In the meantime, though, the presidential race is shaping up to be a battle between big money and big name recognition, with the country's wealthiest politician running just behind the son of its beloved late former leader Corazon Aquino, who helped topple authoritarian President Ferdinand Marcos.

According to The Philippine Star newspaper, big-spending Sen. Manny Villar is catching up in the polls just under a week before the campaign officially begins.

'Sen. Manny Villar's aggressive media campaign mainly accounts for his eight-point gain from December to January in one poll, leaving him only seven points behind front-runner Sen. Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III in the survey, said public administration professor Prospero de Vera.

'The respected Social Weather Stations' January survey has Aquino as the top choice of 42 percent of respondents, down from 46 percent in early December. Villar, who made his fortune in real estate, was up to 35 percent from 27 percent.

'The presidential race is shaping up as a two-pronged battle between Aquino and Villar, both senators from sharply different backgrounds but with a similar message - uplifting the lives of a third of the population who live in abject poverty and cracking down on widespread corruption and political violence.'

Our Southeast Asia correspondent also has just written an interesting piece looking at how the shadow cast by the mass slaying of journalists in the region's restive south last year looms over the contest.

Reuters reports that South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has ruled out giving any handouts to entice North Korea to a summit in the middle of this year, for what would be only the third such meeting between the two technically at war nations.

He's absolutely right to do so - there's no point in having a meeting for meetings sake, especially if it helps perpetuate Pyongyang's habit of expecting to be rewarded simply for doing something it has already agreed to do.

What will be interesting to see now is whether China will be inclined to exert pressure on North Korea to return to Six-Party talks now that the United States has started to push back against Beijing.

The Council on Foreign relations' Leslie Gelb warns in an op-ed in the Daily Beast that there could be repercussions from the recently announced US arms sale to Taiwan, arguing that the move will make it harder to gain their assistance in cajoling both Pyongyang and Iran over their nuclear programmes.

Gelb is probably right on this, though I think he's way off the mark in laying so much of the blame on the Obama administration. To suggest that it is the US that is being provocative when it has taken what are in reality small steps to support an ally that currently has hundreds of missiles pointed directly at it (a balance of power that has shifted dramatically in China's favour in recent years) seems an oddly blinkered way of looking at the situation.

But setting aside the arms sale, China has over the past 12 months consistently tried to belittle the Obama administration through various diplomatic snubs, including as it almost singlehandedly scuttled an effective climate change agreement in Copenhagen.

China went to some lengths around the Beijing Olympics to indicate that it wanted to be a responsible stakeholder in the international community. So it's curious now why it seems so intent to thumb its nose at an administration that has more than met it halfway. Indeed, lately it seems to be taking a leaf out of the book of its stroppy neighbour in the Hermit Kingdom.

The BBC's three top Asia-Pacific stories this morning were all about the country, and all addressed themes that will undoubtedly be recurring for the foreseeable future - media restrictions, defence and human rights.

A report by the International Federation of Journalists says that China has over the past year increased restrictions on what the media can say. This probably shouldn't come as a surprise -- anyone who expected the Beijing Olympics to herald a new era of openness could be described as optimistic at best. It's hard, though, to see what the Chinese government thinks it will achieve in the long run. As I discovered corresponding with people when The Diplomat was blocked there, there are ways around the restrictions, and presumably finding out the information you've been fed is far from the whole picture doesn't endear your leaders to you.

The rights story concerned an activist who had been camped at Tokyo's Narita Airport since being refused entry back into China despite being a Chinese passport holder. He says he has decided to leave the airport after being visited by Chinese Embassy officials, and said that he's confident he'll be allowed entry into China after having been turned away eight times since June.

But the story that has been making headlines over the weekend has been the US arms sale to Taiwan, and China's forceful response in threatening to suspend military exchanges with the US and complaining of the 'severe harm' the sale would do to ties.

I asked our defence correspondent, Toshi Yoshihara, for his take on the sale and the response, and he suggested things are a little more complicated than they seem:

'China's reaction was widely expected.  The pattern of Sino-US interaction over arms sales to Taiwan verges on ritual.  China's threat of sanctions against US companies, however, seems to be signs of a tougher stance.

'The arms sales proposal is notable for two reasons.  First, the United States declined to include the sale of advanced F-16 fighters.  The Taiwanese have made quite clear through many channels that the fighters are their highest priority.  The island's fleet of aircraft is aging and Taiwan desperately needs to recapitalize its force structure.  Air superiority is key to the defence of Taiwan and there are growing doubts in Washington that Taiwan can dominate its own skies in the coming years.  Exclusion of the fighter thus represents a major concession to China and setback to Taiwan.  My understanding is that the Obama administration also put off any plans for helping Taiwan build diesel-electric submarines, another major item on Taipei's wish list.  Seen in this light, Washington has in fact skirted all of the most controversial issues surrounding arms sales.

'Second, the other items, including anti-ballistic missile defence systems, helicopters, and Harpoon missiles, are not likely to tilt the balance of power in favour of Taiwan in any measurable way.  For example, China boasts over a thousand ballistic missiles that could easily overwhelm the island's missile defences.  From a war fighting perspective, the arms package is more of a gesture and would not likely reverse the shifting cross-strait military balance.'

The most interesting discussions prompted by the summit on Afghanistan's future held in London yesterday were centred around suggestions of negotiating with the Taliban. Although both sides are understandably wary about discussing details, a UN official confirmed a special envoy had met with Taliban leaders on January 8th after they had requested talks.

The idea is to talk to 'moderate' Taliban, although as this Reuters story points out, many Afghan women are alarmed at such a prospect:

'[M]any Afghan women, who remember very clearly what life was like under the Taliban from 1996 to 2001, are outraged by the idea.

'On Wednesday, groups representing Afghan women warned the international community against pursuing a peace deal with the Taliban. "I have great fears, and I am greatly confused . 2001 was a very clear signal that there is no more room for conservative elements to rule in Afghanistan," Homa Sabri of the United Nation's agency for women, UNIFEM, told Reuters in London.'

I suspect they have every reason to be worried. Just because the Taliban are growing 'tired' of fighting doesn't mean that once a reintegration process starts they will abandon their entire belief system - a set of beliefs that place little value on these women's rights.

Presumably many of those who signed up to fight for the Taliban weren't doing so simply for the career opportunities - they were motivated by values that include an eye on turning back the clock on everything that has been gained in the past eight years. Western nations are desperate for a way out of a war that is increasingly unpopular and a lasting peace in Afghanistan, if it is possible at all, will need to be an inclusive one. But is this the right way?

We have an interesting piece coming up tomorrow by 'War is Boring' blogger and defence analyst David Axe who looks at China's recent missile exo-atmospheric test and what it could mean for the region (China is only the second country to succeed in such a test, after the United States).

One of the interesting things he says is that China itself may not be completely sure why it is interested in missile defence. Which makes it particularly interesting that India appears to be eyeing some kind of satellite killing missile capability, especially in light of China's (much criticized) test in 2007.

According to Asian Defence blog today:

'The goals for India's anti-ballistic missile (ABM) and ballistic missile defense (BMD) programs may be shifting to accommodate an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon more quickly than previously planned, and this could radically alter the agenda of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who is currently in the middle of a three-day visit to India. "Memories in New Delhi run deep about how India's relative tardiness in developing strategic offensive systems [nuclear weapons] redounded in its relegation on 'judgment day' [when the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was signed in 1968] to the formal category of non-nuclear weapons state," said Sourabh Gupta, senior research associate at Samuels International Associates in Washington, DC.'

Having talked a couple of days ago about military restraint between prickly neighbours (in that case Cambodia and Thailand), and a day after we flagged the west coast of the Korean Peninsula as a possible flashpoint, North and South Korea have exchanged fire in the area, reports say.

North Korea says it was firing as part of an annual military drill, while an unnamed South Korean presidential official told the Yonhap news agency that the South Korean side fired back immediately.

Reuters has a useful snap analysis of whether North Korea really wants a fight:

'It is trying to signal it is ready to return to the stalled nuclear talks, but on terms set by Pyongyang. The threats against the South, a U.S. military ally that hosts about 28,000 U.S. troops, serve as a reminder to global powers to pay attention to its demands because the North has enough military might to wreck the region's economy, which is equal to about one-sixth of the global economy.'

The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, has an interesting op-ed by Chung Min Lee entitled 'Pyongyang's "Peace" Ploy'. The title speaks for itself:

'If Pyongyang were genuinely interested in peace, it could abide fully by the nuclear dismantlement roadmap detailed in its Sep. 19, 2005 agreement in the six-party talks, return to multinational negotiations without preconditions, and pledge not to undertake additional nuclear or long-range missile tests.'

And this is a point I've raised before - North Korea simply isn't interested in giving up its nuclear programme. The question now is whether the US and South Korea are willing to be led on another merry dance.

Japan's ruling Democratic Party of Japan saw a potential door close on one possible way out of the problems it's having over the relocation of a US Marine base in Okinawa.

The DPJ is having a real headache deciding whether to follow through with a 2006 plan agreed between its predecessor and the United States to relocate the Futenma Air Station within the prefecture, or meet an election pledge to move the base out of the prefecture altogether.

Over the weekend, the incumbent mayor of the city eyed as the new home for the base-who was willing to accept the relocation-was defeated by Susumu Inamine, who opposes the plan. According to the Asahi Shimbun newspaper, DPJ headquarters had hoped the incumbent would prevail, so as to at least leave open the option of the move.

Hatoyama could try to find alternative locations, and has given his government until the end of May to reach a decision. But as I've mentioned before, the US doesn't appear in any mood to compromise.

I asked Japan analyst Tobias Harris for his take on the hard-line US response. He told me:

'I think that the US government has greatly overreacted to the Hatoyama government. The Hatoyama government could have been better prepared with an alternative, but then again, I don't think they had the information available to them in opposition to draw up an alternative.

'The US government should have played it cool - like they're doing now - and waited out the government. Why they were able to wait years for the LDP to get its act together but couldn't wait a few months for what is Japan's first truly democratic government to review the agreement and present a possible alternative is beyond me. It's also beyond me why the US government was so surprised when the DPJ made clear.that it was serious in its complaints about the Futenma relocation plan.

'Frankly, I think the Futenma debacle is more the product of an open-source intelligence failure on the part of the US government than a political mistake by the Hatoyama government.'

as has our Southeast Asia correspondent Luke Hunt. The potential dangers were made clear in a clash between the two countries' militaries early Sunday near the disputed site of Preah Vihar Temple.

Thai Prime Minister Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva put it down to a misunderstanding, so at least for now it seems the two sides are sensibly trying to ensure the situation doesn't escalate.

The Diplomat contributor Sergei DeSilva is finishing up a piece for us on the aftermath of the Sri Lankan government's victory over the Tamil Tigers ahead of the election taking place next week.

But in the meantime, it seems, the government is still struggling to fend off accusations of unnecessary brutality. This piece in the Guardian highlights the damage a lack of candidness is doing to the government's reputation:

'The Sri Lankan government continues to believe that aggressive denial is the best policy. But the price it is paying in lost credibility is rising. The European Union is considering ending textile trade benefits to Sri Lanka over its human rights record, while the International Monetary Fund (IMF) took the extraordinary step of delaying an emergency loan for months. At the direction of the US Congress, the US State Department produced a report detailing alleged violations of international humanitarian law during the final months of the conflict.'

Interestingly, there are continued rumours circulating that Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam chief V Prabharakan, who the Sri Lankan military say was killed, is actually still alive:

'A new website, lttepress.com, which claims to be the official website of the rebel outfit, a few days ago published that the Tiger chief is alive:

'Terming the Sri Lankan government's assertions that LTTE founder V Prabhakaran was killed in an encounter in May 2009 as 'rumours', Tamil Maaran, the spokesperson of the Tigers, promised the citizens of Tamil Eelam that the Tamil chief will appear before them.'

Almost certainly just propaganda. But still uncomfortable for Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa appears determined to milk the defeat of the Tigers in his campaign against opposition candidate and former military chief Gen. Sarath Fonseka.

Following the militant attacks on Kabul earlier this week, I asked Animesh Roul, Executive Director (Research) of the Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict in New Delhi and a regular contributor to Counterterrorism Blog what kind of impact the attacks were likely to have.

He said his impression was that the Taliban had hoped to emulate the Mumbai attacks by using vehicle borne suicide attacks and indiscriminate gunfire.

 'The Taliban failed miserably in this attempt in terms of inflicting fatalities or damage to public properties-they could have planned it better,' he told me, adding that their initial claims for the number of suicide bombers that infiltrated the city were undermined by the relative lack of damage.

However, he agreed with me that the psychological impact will potentially be much more lasting:

'When all's said and done, they achieved a psychological advantage for one single reason-that they have created this situation in the heart of the capital, which is well fortified. And they also sent out a message to Karzai government, as well as their affiliates, of what they are capable of.'