in the Asia Pacific region.

Japan-China Alliance Impossible

It is therefore interesting to asses whether the thesis posed by American political scientist Samuel Huntington over the Japan standpoint in the possible war between US versus China in 2010 would be accurate. According to Huntington in his book the Clash of Civilization he wrote: “As China scores military success, Japan nervously begin to bandwagon with China, shifting its position from formal neutrality to pro-Chinese positive neutrality, and then yielding to China’s demands and becoming a cobelligerent. Japanese forces occupy the remaining US bases in Japan and the hastily evacuates its troops.”

His scenario and prediction is interesting, but the author is under the impression that Huntington is misleading specifically on this matters. As far as I am concerned, the strategic alliance between US and Japan is still solid and has no reason whatsoever on the part of Japan to change sides from US into China. The status and credibility of Japan as the economic giant so far is not the disturbing factor for US in terms of security and her agenda to strengthen its military supremacy in world and particularly in Asia.

Realizing the fact that Huntington is known in Washington as a political scientist closed to the Neoconservatives ideologues influential in directing the US foreign policy of the Bush administration, it might be logical if we have some reservation over Huntington’s optimism that Japan may change sides to China in the possible war between US and China in 2010.

True that the unwritten message sent by Huntington is that, there are growing fears in the subconscious mind of the American people, and that more be provoked by the foreign policy makers in Washington, over the emergence of Confucianism-based newly industrializing countries such as South and North Korea, Taiwan, and indeed China.

The strategists in White House fear that in the possible war between US and China as predicted by Huntington, the Confucianism-based newly emerging industrializing countries naturally would be on the side of China, and more crucially, on the side of Middle Eastern countries such Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.

In the scenario Huntington has in mind, China and the major Muslim countries will go hand in hand to fight against US who would be fully supported by the European Union.

Triggering factor of the war between US and China, according to Huntington, is the surprising military attack of China to Vietnam as the revenge where North Vietnam in 1979, which was at the time still under the influence of communist state Soviet Union, occupied Cambodia which was under the influence of China. Since the day of Vietnam’s occupation, China classifies Vietnam as the enemy number one in the South East Asia region.

In dealing with the surprised attack of China, Vietnam according to the scenario, invites the US interference. It is the triggering factor leading to war, where in China would gain full support from the major Muslim countries as mentioned earlier. Thus, the military alliance between Confucianism and Islam begins to be crafted.

But in this scenario, we must be careful not to be trapped in the optimism that Japan may take sides with China rather than US. Seen from strategic view point, it would be impossible for Japan to take sides with China if within this strategic alliance Japan has no chance all for being the leading element in the allegiance. Besides in contradiction with the Japanese ambition to be the emerging superpower in Asian region, seen from size and scope, China is much bigger and much powerful in the bargaining position facing Japan.

Under such objective condition, it is no exaggeration to say that Huntington, driven by several reasons, is trying to mislead us to believe that in the possible 2010 war between US versus China, Japan would take sides with China. Even we have the reason to be suspicious when Huntington imagines that the US declares a blockade of Japan, and the American and Japanese ships engage in sporadic duel in the Western Pacific.

Despite our doubt on the Huntington thesis regarding the possible alliance between Japan and China, the other explanation deserved to be considered for strengthening the pessimistic views over Japan-China alliance. The painful thing is related to the Japanese history text book. One of important Chinese city of Nanking (now called Nanjing) and the Wholesale slaughter of at least 100.000 Chinese that followed at the hands of Japanese soldiers. This is not hearsay. This 1937 incident popularly known as the Rape of Nanking.

The painful thing felt by the China is that many Chinese were killed by the imperial Japanese Army, but the Ministry of Education wanted the passage to read: Many Chinese soldiers and civilians were murdered in the chaos. Thus, the history textbook fails to explain who actually did the killing. Several other passages about military actions, including sexual assaults by the Japanese troops and biological experimentation on thousands of Chinese in Harbin, were either exercised or revised beyond recognition.    

Strategic Position of Indonesia

However, in connection with the strategic position of Indonesia, Huntington has an optimistic assessment that makes the Indonesian authorities in Foreign Affairs, military and intelligence will be very glad to hear. But as dealing with the possible support of Japan to China, Indonesian authorities also need to be on alert and cautious. Why? Because Huntington has the reason to mislead the Indonesians, thus Indonesia would make strategic decisions on the basis of wrong information.

According to Huntington, Indonesia has trump card to play between US and China. In his argument, Indonesia is big country with predominantly Muslim population but moderate and tolerant. And the same time, as one of the major Asian countries, Indonesia has the close relationship with either Japan or China.  Indonesia, together with Australia and India is believed by Huntington as having a good momentum to recover from the crisis hit Indonesia in 1997-1998 just prior to the downfall of President Suharto.

Perhaps because of his conviction and optimism that Indonesia will be the new emerging force in Asian region, Huntington has the intention of making public opinion so as to weaken the alertness of the Indonesia authorities in dealing with the external threat masterminded from Washington, London, Tokyo, or even from the US allies such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and the small country Singapore.

The bilateral cooperation between Indonesia and Singapore on defense popularly known as Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA), is just a clear example how Indonesia has become the target of the game of destabilization played by the US and its allies. As a country considered by a senior intelligence operative as a broker between America and several countries in South East Asia, Singapore has used DCA or Military Training Agreement (MTA) as an effective mechanism to infiltrate and penetrate the Indonesian Armed Forces. Through DCA and MTA mechanism, foreign agents have an effective outlet for mapping out the geographic location, the size and strength of military personnel and military equipment of the Indonesian Armed Forces. Everybody knows that Singapore together with US, Japan and Australia, cooperate in the war against global terrorism. But in reality, war against terrorism is just a public pretext, not an aim of the US mission to the consolidation of global US hegemony through control of Euro-Asia and Central Asia.

In serving the US strategic interest, understandable if the role played by Singapore. Singapore is also viewed by US as her principal ally as US is permitted access to bases US navy logistic facility established. Singapore has been also considered as South East Asia’s leading advocate of a continued United States military presence.    

The fundamental question put forward in this chapter is, how influential the Huntington thesis, especially for the US foreign policy makers. In reality, the Huntington prediction that China will be the new US rival and threat, is very influential to direct the US foreign policy of the Bush presidency. That is the background to explain why the presidential team, as formulated in the National Security Strategy of United States of America, September 2002, warn about the danger of China as the US potential rival. “We are attentive to the possible renewal of old patterns of great power competition. Several potential great powers are now in the midst of internal transition-most importantly Russia, India and China.”  

Directly or indirectly it was the Huntington thesis that drives the US foreign affairs and national defense policy makers to urge to stand for national defense, it means providing adequate funding for the military forces needed to execute the national strategy.

Over the course of this century, US has consistently pursued three fundamental strategic objectives toward Asia: 1) freedom of the seas; 2) unimpeded access to the markets of the region; 3) preventing the domination of the region by a single power or group of powers. Those interest remain valid today, and that’ the reason way US insists on exerting pressure on Indonesia and her allies in ASEAN to build ADF as the military alliance ala SEATO in South East Asia. 

ASEAN NEUTRALITY in DANGER

Speculations with regard to the establishment of ADF in the near future, have increased the growing fear among the authorized government officials dealing with foreign affairs, military and intelligence in the ASEAN countries. 

Viewed from the perspective of the senior high-ranking diplomat at the Foreign Affairs Department, especially those belong to the eye witness of the ASEAN establishment, are quite aware that the establishment of ASEAN in August 1967, was intended to make ASEAN as an independent force free from the it dependence on the influence from two conflicting countries involved in the Cold War era such as United States on the one hand and Soviet Union and China on the other.

As widely known by the general public, the there major countries mentioned earlier got involved in the proxy war gaining sphere of influence in the Middle East, Europe, Asia Pacific, and the Korean Peninsula. As such, since its inception ASEAN is prohibited to be dragged into such kind of military alliance or defense pact at the regional level ala South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) like in the Cold War era.

SEATO which was established during the Cold War between US especially for containing the influence of Soviet Union, was fully under the control of US as the South East Asian-style military alliance or defense pact.

The neutrality and the independence of ASEAN is strengthened by the DECLARATION of ASEAN CONCORD II or more popular with BALI CONCORD II which pointed out: Further that ASEAN member countries share primary responsibili