Suchergebnisse

South-East Asia is home to both conflict and 'natural' disasters which have caused significant displaced populations. Given this context, there is a need to better understand the motivations of the multiple actors involved in negotiating humanitarian responses, and to account for the impact the finished agreement has on the region both in the short and long terms. This article investigates the motivations behind two humanitarian responses in South-East Asia. The first case is the set of humanitarian responses to the Indochinese exodus in the 1970s and 1980s. The second case is the humanitarian response to those affected by Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar during the late 2000s and early 2010. Both of these agreements have been held up as historic and ground breaking achievements within the international relations of South-East Asia. This article assesses these agreements to identify the multiple levels of governance involved and the individual actors' motivations behind them. It argues that greater appreciation of these dynamics will contribute to understanding the governance of humanitarian responses to populations of concern in South-East Asia. This will be important to consider as new crises emerge that demand new negotiations within a crowded field of actors governing humanitarian responses in the region. (Pac Rev/GIGA)

Since the 1950s both Indonesia and Malaysia have contributed to United Nations peace operations across the world to varying degrees. Both states have contributed to regional peace initiatives as well; again to varying degrees and levels of success. These regional initiatives are seen through the prism of greater regionalism, which reflects a shift in focus to regional organisations in the pursuit of peace. Furthermore, understanding the motivations and decisions to contribute to peace operations requires a multifocal lens that recognises the various manifestations of this commitment and identifies the salient motivations behind these decisions. This lens illustrates that both competition and cooperation co-exist in the Indonesian and Malaysian decisions to contribute to peace operations in pursuit of increased political legitimacy in the global system.

While the world's media has centred on the opening up of Myanmar and the removal of sanctions by the West, less attention has been focused on Myanmar's relations with China. Can this relationship be ignored within the context of the Sino-American rivalry in the Asia-Pacific? This policy article focuses on the recent evolution of China-Myanmar relations and Chinese interests in and perceptions of Myanmar in transition.

Over the past two decades there has been increasing international attention to the interactions between Myanmar and China. While China has significant influence in relation to other international actors, there is also significant calculation by the government in Myanmar in an effort to ensure that no single external actor calls the policy shots. Instead, the policy choices of the government illustrate that they are calculated on a case-by-case basis to respond to emerging security threats and challenges. However, this represents only a partial truth because there are myriad actors competing for legitimacy in Myanmar which also have various relationships with external actors. Indeed, to fully understand the relationship between Myanmar and China a multifocal lens is required to appreciate the nuances and tensions within Myanmar and their effects on its overarching relationship with China. Furthermore, this lens must also be applied to China, as it too has multiple levels of engagement with Myanmar at both formal and informal levels to varying degrees. This article analyses this complex web of interactions to provide insight into the various agendas, strategies and challenges at play in the relationship between Myanmar and China.

In April 2012, another territorial dispute broke out in the South China Sea highlighting challenges to regional peace and security in East Asia. While China and the Philippines sought to resolve the Scarborough Shoal dispute peacefully, domestic concerns coupled with greater US involvement in the region illustrated the multifaceted nature of these issues. Future attempts at managing and resolving disputes will need to balance interests between actors at the sub-national, national and international levels.