So, North Korea has finally pledged to suspend all nuclear tests, uranium enrichment and long-range missile tests, and to allow for verification and monitoring of their nuclear facilities at Yongbyon by international inspectors for the first time since 2009.

Hailed by some as a “breakthrough,” the agreement followed talks between U.S. and North Korean diplomats in Beijing last month. The U.S., for its part, has called it a “modest first step” towards complete, verifiable and peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, while cautioning that patience is needed to ensure further headway.

Inevitably, many hope that the end of this diplomatic impasse will reopen the doors to broader negotiations on nuclear disarmament, most likely in the form of the resumption of the Six-Party Talks. However, a closer look at North Korea’s form on this issue suggests a great deal of caution is warranted.

For years, North Korea has engaged in what some reports have termed a cycle of provocation, then accommodation with the United States, South Korea and Japan. Back in 2007, Pyongyang agreed to disable all nuclear facilities in exchange for economic, energy and humanitarian assistance from other states participating in the Six-Party Talks. However, North Korea turned this accommodating stance on its head in September 2008 by ignition-testing a long-range missile, reversing its decision to deactivate its Yongbyon nuclear facilities, and barring International Atomic and Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors from nuclear sites. In April 2009, North Korea continued down this provocative path by launching a Taepodong-2 rocket, prompting unanimous condemnation from the U.N. Security Council. North Korea responded to this by expelling all nuclear inspectors from the country and boycotting the Six-Party Talks.

Read more...

The recent coup in the Maldives has caused consternation in the United States and India, arousing fears that the Maldives is falling into the hands of Islamic extremists, that the country’s political instability could somehow increase China’s influence in the strategic sea lanes of the Indian Ocean, and that India now faces a new security threat to its southern flank. But a careful consideration of these factors shows that these fears are unfounded. The tourist hamlet of the Maldives is unlikely to be a source of regional instability anytime soon.

On February 7, Mohamed Nasheed, who became president through the Maldives’ first multi-party elections in October 2008, was forced to resign against his will – allegedly at gunpoint. Nasheed’s former vice president, Mohamed Waheed Hassan, assumed the presidency and has appointed an aide to Nasheed’s autocratic predecessor, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Both the United States and India have recognized the new government, albeit with the requisite admonitions to avoid a descent into violence and pursue the reconciliation of differences.

The coup isn’t good news for South Asia. All countries in the region had been governed by democratically elected leaders since 2008. India also doesn’t want any of the Maldives’ sprawling 1,200 islands to serve as sites for Muslim extremists to launch seaborne terrorist attacks. In fact, some Maldivians were arrested in Pakistan in 2010 for terrorist activity and training at camps in South Waziristan. Indian Minister of Defense A.K. Antony recently discussed how the November 2008 Mumbai attacks jolted his country into recognition of such maritime security threats.

Read more...

They say that it’s only in hard times that you really see who your true friends are. What separates opportunistic partnership from genuine alliance isn’t necessarily treaties, but a willingness among both parties to hang onto their relationship when the going gets tough.

With Iran’s growing isolation over its nuclear program, China’s ties with Tehran are being put to the test as never before. As the European Union and the United States tighten the noose around Iran’s oil exports – constituting 80 percent of government revenues – and key financial institutions, including the Iranian Central Bank, Tehran is in desperate need of Chinese assistance. On top of this, Israel appears to be laying the groundwork for military strikes in case sanctions fail to achieve the desired effect: namely, Iran abandoning its nuclear program.

This is precisely when China is most needed by Iran. However, with Washington stepping up its pressure on China to cut Iran loose, there are growing signs that Beijing’s leaders attach greater importance to Sino-American ties and the country’s own energy security.

Read more...

The first Australia-Vietnam Joint Foreign Affairs Defense Strategic Dialogue, held in Canberra late last month, underscored the degree to which Vietnam is seeking to establish a closer relationship with Australia, especially in the area of military affairs.

This is a strategically meaningful move for Vietnam against a backdrop of increasing tensions in the South China Sea, where China has become more aggressive in asserting its claims. Faced with a far more powerful neighbor, Vietnam has faced a dilemma – it can’t afford a hostile relationship with Beijing, but it also won’t sacrifice national sovereignty and territorial integrity in exchange for a “good” relationship with China. As a result, Vietnam has been reaching out to foreign powers in an attempt to at least deter Chinese aggression in the South China Sea, if not balance against its broader regional dominance.

The United States is undoubtedly one of Vietnam’s preferred foreign partners, and despite past hostilities, it has been keen on fostering stronger ties with the United States in all fields. Indeed, Vietnam has even indicated its desire to acquire U.S. weapons and military equipment, although its human rights record is seen as a sticking point in Washington. Still, with the United States pivoting to the Asia-Pacific, a stronger U.S.-Vietnam relationship would most likely put unwanted strain on Vietnam’s already tense relations with China.

Read more...

In recent years, the civil sphere in Malaysia has become increasingly dynamic, with civil society organizations of various stripes stepping up to make sure their voice counts. But along with the broadening of civil society influence has come an increase in the number of extremist, sometimes malicious voices. Chief among these are certain Malay right wing non-governmental organizations.

In post-colonial Malaysia,communal politics has been institutionalized and the idea of Ketuanan Melayu (Malay Supremacy) has been perpetuated by the ruling United Malays National Organization. Although Malay-Muslims in Malaysia constitute the largest ethnic group, the perception persists that they need to be united to defend their race and religion against other ethnic minoritiesin the country.

Since last year, there have been allegations of Christians usurping Islam and alleged attempts to convert Muslims through channels such as Christian-related charity organizations (the conversion of Muslims to other religions is prohibited in Malaysia). Similarly, when the chairperson of the Coalition of Free and Fair Election (Bersih), Ambiga Sreenevasan, organized the Bersih 2.0 rally, she was labeled a “dangerous Hindu woman.” Both examples underscore how the norm in public discourse is still for Malaysians from other ethnic minority groups to be cast as a potential threat to the Malay-Muslim community.

Read more...

Yesterday, the United States and North Korea announced that they had come to a series of initial agreements after bilateral meetings on February 23 and 24 in Beijing. The agreement stated that North Korea would suspend nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and uranium enrichment, and allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors in the Yongbyon facilities to confirm disablement of the 5-MW reactor. They would also receive 240,000 metric tons of nutritional assistance from the United States, with the prospect of additional assistance based on continued need. These initial steps offer important indications about the North Korean regime, as well as raising further questions and tasks for the U.S.

Given that the Kim Jong-un regime is only two months old, it’s noteworthy that it agreed to the same terms as those negotiated under U.S. Ambassador Stephen Bosworth prior to Kim Jong-il’s death. This indicates that the new Kim regime is mainly focused on legitimacy. 

What does that mean? It implies that North Korea is capable of making major foreign policy decisions, and is determined to let the international community know about their quick decision-making capacity. After his meetings with North Korean First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Gye Gwan, U.S. Special Representative for North Korea Policy Glyn Davies observed a significant amount of continuity in North Korea’s tone, style, and issues of focus. By agreeing to what some consider a surprisingly conciliatory outcome, the new Kim regime made its foreign policy debut with the underlying message that things are under control. This also confirms that North Korea’s chief mission is to achieve stability and continuity in the midst of the leadership transition by rapidly improving relations with the United States. For the U.S., South Korea, and the international community, it should be seen as progress that North Korea’s first big foreign policy decision was engagement, not provocation. 

Read more...

Since military rule began, Burma has been a shining example of how not to run an economy. The dual exchange rate system that has been in place since 1972 is a major part of the poor economic performance the country has experienced; reforming it will be key to advancing other reforms in the country.

The official rate of the kyat is set at around K6 / $1, while the unofficial rate, as of last summer, stood at nearly K800 / $1 and has grown to around K1,000 since. This hasn’t only hurt private business and agriculture, but has also had a negative impact on some important State Economic Enterprises (SEEs). In addition, as in other cases where the system was in place, we’ve seen widespread corruption whereby those who have access to foreign exchange engage in arbitrage on the black market and can make easy money. Most scholars seem to agree that the best solution would involve unification of the rates as soon as possible.  

Burmese businesses have been affected by the dual exchange rates because, in the words of  David Dapice, et al.“producers of import substitutes face increased competition from imports with lower kyat prices even as their local costs, especially wages, increase.” Over the past few decades, inflation in Burma has been higher on average than any other Southeast Asian country, even as the kyat has remained at a highly overvalued rate. A similarly disastrous situation has emerged in the agricultural sector, where distortions have affected the import and export of agricultural products and farm inputs. Whereas Burma was once considered the “rice bowl of Asia,” its importance has declined dramatically since military rule began, and since 1985 the sector has seen stagnant paddy production and lower yields.

Read more...

Philippine politics couldn’t be more fascinating or discordant. Recent months have witnessed open legal warfare between the Benigno Aquino administration and its allies in the legislature, on the one hand, and the judiciary, on the other. The ongoing impeachment trial in the Philippine Senate against Chief Justice Renato Corona is part of an attempt by the government to purge allies of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo from all key state institutions and eliminate widespread corruption in the bureaucracy.

However, intra-state bickering has spread to other issue areas as well. Thanks to escalating tensions in the South China Sea, and growing calls for a more robust Philippine-U.S. military partnership as America pivots to Asia, there seems to be a new front in the making.

Legislators from both houses of congress are pressuring the executive branch to re-assess the very wisdom of the Philippine-U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) of 1951 by specifically focusing on the provisions as well as the implementation of the1998 Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA),which governs the conduct of U.S. military operations in the Philippines.

Read more...

The Diplomat is running a series of interviews with Washington DC-based ambassadors on defense, diplomacy, and trade in the Asia-Pacific region. In this seventh interview in the series, conducted by Washington correspondent Eddie Walsh, Norwegian Ambassador Wegger Chr. Strommen discusses how the opening of the Arctic will affect the national interests of China, NATO, Russia and other Asian powers.

One of the countries that might wish to challenge the status quo in the Arctic is China. Clearly, as a non-Arctic state, it’s difficult for them to advance their national interests in the region. What are your thoughts on how China can be properly accommodated in the Arctic?

When we think of China, we think about it as an Arctic issue. For Norway, China isn’t some place you get to by sailing through the Suez Canal or around Africa. It’s somewhere you get to by going over the top of the world. If you live in Africa, you may have a different geographic view. But for us, our Asian Century will be over the top. 

Much has been made over the last decade concerning the rise of Asia – led by China and India – and the continent’s increasingly important role. The announcement by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last year that the 21st century would be America’s “Pacific Century” further strengthened the belief that the epicenter of 21st century global politics would be located within Asia. And, as has been well-documented, ongoing economic turmoil has also led to growing numbers of Western countries looking at Asia – particularly China – for financial assistance. In light of various leadership transitions taking place later this year among the major powers, one can expect conditions in Asia to factor significantly in the political discourse of their leaders.

What does Asia’s increasing prominence mean for ASEAN – a ten-member political community whose regional presence has received growing attention from the global community of late? Already Washington has embarked on its “forward-deployed diplomacy” strategy in the region as evinced by Clinton’s attendance at last year’s ASEAN Regional Forum and her landmark visit to Burma in December. The United States’ recent conduct of separate high level meetings with both the Philippines and Singapore over defense and security issues suggests that ASEAN will be a strategic region as far as Washington’s military strategies are involved. In a recent interview on CNN, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, for his part, noted that the U.S. presence in the region since World War II has been a “tremendous benign influence” and that it was “a good example for the Chinese to seek to emulate.”

Read more...