
2004 Events
List of Events
List of Events
2004. Semi-Annual EAAS Meeting
2004.12.09 EU-China: Ever Closer Cooperation?
2004.11.29-12.03. Asia-Europe Young Leaders Symposium 8
2004.11.23&25. Taiwan-China Cross-Straits Relations: Regional Security
2004.11.16. Relocating Productive Capacities to China? Or Elsewhere?
2004.11.11. The Outcomes of the Fifth EU-India Summit
2004.11.09. The Outcomes of the Hanoi ASEM V Summit
2004.11.08. EU-Indonesia Relations: Stability and Prosperity in South East Asia
2004.10.27.Visitors from Ecole Supé des Sciences Commerciales d’Angers
2004.10.21. The Promotion of Human Rights in EU External
2004.10.00. Visiting Delegation from North Korea
2004.09.29. Presentation at the European Parliament: EU and South Asia
2004.10.14. Asian Studies in Czech Republic & other new EU Member States
2004.10.04. Global Organisation for Persons of Indian Origin (GOPIO)
2004.09.30. European Union-India-United States Trialogue
2004.09.28. Democracy and the Rule of Law in Bangladesh
2004.09.05-10. The Sixth EU-ASEAN Think-Tank Dialogue
2004.09.01-02. The Fourth Asian International Forum
2004.07.24-08.14. Modern South Asian Studies Summer School
2004.07.07. China Engages Asia: A new Regional Order?
2004.07.06-10. Modern South Asia Conference
2004.06.16-18. Connecting Civil Societies
2004.05.28. The Return of Congress! India’s 2004 Elections and Beyond
2004.05.06. Islam and Democracy: Indonesia’s 2004 Elections and Beyond
2004.05.10-11. World Bank ABCDE Conference
2004.04.28. EU-China Security Relations
2004.04.15. 2004 Elections in Indonesia
2004.04.02. Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation and North Korea
2004.03.18. India’s National Security under the BJP/NDA Governments
2004.03.12. Kashmir: What prospects for a lasting settlement?
2004.02.25. Iraq: Is Japan changing fundamentals defence & security policy?
2004.02.21. The National Democratic Alliance and National Security
2004.02.04. EU-ASEAN FTA: Sharing Benefits of Globalisation?
2004.01.22. Outcomes and Implications of the SAARC Summit in Islamabad
2004.01.20. Kyrgyzstan’s Accession to the WTO - Implications for Central Asia
2004.01.16. 2004 Presidential Elections in Taiwan - Why the Elections
2004.12.09 EU-China: Ever Closer Cooperation?
2004.11.29-12.03. Asia-Europe Young Leaders Symposium 8
2004.11.23&25. Taiwan-China Cross-Straits Relations: Regional Security
2004.11.16. Relocating Productive Capacities to China? Or Elsewhere?
2004.11.11. The Outcomes of the Fifth EU-India Summit
2004.11.09. The Outcomes of the Hanoi ASEM V Summit
2004.11.08. EU-Indonesia Relations: Stability and Prosperity in South East Asia
2004.10.27.Visitors from Ecole Supé des Sciences Commerciales d’Angers
2004.10.21. The Promotion of Human Rights in EU External
2004.10.00. Visiting Delegation from North Korea
2004.09.29. Presentation at the European Parliament: EU and South Asia
2004.10.14. Asian Studies in Czech Republic & other new EU Member States
2004.10.04. Global Organisation for Persons of Indian Origin (GOPIO)
2004.09.30. European Union-India-United States Trialogue
2004.09.28. Democracy and the Rule of Law in Bangladesh
2004.09.05-10. The Sixth EU-ASEAN Think-Tank Dialogue
2004.09.01-02. The Fourth Asian International Forum
2004.07.24-08.14. Modern South Asian Studies Summer School
2004.07.07. China Engages Asia: A new Regional Order?
2004.07.06-10. Modern South Asia Conference
2004.06.16-18. Connecting Civil Societies
2004.05.28. The Return of Congress! India’s 2004 Elections and Beyond
2004.05.06. Islam and Democracy: Indonesia’s 2004 Elections and Beyond
2004.05.10-11. World Bank ABCDE Conference
2004.04.28. EU-China Security Relations
2004.04.15. 2004 Elections in Indonesia
2004.04.02. Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation and North Korea
2004.03.18. India’s National Security under the BJP/NDA Governments
2004.03.12. Kashmir: What prospects for a lasting settlement?
2004.02.25. Iraq: Is Japan changing fundamentals defence & security policy?
2004.02.21. The National Democratic Alliance and National Security
2004.02.04. EU-ASEAN FTA: Sharing Benefits of Globalisation?
2004.01.22. Outcomes and Implications of the SAARC Summit in Islamabad
2004.01.20. Kyrgyzstan’s Accession to the WTO - Implications for Central Asia
2004.01.16. 2004 Presidential Elections in Taiwan - Why the Elections
7 June, Copenhagen
On the 7th of June the European Alliance for Asian Studies held its semi-annual meeting at the Nordic Institute for Asian Studies in Copenhagen to plan for joint activities during the remainder of 2004 and to develop ideas for the next year.
The meeting was chaired by Prof Wim Stokhof of the International Institute for Asian Studies in Leiden, which holds the secretariat of the Alliance, with representatives of all eight member institutes of the Alliance present. The European Institute for Asian Studies was represented by its Director, Dr Willem van der Geest.
At the meeting it was decided to hold Asia Update meetings at the European Parliament in Brussels annually under the aegis of the Alliance and to focus the forthcoming meeting in November 2004 on Asian Governance -- Outcomes of Elections in Asia 2004. It is scheduled to be held shortly after the November 2004 American Presidential Elections.
The draft programme outline for the Asia Update will be available from the Alliance and our website in the course of September.
On the 7th of June the European Alliance for Asian Studies held its semi-annual meeting at the Nordic Institute for Asian Studies in Copenhagen to plan for joint activities during the remainder of 2004 and to develop ideas for the next year.
The meeting was chaired by Prof Wim Stokhof of the International Institute for Asian Studies in Leiden, which holds the secretariat of the Alliance, with representatives of all eight member institutes of the Alliance present. The European Institute for Asian Studies was represented by its Director, Dr Willem van der Geest.
At the meeting it was decided to hold Asia Update meetings at the European Parliament in Brussels annually under the aegis of the Alliance and to focus the forthcoming meeting in November 2004 on Asian Governance -- Outcomes of Elections in Asia 2004. It is scheduled to be held shortly after the November 2004 American Presidential Elections.
The draft programme outline for the Asia Update will be available from the Alliance and our website in the course of September.
December 9th 2004, Residence Palace, Brussels
The EU’s relations with China have greatly intensified since the early 1990s, through trade and investment, reinforced through the European Commission’s communications calling for a deeper engagement between the EU and China. The EU has sought to develop its engagement with China through numerous cooperation initiatives across a number of fields, in particular trade, investment, development, science and technology, political dialogue, governance and civil society and cultural exchange.
The search for an ‘Ever Closer Cooperation’ appears to be one of the leitmotivs in the construction of the EU-China relation.
In recognition of this fact the European Office of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, the Brussels Office of the Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, the European Institute for Asian Studies, and the European Policy Centre will hold this conference.
The Conference will seek to assess the results of this approach for EU-China, taking stock of the latest developments in EU-China relations as emerged at the Hague summit. The Conference will be of particular importance to all of those professionally engaged in EU-Asia relations, in particular Members of the European Parliament and their staff, officials of the European Commission, officials of the Permanent Representation to the EU, research analysts and academic scholars studying EU-China and representatives of international business.
During the first session, the Conference will take stock of the outcomes of the seventh EU-China Summit, reflecting the viewpoint of the key players – the Presidency of the EU, a senior representative of the People’s Republic of China, a senior official of the European Commission as well as a Member of the European Parliament from its Delegation for relations with China.
The second session will examine the crucial political security issues that are of joint interest to the EU and China, in particular, the implications of the continuing war in Iraq and the outcomes of the US Presidential elections. It will also focus on issues which may limit the scope for cooperation between the EU and China, in particular the (non) lifting of the EU arms embargo and the issues of human rights protection in the PRC. The long-term implications for the strengthening of ‘effective multilateralism’ will be assessed.
The third session will examine the prospects for EU-China economic and political relations in light of the rise of China in the region and globally. In what ways will East Asia’s regional balance of power shift and what are the implications for the EU and, more generally, global governance? Will East Asia, spearheaded by China, emerge as a global partner for the EU, contributing towards genuine multi-polarity? The state-of-play of China’s membership of the WTO will be examined, in light of the decision of the European Commission to not yet grant ‘market-economy status’ to the People's Republic of China.
China's Peaceful Rising Presentation by Wang Zaibang (pdf)
Photos of the Event
The EU’s relations with China have greatly intensified since the early 1990s, through trade and investment, reinforced through the European Commission’s communications calling for a deeper engagement between the EU and China. The EU has sought to develop its engagement with China through numerous cooperation initiatives across a number of fields, in particular trade, investment, development, science and technology, political dialogue, governance and civil society and cultural exchange. The search for an ‘Ever Closer Cooperation’ appears to be one of the leitmotivs in the construction of the EU-China relation.
In recognition of this fact the European Office of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, the Brussels Office of the Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, the European Institute for Asian Studies, and the European Policy Centre will hold this conference.
The Conference will seek to assess the results of this approach for EU-China, taking stock of the latest developments in EU-China relations as emerged at the Hague summit. The Conference will be of particular importance to all of those professionally engaged in EU-Asia relations, in particular Members of the European Parliament and their staff, officials of the European Commission, officials of the Permanent Representation to the EU, research analysts and academic scholars studying EU-China and representatives of international business. During the first session, the Conference will take stock of the outcomes of the seventh EU-China Summit, reflecting the viewpoint of the key players – the Presidency of the EU, a senior representative of the People’s Republic of China, a senior official of the European Commission as well as a Member of the European Parliament from its Delegation for relations with China.
The second session will examine the crucial political security issues that are of joint interest to the EU and China, in particular, the implications of the continuing war in Iraq and the outcomes of the US Presidential elections. It will also focus on issues which may limit the scope for cooperation between the EU and China, in particular the (non) lifting of the EU arms embargo and the issues of human rights protection in the PRC. The long-term implications for the strengthening of ‘effective multilateralism’ will be assessed. The third session will examine the prospects for EU-China economic and political relations in light of the rise of China in the region and globally. In what ways will East Asia’s regional balance of power shift and what are the implications for the EU and, more generally, global governance? Will East Asia, spearheaded by China, emerge as a global partner for the EU, contributing towards genuine multi-polarity? The state-of-play of China’s membership of the WTO will be examined, in light of the decision of the European Commission to not yet grant ‘market-economy status’ to the People's Republic of China.
China's Peaceful Rising Presentation by Wang Zaibang (pdf)
Photos of the Event
29 November-3 December 2004, The Hague, the Netherlands
The annual Asia-Europe Young Leaders Symposium (AEYLS) originated from a proposal made under the framework of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) dialogue process to establish an exchange programme for young leaders to strengthen cultural links and mutual understanding between Asia and Europe.
AEYLS 8
The 8th AEYLS is organised by the International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS, the Netherlands) and sponsored by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF). Hosting the event is particularly timely as the Netherlands not only holds the EU Presidency, it also co-hosts the fifth ASEM summit to be held in Hanoi this October. The theme chosen “Shifting Paradigms in Asia-Europe relation” underlines the importance of the current developments in the ASEM process. The third IIAS book on ASEM, which will be distributed at the ASEM 5 summit, highlights some of these developments. AEYLS 8 promises to become a fruitful endeavor which will provide recommendations for ASEM officials as well as strengthen the ongoing dialogue between Asia and Europe.
Themes discussed were: Social Welfare Systems in Asia and Europe, Financial Architecture: Challenges for Interregional Co-operation, Designing a Euro-Asian Cultural Portal, The Myth of Globalism: an authors dilemma, Voters Adrift: European and Asian Elections Compared.
Caroline Horekens representing EIAS was elected chairwoman of the Economic Working Group - "EU Asia: Economic Cooperation or Confrontation". Several sessions throughout the Symposium were devoted to brainstorming on the Economic relationship between the EU and Asia at a regional, bilateral and business to business level. Please read the summary report and recommendations of the Working Group as presented by Caroline Horekens at the closing session of the symposium
Report of the Symposium
The annual Asia-Europe Young Leaders Symposium (AEYLS) originated from a proposal made under the framework of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) dialogue process to establish an exchange programme for young leaders to strengthen cultural links and mutual understanding between Asia and Europe.
AEYLS 8
The 8th AEYLS is organised by the International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS, the Netherlands) and sponsored by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF). Hosting the event is particularly timely as the Netherlands not only holds the EU Presidency, it also co-hosts the fifth ASEM summit to be held in Hanoi this October. The theme chosen “Shifting Paradigms in Asia-Europe relation” underlines the importance of the current developments in the ASEM process. The third IIAS book on ASEM, which will be distributed at the ASEM 5 summit, highlights some of these developments. AEYLS 8 promises to become a fruitful endeavor which will provide recommendations for ASEM officials as well as strengthen the ongoing dialogue between Asia and Europe.
Themes discussed were: Social Welfare Systems in Asia and Europe, Financial Architecture: Challenges for Interregional Co-operation, Designing a Euro-Asian Cultural Portal, The Myth of Globalism: an authors dilemma, Voters Adrift: European and Asian Elections Compared.
Caroline Horekens representing EIAS was elected chairwoman of the Economic Working Group - "EU Asia: Economic Cooperation or Confrontation". Several sessions throughout the Symposium were devoted to brainstorming on the Economic relationship between the EU and Asia at a regional, bilateral and business to business level. Please read the summary report and recommendations of the Working Group as presented by Caroline Horekens at the closing session of the symposium
Report of the Symposium
23 & 25 November, Paris & Madrid
The European Alliance for Asian Studies is organising the forthcoming International Conference on 'Taiwan-China Cross-Straits Relations - Outlook for Regional Security in East Asia' which will take place in Paris, November 23 and Madrid, November 25, 2004.
Full Report and Papers
The European Alliance for Asian Studies is organising the forthcoming International Conference on 'Taiwan-China Cross-Straits Relations - Outlook for Regional Security in East Asia' which will take place in Paris, November 23 and Madrid, November 25, 2004.
Full Report and Papers
16 November 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Prof Sylvain Plasschaert, Emeritus, University of Leuven, will address this issue.
China's role in the global economy is growing rapidly. China's membership to the World Trade Organisation, its political stability and the recent internal developments made to facilitate international trade and foreign investment have all contributed to making China a prominent global economic player. In light of China's dynamic and rapidly changing business environment Professor Plasschaert will analyse the issue of the relocation of productive capacities. The closure of productive capacity in a 'home country' entails a simultaneous establishment of such productive capacity in a ‘host country‘. With its growing productivity, improving quality of goods and production facilities and low labour and capital costs the question of whether China will become host to an important amount of productive capacities in the future must be raised.
Photos of the Event
Prof Sylvain Plasschaert, Emeritus, University of Leuven, will address this issue.
China's role in the global economy is growing rapidly. China's membership to the World Trade Organisation, its political stability and the recent internal developments made to facilitate international trade and foreign investment have all contributed to making China a prominent global economic player. In light of China's dynamic and rapidly changing business environment Professor Plasschaert will analyse the issue of the relocation of productive capacities. The closure of productive capacity in a 'home country' entails a simultaneous establishment of such productive capacity in a ‘host country‘. With its growing productivity, improving quality of goods and production facilities and low labour and capital costs the question of whether China will become host to an important amount of productive capacities in the future must be raised.
 |  |
Photos of the Event
Thursday 11 November 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Speakers:
H.E. Ambassador Abhyankar Rajendra, Embassy of the Republic of India to the EU and Ms. Laurence Argimon-Pistre, Head of India Unit, European Commission.
Chair:
Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice-Chair, European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels
On 8 November the fifth EU-India Summit was held in The Hague. The Summit offered an opportunity for the two major international players, who share a commitment to democracy and multilateralism, to review the state of their bilateral relationship and examine means to further strengthen their "Strategic Partnership. A Communication examining the many facets of EU-India relations in the light of India's role as an emerging global player and a major regional actor and proposing a series of concrete steps to strengthen co-operation, was adopted by the European Commission in June of this year.
The Summit was be chaired by Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende and Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Bernard Bot, in their capacity as Chairpersons of the Council of Ministers of the European Union. The Indian delegation was led by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs Natwar Singh.
This briefing, a few days following the Summit, took stock of and addressed the outcomes of this important Summit. Mr R.P. Agrawal, from the Embassy of the Republic of India to the EU and Ms. Argimon-Pistre, Head of the India Unit, European Commission, briefed the audience on the main issues that were raised and the conclusions that were drawn at the Fifth EU-India Summit.
Photos of the Event
Speakers: H.E. Ambassador Abhyankar Rajendra, Embassy of the Republic of India to the EU and Ms. Laurence Argimon-Pistre, Head of India Unit, European Commission.
Chair:
Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice-Chair, European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels
On 8 November the fifth EU-India Summit was held in The Hague. The Summit offered an opportunity for the two major international players, who share a commitment to democracy and multilateralism, to review the state of their bilateral relationship and examine means to further strengthen their "Strategic Partnership. A Communication examining the many facets of EU-India relations in the light of India's role as an emerging global player and a major regional actor and proposing a series of concrete steps to strengthen co-operation, was adopted by the European Commission in June of this year.
The Summit was be chaired by Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende and Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Bernard Bot, in their capacity as Chairpersons of the Council of Ministers of the European Union. The Indian delegation was led by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs Natwar Singh.
This briefing, a few days following the Summit, took stock of and addressed the outcomes of this important Summit. Mr R.P. Agrawal, from the Embassy of the Republic of India to the EU and Ms. Argimon-Pistre, Head of the India Unit, European Commission, briefed the audience on the main issues that were raised and the conclusions that were drawn at the Fifth EU-India Summit.
Photos of the Event
Tuesday 9 November 2004 from 12:30 to 14:30
Speakers:
Ambassador Mrs. Phan Thuy Thanh, Embassy of Vietnam, Brussels
Ambassador Dato Deva Mohd Ridzam, Embassy of Malaysia, Brussels
Mr Geoffrey Barrett, European Commission
Chair:
Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels
Launched in Bangkok in 1996 between the then 15 member countries of the European Union (EU), the European Commission, and 10 Asian countries, the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) process has developed into a wide-ranging strategic dialogue between the two continental partners, Asia and Europe. The Fifth ASEM Summit which took place in Hanoi, Vietnam on 7-9th October 2004, was a landmark in Asia-Europe relations as it celebrated the enlargement of ASEM to include 39 partners, including the 10 new members of the EU, and 3 new members on the Asian side: Cambodia, Laos and Burma/Myanmar.
At the Summit, ASEM Leaders addressed international developments, global challenges and regional developments in Europe and Asia. A particular theme was how to deepen a common commitment to a multilateral approach to international relations and to reform of the United Nations system. The Asia-Europe economic partnership and recent developments at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) were also discussed. In addition, the Europeans took the opportunity to discuss the human rights situation and the need for democratic reforms in Burma/Myanmar with Asian partners.
Speech by Ambassador Ridzam (pdf)
ASEM Summit Documents
Speech by Mr. Toyoo Gyohten (Japan) Chairman of ASEM Task Force for Closer Economic Partnership between Asia and Europe's (pdf)
Dr. Gert Vogt, Co -Chairman's report (pfd)
ASEM Task Force's Conclusions
Photos of the Event
Speakers: Ambassador Mrs. Phan Thuy Thanh, Embassy of Vietnam, Brussels
Ambassador Dato Deva Mohd Ridzam, Embassy of Malaysia, Brussels
Mr Geoffrey Barrett, European Commission
Chair:
Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, European Institute for Asian Studies, Brussels
Launched in Bangkok in 1996 between the then 15 member countries of the European Union (EU), the European Commission, and 10 Asian countries, the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) process has developed into a wide-ranging strategic dialogue between the two continental partners, Asia and Europe. The Fifth ASEM Summit which took place in Hanoi, Vietnam on 7-9th October 2004, was a landmark in Asia-Europe relations as it celebrated the enlargement of ASEM to include 39 partners, including the 10 new members of the EU, and 3 new members on the Asian side: Cambodia, Laos and Burma/Myanmar. At the Summit, ASEM Leaders addressed international developments, global challenges and regional developments in Europe and Asia. A particular theme was how to deepen a common commitment to a multilateral approach to international relations and to reform of the United Nations system. The Asia-Europe economic partnership and recent developments at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) were also discussed. In addition, the Europeans took the opportunity to discuss the human rights situation and the need for democratic reforms in Burma/Myanmar with Asian partners.
Speech by Ambassador Ridzam (pdf)
ASEM Summit Documents
Speech by Mr. Toyoo Gyohten (Japan) Chairman of ASEM Task Force for Closer Economic Partnership between Asia and Europe's (pdf)
Dr. Gert Vogt, Co -Chairman's report (pfd)
ASEM Task Force's Conclusions
Photos of the Event
Round-Table Briefing and Discussion
Résidence Palace, Brussels, Monday 8th November 2004
The EU attaches great importance to the continuing consolidation of democracy in Indonesia under the newly elected President Yudhoyono. As a democratic country with the world's largest Muslim population, Indonesia is a key ally of the EU in promoting equitable, representative and secular governance.
The speakers were:
Wiryono Sastrohandoyo is a Fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Jakarta. He is a former Indonesian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Vienna. Most notably, Ambassador Wiryono was the Chief Negotiator for the Government of Indonesia with the Free Aceh Movement (or GAM), and he successfully brokered the Geneva Accord on Aceh, which was signed in 2002. He addressed an EIAS meeting in Brussels in May 2003 noting the fragility of the peace process at the time.
Fu’ad Jabali is a lecturer at the post-graduate studies at the State Islamic University (UIN) and the editor of Studia Islamika, the International Journal of Islam in South East Asia. He is currently engaged in studying Islam in the modern context and is the author of numerous publications.
Shanti L. Poesposoetjipto is the CEO of Praweda Ciptakarsa Informatika and of Soedarpo Informatika Group and Co-Chair of the Executive Board of the Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia. She holds key positions in a number of professional organizations and NGO's. She is the recipient of the Women Inspire 2002 Award for IT.
Frans Winarta is a prominent and outspoken commentator on legal affairs in Indonesia. Mr. Winarta is inter alia, member of the Governing Board of the National Law Commission and Council Member of the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association. He is also the Managing Partner of a law practice that he established in Jakarta in 1981.
The meeting will be chaired by Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, EIAS, and concluded by Dr Axel Berkofsky, Senior Policy Analyst, EPC.
Report of the meeting
Photos of the Event
Résidence Palace, Brussels, Monday 8th November 2004
The EU attaches great importance to the continuing consolidation of democracy in Indonesia under the newly elected President Yudhoyono. As a democratic country with the world's largest Muslim population, Indonesia is a key ally of the EU in promoting equitable, representative and secular governance.
The speakers were:
Wiryono Sastrohandoyo is a Fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Jakarta. He is a former Indonesian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Vienna. Most notably, Ambassador Wiryono was the Chief Negotiator for the Government of Indonesia with the Free Aceh Movement (or GAM), and he successfully brokered the Geneva Accord on Aceh, which was signed in 2002. He addressed an EIAS meeting in Brussels in May 2003 noting the fragility of the peace process at the time.
Fu’ad Jabali is a lecturer at the post-graduate studies at the State Islamic University (UIN) and the editor of Studia Islamika, the International Journal of Islam in South East Asia. He is currently engaged in studying Islam in the modern context and is the author of numerous publications.
Shanti L. Poesposoetjipto is the CEO of Praweda Ciptakarsa Informatika and of Soedarpo Informatika Group and Co-Chair of the Executive Board of the Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia. She holds key positions in a number of professional organizations and NGO's. She is the recipient of the Women Inspire 2002 Award for IT.
Frans Winarta is a prominent and outspoken commentator on legal affairs in Indonesia. Mr. Winarta is inter alia, member of the Governing Board of the National Law Commission and Council Member of the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association. He is also the Managing Partner of a law practice that he established in Jakarta in 1981.
The meeting will be chaired by Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, EIAS, and concluded by Dr Axel Berkofsky, Senior Policy Analyst, EPC. Report of the meeting
Photos of the Event
27 October 2004
EIAS welcomed a group of students from Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Commerciales d'Angers, led by Mr. Albrecht Sonntag, for a briefing on the work of the Institute and EU-Asia relations.
EIAS welcomed a group of students from Ecole Supérieure des Sciences Commerciales d'Angers, led by Mr. Albrecht Sonntag, for a briefing on the work of the Institute and EU-Asia relations.
 |  |
21 October 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Dr Georg Wiessala, Reader in International Relations, University of Lancashire, spoke on this issue, with particular regard to Asia.
The Discussant was Phillipe van Amersfoort, from the Human Rights and Democratisation Unit of the European Commission.
Photos of the Event
Dr Georg Wiessala, Reader in International Relations, University of Lancashire, spoke on this issue, with particular regard to Asia.
The Discussant was Phillipe van Amersfoort, from the Human Rights and Democratisation Unit of the European Commission.
 |  |
Photos of the Event
We hosted an information visit for Members of the North Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where we briefed them on the Structure and role of the European Institutions.
At the first full meeting of the European Parliament's Delegation for relations with South Asia and SAARC countries, Dr Willem van der Geest, EIAS Director was invited to present an overview and outlook of EU-South Asia relations, covering economic and governance issues.
Breifing on EU-South Asia Relations by Dr Willem Van Der Geest, EIAS (pdf)
Breifing on EU-South Asia Relations by Dr Willem Van Der Geest, EIAS (pdf)
14 October 2004
EIAS, Brussels
Prof PhDr. Jaroslav Vacek, CSc., Dean, Philosphical Fac, Former Vice-Rector for International Relations, Charles University, Prague.
The enlargement of the European Union in May 2004 has brought to the fore the unique intellectual knowledge and competence which the Central and Eastern European Countries have built up across a wide range of fields.
The European Institute for Asian Studies seeks to contribute to a better scholarly traditions in the new EU Member States by inviting leading scholars from the new EU member states to introduce the research traditions in their respective disciplines to a wider audience.
EIAS, Brussels
Prof PhDr. Jaroslav Vacek, CSc., Dean, Philosphical Fac, Former Vice-Rector for International Relations, Charles University, Prague.
The enlargement of the European Union in May 2004 has brought to the fore the unique intellectual knowledge and competence which the Central and Eastern European Countries have built up across a wide range of fields.
The European Institute for Asian Studies seeks to contribute to a better scholarly traditions in the new EU Member States by inviting leading scholars from the new EU member states to introduce the research traditions in their respective disciplines to a wider audience.
4 October 2004,
Brussels
This event launched a European-Indian Chamber of Cmmerce. The event was co-sponsored by GOPIO and the Mission of India to the European Union. Amongst the speakers were Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice-Chairman EIAS and Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, EIAS. He focused on the question how GOPIO could play a role on ensuring an informed debate about the mutual gains of outsourcing in the services sector.
Contribution of the Indian Community to the Economic Development of Europe by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
Brussels
This event launched a European-Indian Chamber of Cmmerce. The event was co-sponsored by GOPIO and the Mission of India to the European Union. Amongst the speakers were Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice-Chairman EIAS and Dr Willem van der Geest, Director, EIAS. He focused on the question how GOPIO could play a role on ensuring an informed debate about the mutual gains of outsourcing in the services sector.
Contribution of the Indian Community to the Economic Development of Europe by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
30th of September 2004, Brussels
The European Institute for Asian Studies, jointly with the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and the Hanns Seidel Stiftung, will be organising a European Union-India-United States trialogue on the 30th of September 2004 in Brussels on the eve of the EU-India summit to take place in Den Haag mid-October.
The One day Conference -- the first of its kind in Brussels -- will take stock of the state of play of EU-India cooperation and compare and contrast this with US-India relations and cooperation, focusing on security as well as economic dimensions. The conference will cover scope for trilateral cooperation in areas of international terrorism, non-proliferation and peacebuilding and assess the scope for promoting Tri-lateral EU-US-India alliances in these fields.
Report of the Conference by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
Speeches and presentations:
Promoting Trilateral Cooperation in Global Governance by Armin Laschet MEP (pdf)
External, Internal and Human Security in India by Dr Apurba Kundu (pdf)
by Maj Gen Dipankar Banerjee (rtd) (pdf)
Photos of the Event
The European Institute for Asian Studies, jointly with the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and the Hanns Seidel Stiftung, will be organising a European Union-India-United States trialogue on the 30th of September 2004 in Brussels on the eve of the EU-India summit to take place in Den Haag mid-October. The One day Conference -- the first of its kind in Brussels -- will take stock of the state of play of EU-India cooperation and compare and contrast this with US-India relations and cooperation, focusing on security as well as economic dimensions. The conference will cover scope for trilateral cooperation in areas of international terrorism, non-proliferation and peacebuilding and assess the scope for promoting Tri-lateral EU-US-India alliances in these fields. Report of the Conference by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
Speeches and presentations:
Promoting Trilateral Cooperation in Global Governance by Armin Laschet MEP (pdf)
External, Internal and Human Security in India by Dr Apurba Kundu (pdf)
by Maj Gen Dipankar Banerjee (rtd) (pdf)
Photos of the Event
28 September 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Democracy and the rule of law have not gone without challenges in Bangladesh’s political history. The intense political violence witnessed in recent years increasingly threatens the country’s aim of establishing a mature democracy with the rule of law and equitable social and economic development.
This threat became particularly evident when the Leader of the Opposition, former Prime Minister Ms. Sheikh Hasina, narrowly escaped an assassination attempt on the 21st of August, 2004 during a political rally in Dhaka. Senior members of her Party, her bodyguard as well as innocent by-standers were killed, while several hundreds were seriously injured. Investigations have to date failed to identify or apprehend the perpetrators.
Barrister Amirul Islam, Legal Advisor to Ms Sheikh Hasina since 2002, kindly agreed to address the key question of what may be done to ensure that Bangladesh improves its governance performance and moves towards a mature political democracy.
Barrister Islam was Minister during 1973-74 in the government of Sheikh Mujib, the father of Ms Sheikh Hasina, who was assassinated in 1975. He has been practising law in Bangladesh since the early 1960s and was a member of the committee drafting the country’s constitution during 1971-72.
In his presentation, he addressed the importance of police and judicial reform for democratic development and examine the possible role of the international community, including the European Union.
Background note: Democracy and Rule of Law in Bangladesh
Report of the meeting
Photos of the Event
Democracy and the rule of law have not gone without challenges in Bangladesh’s political history. The intense political violence witnessed in recent years increasingly threatens the country’s aim of establishing a mature democracy with the rule of law and equitable social and economic development.
This threat became particularly evident when the Leader of the Opposition, former Prime Minister Ms. Sheikh Hasina, narrowly escaped an assassination attempt on the 21st of August, 2004 during a political rally in Dhaka. Senior members of her Party, her bodyguard as well as innocent by-standers were killed, while several hundreds were seriously injured. Investigations have to date failed to identify or apprehend the perpetrators.
Barrister Amirul Islam, Legal Advisor to Ms Sheikh Hasina since 2002, kindly agreed to address the key question of what may be done to ensure that Bangladesh improves its governance performance and moves towards a mature political democracy.
Barrister Islam was Minister during 1973-74 in the government of Sheikh Mujib, the father of Ms Sheikh Hasina, who was assassinated in 1975. He has been practising law in Bangladesh since the early 1960s and was a member of the committee drafting the country’s constitution during 1971-72. In his presentation, he addressed the importance of police and judicial reform for democratic development and examine the possible role of the international community, including the European Union.
Background note: Democracy and Rule of Law in Bangladesh
Report of the meeting
Photos of the Event
Munich, Brussels and Lisbon
5-10 September 2004
EIAS attended this conference and presented academic summaries at the end of the conference.
Photos of the Event
5-10 September 2004
EIAS attended this conference and presented academic summaries at the end of the conference.
 |  |
Photos of the Event
1 - 2 September 2004
Fukuoka, Japan
Presentation: Should the EU share the Benefits of Globalisation through FTAs? by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
Fukuoka, Japan
Presentation: Should the EU share the Benefits of Globalisation through FTAs? by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
24 July - 14 August, Heidelburg, Germany
This course is based on lectures, group work, roundtable discussions and one week of guided research, addressing several thematic modules.
Outline of the presentation by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
List of participants (pdf)
This course is based on lectures, group work, roundtable discussions and one week of guided research, addressing several thematic modules.
Outline of the presentation by Dr Van Der Geest (pdf)
List of participants (pdf)
7 July, Residence Palais, Brussels
A special presentation by Professor David Shambaugh. We have organised this briefing with the European Policy Centre. Unlike most of our other events, this one will be from 16:30 to 18:00.
Professor David Shambaugh is Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, Director of The China Policy Program at the George Washington University. Prior to joining the faculty at the Elliott School of International Affairs, he taught at the University of London School of Oriental & African Studies, served as Editor of The China Quarterly, and directed the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
He has published widely on Chinese politics, foreign relations, military affairs, Sino-American relations, and international politics and security in the Asia-Pacific region. Prof Shambaugh is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and the author of Modernizing China's Military (2003).
Agenda of the meeting (pdf)
Report of the meeting (pdf)
Photos of the Event
A special presentation by Professor David Shambaugh. We have organised this briefing with the European Policy Centre. Unlike most of our other events, this one will be from 16:30 to 18:00.
Professor David Shambaugh is Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, Director of The China Policy Program at the George Washington University. Prior to joining the faculty at the Elliott School of International Affairs, he taught at the University of London School of Oriental & African Studies, served as Editor of The China Quarterly, and directed the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
He has published widely on Chinese politics, foreign relations, military affairs, Sino-American relations, and international politics and security in the Asia-Pacific region. Prof Shambaugh is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and the author of Modernizing China's Military (2003).
Agenda of the meeting (pdf)
Report of the meeting (pdf)
Photos of the Event
Modern South Asia Conference
6-10 July, Lund, Sweeden
Abstract of Papers presented at the conference
More information on the conference's website
6-10 July, Lund, Sweeden
Abstract of Papers presented at the conference
More information on the conference's website
25 June, EIAS, Brussels
Stephen Green, Senior Research Fellow and Head of Asia Programmeat the Royal Institute for International Affairs, discussed this important issue. Mr Sun Xue Gong acted as respondant.
Presentation: To Privatise is Glorious! by Stephen Green
Photos of the Event
Stephen Green, Senior Research Fellow and Head of Asia Programmeat the Royal Institute for International Affairs, discussed this important issue. Mr Sun Xue Gong acted as respondant.
 |  |
Presentation: To Privatise is Glorious! by Stephen Green
Photos of the Event
Connecting Civil Societies
16-18 June 2004, Barcelona, Spain
Workshop on International Relations, Regionalisation Processes and Security Issues
Hosted by the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
17 June 2004
Concept
Under current circumstances, Asia and Europe have agreed on an increasing number of issues concerning regional stability and global security.
Nevertheless, because of different historical, cultural background, and varied political, economical, and social trajectories, the agenda and mechanisms of Asia and Europe in the fied of international relations, regionalisation processes and security issues, are, to a large extent, distinct from one another.
While the EU is currently confronted with the challenge of integrating the foreign and security policies of its new member states into its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), Asian regional integration in the field of regional and international politics and security remains weak. EU-Asia co-operation in the field of international relations and international security hasn't reached its potential yet.
Despite the differences with respect to the status and goals of civil society Europe and Asia, the role of Civil Society formulating and implementing foreign and security policies remains limited both in an enlarged Europe and Asia.
Therefore, objective recognition of these challenges and differences is useful for better mutual understanding and closer dialogue and cooperation between the two regions.
In order to assure more productive coordination and cooperation, and a more constructive role in international matters, there is great scope for civil society organisations in Asia and Europe to enhance their communication and mutual understanding on these issues, and seek areas of possible co-operation.
The workshop will seek to identify areas where co-operation between European and Asian non-governmental actors and organisations can be relevant to influence the foreign and security policy-making process in both an enlarged Europe and Asia.
It will also be assessed how ASEM and CSCAP, a track-II security forum for the Asia-Pacific region, can serve as platforms to promote and enhance Europe-Asia inter-regional co-operation between non-governmental actors and organisations in the field of international politics and relations.
Due to the limited time available during the workshop, participants are of course not expected to elaborate in great depth on the issues mentioned above. However, discussions should be focussed on establishing common ground, taking stock of past successes and failures and seeking approaches and solutions to tackle these issues through greater co-operation and more partnerships between Asian and European civil society organisations. The discussion should indeed be solution oriented, and lead to the formulation of concrete and feasible recommendations, which should also contribute to the enhancement of Asia-Europe co-operation in this area.
List of Participants
More information can be found on ASEF Website
16-18 June 2004, Barcelona, Spain
Workshop on International Relations, Regionalisation Processes and Security Issues
Hosted by the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
17 June 2004
Concept
Under current circumstances, Asia and Europe have agreed on an increasing number of issues concerning regional stability and global security.
Nevertheless, because of different historical, cultural background, and varied political, economical, and social trajectories, the agenda and mechanisms of Asia and Europe in the fied of international relations, regionalisation processes and security issues, are, to a large extent, distinct from one another.
While the EU is currently confronted with the challenge of integrating the foreign and security policies of its new member states into its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), Asian regional integration in the field of regional and international politics and security remains weak. EU-Asia co-operation in the field of international relations and international security hasn't reached its potential yet.
Despite the differences with respect to the status and goals of civil society Europe and Asia, the role of Civil Society formulating and implementing foreign and security policies remains limited both in an enlarged Europe and Asia.
Therefore, objective recognition of these challenges and differences is useful for better mutual understanding and closer dialogue and cooperation between the two regions.
In order to assure more productive coordination and cooperation, and a more constructive role in international matters, there is great scope for civil society organisations in Asia and Europe to enhance their communication and mutual understanding on these issues, and seek areas of possible co-operation.
The workshop will seek to identify areas where co-operation between European and Asian non-governmental actors and organisations can be relevant to influence the foreign and security policy-making process in both an enlarged Europe and Asia.
It will also be assessed how ASEM and CSCAP, a track-II security forum for the Asia-Pacific region, can serve as platforms to promote and enhance Europe-Asia inter-regional co-operation between non-governmental actors and organisations in the field of international politics and relations.
Due to the limited time available during the workshop, participants are of course not expected to elaborate in great depth on the issues mentioned above. However, discussions should be focussed on establishing common ground, taking stock of past successes and failures and seeking approaches and solutions to tackle these issues through greater co-operation and more partnerships between Asian and European civil society organisations. The discussion should indeed be solution oriented, and lead to the formulation of concrete and feasible recommendations, which should also contribute to the enhancement of Asia-Europe co-operation in this area.
List of Participants
More information can be found on ASEF Website
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS), 28 May 2004
Chair: Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice Chair, European Institute for Asian Studies
With speakers:
Dr Kunal Sen, Reader in Economics, University of East Anglia
Dr John Zavos, Centre for Applied South Asian Studies, University of Manchester
Dr Apurba Kundu, Senior Research Fellow, European Institute for Asian Studies
India, the world’s largest democracy, second-most populous state, fifth-largest economy and sixth declared nuclear weapons power has just returned a Congress government to power after five years of BJP rule.
This stunning result has myriad implications for the domestic and international economy and security of India. How were the elections won and lost? What is the future of India’s programme of economic liberalisation? What are the implications for India’s relations with Pakistan and other countries? This luncheon briefing will examine these and other questions related to the results of India’s 2004 parliamentary elections.
Presentations:
Dr Kundu's presentation (pdf)
Dr Sen's presentation (pdf)
Dr Zavos' presentation (pdf)
Photos of the Event
Chair: Mr Malcolm Subhan, Vice Chair, European Institute for Asian Studies
With speakers:
Dr Kunal Sen, Reader in Economics, University of East Anglia
Dr John Zavos, Centre for Applied South Asian Studies, University of Manchester
Dr Apurba Kundu, Senior Research Fellow, European Institute for Asian Studies
India, the world’s largest democracy, second-most populous state, fifth-largest economy and sixth declared nuclear weapons power has just returned a Congress government to power after five years of BJP rule.
This stunning result has myriad implications for the domestic and international economy and security of India. How were the elections won and lost? What is the future of India’s programme of economic liberalisation? What are the implications for India’s relations with Pakistan and other countries? This luncheon briefing will examine these and other questions related to the results of India’s 2004 parliamentary elections.
Presentations:
Dr Kundu's presentation (pdf)
Dr Sen's presentation (pdf)
Dr Zavos' presentation (pdf)
Photos of the Event
Thursday, 6 May
Embassy of Indonesia, Avenue de Tervuren 294, 1150 Brussels.
Indonesia is a nation in flux, striving to establish a democratic framework while overcoming the challenges of development, terrorism and globalisation. As the most populous Muslim country in the world, Indonesia’s response to these challenges is a crucial indicator of the future of both regional and global prosperity and stability. This seminar will examine the results of the country’s recent local, regional and parliamentary elections and how these may affect the forthcoming Presidential elections, as well as Indonesia’s future role as a leading nation in the region and the world.
Speakers included Dr Salim Said, Department of Social and Political Science, University of Indonesia, and Dr Francois Raillon, Director of Research, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, with discussant Dr Tazeen Murshid, Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Presentation: Islam and Democracy: Indonesia's 2004 elections and beyond by Dr Raillon
Photos of the Event
Embassy of Indonesia, Avenue de Tervuren 294, 1150 Brussels.
Indonesia is a nation in flux, striving to establish a democratic framework while overcoming the challenges of development, terrorism and globalisation. As the most populous Muslim country in the world, Indonesia’s response to these challenges is a crucial indicator of the future of both regional and global prosperity and stability. This seminar will examine the results of the country’s recent local, regional and parliamentary elections and how these may affect the forthcoming Presidential elections, as well as Indonesia’s future role as a leading nation in the region and the world.
Speakers included Dr Salim Said, Department of Social and Political Science, University of Indonesia, and Dr Francois Raillon, Director of Research, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, with discussant Dr Tazeen Murshid, Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Presentation: Islam and Democracy: Indonesia's 2004 elections and beyond by Dr Raillon
Photos of the Event
Palais d'Egmont, Brussels
10-11 May 2004
Speaker, Ananya RAIHAN, Research Fellow, Center for Policy Dialogue, Bangladesh
Discussant, Peter HOLMES, University of Sussex, U.K.
This workshop was organised by EIAS
Photos of the Event
10-11 May 2004
Speaker, Ananya RAIHAN, Research Fellow, Center for Policy Dialogue, Bangladesh
Discussant, Peter HOLMES, University of Sussex, U.K.
This workshop was organised by EIAS
 |  |
Photos of the Event
Wednesday, 28 April 2004, EIAS, Brussels
The EU Security Strategy paper, A Secure Europe in a Better World, proposes to develop a strategic partnership with China. Mr. Frank Umbach, Resident Fellow, German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), offered an assessment of how to put the envisioned EU-China strategic partnership into practice. He gave an overview of current EU-China security relations in the context of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, assess the possibilities and prospects of future trilateral EU-US-China security co-operation, and address the issue of the EU weapons embargo imposed on China in 1989.
Acting as discussant was Dr. Axel Berkofsky, EIAS Research Fellow. The Luncheon Briefing was chaired by Mr Dick Gupwell, EAIS Secretary General.
Report of the Briefing
The EU Security Strategy paper, A Secure Europe in a Better World, proposes to develop a strategic partnership with China. Mr. Frank Umbach, Resident Fellow, German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), offered an assessment of how to put the envisioned EU-China strategic partnership into practice. He gave an overview of current EU-China security relations in the context of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, assess the possibilities and prospects of future trilateral EU-US-China security co-operation, and address the issue of the EU weapons embargo imposed on China in 1989.
Acting as discussant was Dr. Axel Berkofsky, EIAS Research Fellow. The Luncheon Briefing was chaired by Mr Dick Gupwell, EAIS Secretary General.
Report of the Briefing
Thursday, 15 April 2004
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Speaker: Mr. Glyn Ford MEP,
EU Chief Observer of the Election Observation Mission to Indonesia
The EU Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) in Indonesia followed an invitation from the National Election Commission of Indonesia (KPU) of 8 January 2004 in order to observe the General Elections (multi-level local and parliamentary elections) scheduled for 5 April 2004 and the Presidential Elections scheduled for 5 July 2004. The election administration body KPU (short for Komisi Pemilihan Umum) is Indonesia’s permanent and independent election commission.
Indonesia’s General Elections were held under a new legal framework with more than 140 million eligible voters.
The EU EOM is led by Chief Observer Mr. Glyn Ford MEP (UK) and the mission consists of a 13-person core team, 64 long-term observers (LTOs), 128 short-term observers (STOs) and 20 locally-recruited short-term observers (LSTOs) (diplomatic staff of the EU member states).
In total, 231 EU observers monitored Indonesia’s General Elections.
That, as Mr. Ford pointed out during his presentation at the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS), made the EU’s election observer mission by far the largest international elections observer mission in Indonesia. The EU, Ford said, has deployed more election observers to Indonesia than all other international observer missions combined.
One part of the mission, Ford explained, was devoted to monitoring the media coverage of the elections. Amongst others, EU EOM election observers assessed whether political parties and their candidates gained fair and sufficient access to the media and whether it was possible for the public to obtain sufficient information on candidates and parties through the media.
Based on the EU’s election observation mission’s assessment, Mr. Ford concluded that this was the case adding that Indonesia’s media in its coverage on the elections did not favour any particular political party or candidates.
All political parties, including Golkar, he added, appeared to have been able to campaign freely and without restrictions.
Mr. Ford pointed out that Indonesia’s General Elections distinguished themselves above all by their complexity, the vast number of ballot papers (600 million), political candidates (450.000) and polling stations (more than 560.000).
The General Elections, Ford maintained, were further complicated by the fact that voters were both asked to vote for a candidate and a party on the same ballot paper.
The ballot papers, Ford explained, became invalid if the elector voted for a party and a candidate from a different party. Ballot papers became also invalid if the voter voted for a candidate without voting for a party on the same ballot paper.
However, Ford said, more than 60% of the ballot papers turned out to be valid as of April 15.
Mr. Ford concluded that Indonesia’s multi-level General Elections that took place on a national, provincial, regency/city, subdistrict and village level were transparent and democratic. The EU’s observer mission monitored 1.244 polling stations (out of a total of 565.000) and did not detect irregularities with regards to the conduct and count of the poll.
However, Ford pointed out, Indonesia’s General Elections were subject to what he called “administrative shortcomings.” Electoral commissions e.g., Ford pointed out, were not always able to prepare and provide election materials in time and the counting of the ballot papers were too slow. These and other administrative shortcomings, Ford recommended, needed to be solved quickly in order to reduce the complexity of future elections in Indonesia.
Furthermore, Ford pointed out, Indonesia’s General Elections were subject to restrictions to vote and to stand for office. Indonesia’s police and the armed forces e.g. were neither allowed to vote nor to present themselves as political candidates. Mr. Ford recommended abolishing this impediment in the future to guarantee the universal right to vote and stand for office.
The General Election’s turnout, Mr. Ford informed the audience, was between 70 and 80% as of April 15. So far, roughly 65% of the votes had been counted, he added.
In order to secure transparency of the elections, the KPU publishes (and constantly updates) the results of the ballot counting of all polling stations, Mr. Ford said.
Local NGOs and election observer groups, Ford reported, initially accused the EU’s election observation mission of being a “tool of EU business interests”. However, Mr. Ford pointed out, their final conclusions that the elections were free and fair did not differ from the assessment made by the EU’s election observation mission.
The mission, Mr. Ford said, had no interest in the outcome of the General Elections but was solely dispatched to monitor the election’s process. No EU election observers, Mr. Ford said, were dispatched to Aceh, Indonesia’s province subject to martial law.
Provisional vote count from the General Elections Commission (KPU) as of 9:00 p.m. on Friday April 19 was as follows: The Golkar Party 21.10%, The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) 19.49%, The National Awakening Party (PKB) 11.92%, The United Development Party (PPP) 8.33%, The Democratic Party (PD) 7.53%, The Prosperous Justice Party (PKS)7.17%, The National Mandate Party (PAN) 6.48%, The Crescent Star Party (PBB) 2.57%, The Reform Star Party (PBR) 2.30% ,The Concern for the Nation Functional Party (PKPB) 2.13%.
Mr. Ford will return to Indonesia in July to head the monitoring process of Indonesia’s presidential elections.
The lunch briefing was chaired by Mr. Dick Gupwell, Secretary-General of the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Photos of the Event
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Speaker: Mr. Glyn Ford MEP,
EU Chief Observer of the Election Observation Mission to Indonesia
The EU Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) in Indonesia followed an invitation from the National Election Commission of Indonesia (KPU) of 8 January 2004 in order to observe the General Elections (multi-level local and parliamentary elections) scheduled for 5 April 2004 and the Presidential Elections scheduled for 5 July 2004. The election administration body KPU (short for Komisi Pemilihan Umum) is Indonesia’s permanent and independent election commission.
Indonesia’s General Elections were held under a new legal framework with more than 140 million eligible voters.
The EU EOM is led by Chief Observer Mr. Glyn Ford MEP (UK) and the mission consists of a 13-person core team, 64 long-term observers (LTOs), 128 short-term observers (STOs) and 20 locally-recruited short-term observers (LSTOs) (diplomatic staff of the EU member states).
In total, 231 EU observers monitored Indonesia’s General Elections.
That, as Mr. Ford pointed out during his presentation at the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS), made the EU’s election observer mission by far the largest international elections observer mission in Indonesia. The EU, Ford said, has deployed more election observers to Indonesia than all other international observer missions combined.
One part of the mission, Ford explained, was devoted to monitoring the media coverage of the elections. Amongst others, EU EOM election observers assessed whether political parties and their candidates gained fair and sufficient access to the media and whether it was possible for the public to obtain sufficient information on candidates and parties through the media.
Based on the EU’s election observation mission’s assessment, Mr. Ford concluded that this was the case adding that Indonesia’s media in its coverage on the elections did not favour any particular political party or candidates.
All political parties, including Golkar, he added, appeared to have been able to campaign freely and without restrictions.
Mr. Ford pointed out that Indonesia’s General Elections distinguished themselves above all by their complexity, the vast number of ballot papers (600 million), political candidates (450.000) and polling stations (more than 560.000).
The General Elections, Ford maintained, were further complicated by the fact that voters were both asked to vote for a candidate and a party on the same ballot paper.
The ballot papers, Ford explained, became invalid if the elector voted for a party and a candidate from a different party. Ballot papers became also invalid if the voter voted for a candidate without voting for a party on the same ballot paper.
However, Ford said, more than 60% of the ballot papers turned out to be valid as of April 15.
Mr. Ford concluded that Indonesia’s multi-level General Elections that took place on a national, provincial, regency/city, subdistrict and village level were transparent and democratic. The EU’s observer mission monitored 1.244 polling stations (out of a total of 565.000) and did not detect irregularities with regards to the conduct and count of the poll.
However, Ford pointed out, Indonesia’s General Elections were subject to what he called “administrative shortcomings.” Electoral commissions e.g., Ford pointed out, were not always able to prepare and provide election materials in time and the counting of the ballot papers were too slow. These and other administrative shortcomings, Ford recommended, needed to be solved quickly in order to reduce the complexity of future elections in Indonesia.
Furthermore, Ford pointed out, Indonesia’s General Elections were subject to restrictions to vote and to stand for office. Indonesia’s police and the armed forces e.g. were neither allowed to vote nor to present themselves as political candidates. Mr. Ford recommended abolishing this impediment in the future to guarantee the universal right to vote and stand for office.
The General Election’s turnout, Mr. Ford informed the audience, was between 70 and 80% as of April 15. So far, roughly 65% of the votes had been counted, he added.
In order to secure transparency of the elections, the KPU publishes (and constantly updates) the results of the ballot counting of all polling stations, Mr. Ford said.
Local NGOs and election observer groups, Ford reported, initially accused the EU’s election observation mission of being a “tool of EU business interests”. However, Mr. Ford pointed out, their final conclusions that the elections were free and fair did not differ from the assessment made by the EU’s election observation mission.
The mission, Mr. Ford said, had no interest in the outcome of the General Elections but was solely dispatched to monitor the election’s process. No EU election observers, Mr. Ford said, were dispatched to Aceh, Indonesia’s province subject to martial law.
Provisional vote count from the General Elections Commission (KPU) as of 9:00 p.m. on Friday April 19 was as follows: The Golkar Party 21.10%, The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) 19.49%, The National Awakening Party (PKB) 11.92%, The United Development Party (PPP) 8.33%, The Democratic Party (PD) 7.53%, The Prosperous Justice Party (PKS)7.17%, The National Mandate Party (PAN) 6.48%, The Crescent Star Party (PBB) 2.57%, The Reform Star Party (PBR) 2.30% ,The Concern for the Nation Functional Party (PKPB) 2.13%.
Mr. Ford will return to Indonesia in July to head the monitoring process of Indonesia’s presidential elections.
The lunch briefing was chaired by Mr. Dick Gupwell, Secretary-General of the European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Photos of the Event
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels 2, April 2004
Ambassador Charles Kartman, Executive Director of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), presented a stimulating insider’s account on the current state and the future of KEDO.
KEDO was established by the U.S., Japan and South Korea in 1995 to replace North Korea’s nuclear facilities with safe more proliferation-resistant light-water reactors, under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The EU joined KEDO as a member of the Executive Board alongside the three founding members in 1997.
KEDO, however, was forced to review its activities in North Korea late 2002 after it was revealed that North Korea is maintaining a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
North Korea’s alleged nuclear weapons programme was considered to be a serious breach of Pyongyang’s international non-proliferation commitments and the 1994 Agreed Framework, a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and North Korea.
In November 2002, the KEDO Executive Board Meeting decided to suspend heavy fuel oil deliveries as from December 2002 until North Korea takes concrete and credible action to dismantle completely its highly enriched uranium programme. North Korea’s non-compliance with the Agreed Framework, Ambassador Kartman pointed out, led to KEDO’ s “quiet suspension.”
Although KEDO is currently suspended, Kartman pointed out, the project’s activities must not be referred to as “terminated” just yet. However, he indicated, it remains unclear whether KEDO will continue the construction of the light-water reactors any time soon.
Ambassador Kartman who is recognized for his expertise on Northeast Asia, having earlier specialized on Japanese affairs, working as a political officer in the Embassy in Tokyo, Consul General in Sapporo, and twice in the office of Japanese Affairs at the Department of State, complemented his presentation with a detailed analysis of U.S.-North Korea relations throughout the 1990s.
Kartman’s interesting insight into U.S. policy towards North Korea over the last decade not only helped to understand the causes of the current nuclear crisis on the Korea Peninsula, but also provided the audience with a sense of KEDO’s value in helping to defuse the crisis.
The outcome of the so-called six-party talks (a multilateral forum with the participation of U.S., Japan, South Korea, China, Russia and North Korea) dealing with the current crisis on the Korean Peninsula, Kartman pointed out, is likely to have an impact on the future of KEDO. However, he cautioned, it is still too early to assess whether the results of multilateral negotiations with North Korea will support the resumption of KEDO’s activities.
Only the complete and verifiable dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme, Kartman indicated, will enable KEDO to restart heavy fuel deliveries and construction of the light-water reactors.
Ambassador Kartman’s presentation was followed by a Q&A session during which he took questions from the audience.
The meeting was chaired by EIAS Director Dr. Willem van der Geest while Dr. Axel Berkofsky Research Fellow at EIAS acted as discussant.
Photos of the Event
Ambassador Charles Kartman, Executive Director of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), presented a stimulating insider’s account on the current state and the future of KEDO.
KEDO was established by the U.S., Japan and South Korea in 1995 to replace North Korea’s nuclear facilities with safe more proliferation-resistant light-water reactors, under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The EU joined KEDO as a member of the Executive Board alongside the three founding members in 1997.
KEDO, however, was forced to review its activities in North Korea late 2002 after it was revealed that North Korea is maintaining a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.
North Korea’s alleged nuclear weapons programme was considered to be a serious breach of Pyongyang’s international non-proliferation commitments and the 1994 Agreed Framework, a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and North Korea.
In November 2002, the KEDO Executive Board Meeting decided to suspend heavy fuel oil deliveries as from December 2002 until North Korea takes concrete and credible action to dismantle completely its highly enriched uranium programme. North Korea’s non-compliance with the Agreed Framework, Ambassador Kartman pointed out, led to KEDO’ s “quiet suspension.”
Although KEDO is currently suspended, Kartman pointed out, the project’s activities must not be referred to as “terminated” just yet. However, he indicated, it remains unclear whether KEDO will continue the construction of the light-water reactors any time soon.
Ambassador Kartman who is recognized for his expertise on Northeast Asia, having earlier specialized on Japanese affairs, working as a political officer in the Embassy in Tokyo, Consul General in Sapporo, and twice in the office of Japanese Affairs at the Department of State, complemented his presentation with a detailed analysis of U.S.-North Korea relations throughout the 1990s.
Kartman’s interesting insight into U.S. policy towards North Korea over the last decade not only helped to understand the causes of the current nuclear crisis on the Korea Peninsula, but also provided the audience with a sense of KEDO’s value in helping to defuse the crisis.
The outcome of the so-called six-party talks (a multilateral forum with the participation of U.S., Japan, South Korea, China, Russia and North Korea) dealing with the current crisis on the Korean Peninsula, Kartman pointed out, is likely to have an impact on the future of KEDO. However, he cautioned, it is still too early to assess whether the results of multilateral negotiations with North Korea will support the resumption of KEDO’s activities.
Only the complete and verifiable dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme, Kartman indicated, will enable KEDO to restart heavy fuel deliveries and construction of the light-water reactors.
Ambassador Kartman’s presentation was followed by a Q&A session during which he took questions from the audience.
The meeting was chaired by EIAS Director Dr. Willem van der Geest while Dr. Axel Berkofsky Research Fellow at EIAS acted as discussant.
Photos of the Event
EIAS Luncheon Briefing: India's National Security under the BJP/NDA Governments: "Strong at Home, Engaged Abroad"
18 March 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Dr Apurba Kundu, EIAS Senior Research Fellow, will examine the BJP’s initial strategic vision of a strong India, and show how this led to the country becoming an overt nuclear weapons state in 1998. However, argues Dr Kundu, the 1999 Kargil Conflict and the 2002 near-war situation with Pakistan caused the BJP-led NDA administration to reposition its national security strategy as one of “strong at home, engaged abroad”.
Download the Invitation (pdf)
Photo's of the Event
Dr Apurba Kundu, EIAS Senior Research Fellow, will examine the BJP’s initial strategic vision of a strong India, and show how this led to the country becoming an overt nuclear weapons state in 1998. However, argues Dr Kundu, the 1999 Kargil Conflict and the 2002 near-war situation with Pakistan caused the BJP-led NDA administration to reposition its national security strategy as one of “strong at home, engaged abroad”.
Download the Invitation (pdf)
Photo's of the Event
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS) 12 March 2004
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
The SAARC Summit in Islamabad in January and the promise of bilateral discussions between Pakistan and India in February have raised hopes for a peaceful solution in Kashmir. How real are the prospects for a lasting settlement?
This question will be examined by Dr Robert W. Bradnock, Senior Lecturer in Geography at King’s College, University of London, and widely published author of numerous books and articles on the political geography of South Asia.
About Dr Robert W. Bradnock:
Dr Bradnock is currently Senior Lecturer in Geography at King’s College, University of London.
Born in 1943 in Palwal, North India, Robert Bradnock took his degree in Geography at Cambridge, joined the staff of the School of Oriental and African Studies in 1968 as a Lecturer in Geography with special reference to South Asia, and moved to King’s College in 2001.
Dr. Bradnock is currently completing a book on the Political Geography of South Asia. His published work includes the books South Asia in a Globalising World, London, Pearson/DARG (edited with G. O. Williams); India's Foreign Policy since 1971, (Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House,1990), and Political Geography; a study guide (The University of London),
He has also published papers on various aspects of geopolitics and development, including regional co-operation in South Asia, the geopolitics of the Kashmir dispute, and the geopolitics of environmental change in South Asia. The most recent, written with Stephen Brichieri-Colombi, was Geopolitics, water and development in South Asia: cooperative development in the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta, Geographical Journal March 2003.
His interests in South Asia have enabled him to travel frequently and extensively throughout the countries of the region. He has recently visited both Pakistan and India in connection with a study of South Asian security, Kashmir and the nuclear issue. He has lived several years in India and has held a British Council visiting lectureship in Bangladesh.
His current research focuses on the political geography of South Asia, with special reference to environmental change and the geopolitics of the South Asian countries. Dr Bradnock broadcasts regularly on the BBC, as well as on American and European radio and TV networks, covering South Asian current affairs. He lectures widely in Britain and continental Europe.
Photos of the Event
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
The SAARC Summit in Islamabad in January and the promise of bilateral discussions between Pakistan and India in February have raised hopes for a peaceful solution in Kashmir. How real are the prospects for a lasting settlement?
This question will be examined by Dr Robert W. Bradnock, Senior Lecturer in Geography at King’s College, University of London, and widely published author of numerous books and articles on the political geography of South Asia.
About Dr Robert W. Bradnock:
Dr Bradnock is currently Senior Lecturer in Geography at King’s College, University of London.
Born in 1943 in Palwal, North India, Robert Bradnock took his degree in Geography at Cambridge, joined the staff of the School of Oriental and African Studies in 1968 as a Lecturer in Geography with special reference to South Asia, and moved to King’s College in 2001.
Dr. Bradnock is currently completing a book on the Political Geography of South Asia. His published work includes the books South Asia in a Globalising World, London, Pearson/DARG (edited with G. O. Williams); India's Foreign Policy since 1971, (Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House,1990), and Political Geography; a study guide (The University of London),
He has also published papers on various aspects of geopolitics and development, including regional co-operation in South Asia, the geopolitics of the Kashmir dispute, and the geopolitics of environmental change in South Asia. The most recent, written with Stephen Brichieri-Colombi, was Geopolitics, water and development in South Asia: cooperative development in the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta, Geographical Journal March 2003.
His interests in South Asia have enabled him to travel frequently and extensively throughout the countries of the region. He has recently visited both Pakistan and India in connection with a study of South Asian security, Kashmir and the nuclear issue. He has lived several years in India and has held a British Council visiting lectureship in Bangladesh.
His current research focuses on the political geography of South Asia, with special reference to environmental change and the geopolitics of the South Asian countries. Dr Bradnock broadcasts regularly on the BBC, as well as on American and European radio and TV networks, covering South Asian current affairs. He lectures widely in Britain and continental Europe.
Photos of the Event
EIAS Research Agenda Presentation: Troop deployment to Iraq: Is Japan really changing the fundamentals of its defence and security policy?
A presentation by Dr Axel Berkofsky, EIAS Research Fellow at the "Reforming Japan: Has the Corner been finally turned?" conference organised by the Asia Programme, the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) and the Keizai Koho Center Tokyo, and held on 25 February 2004 at Chatham House, London.
A presentation by Dr Apurba Kundu, EIAS Senior Research Fellow, at the "Coalition Politics and Hindu Nationalism" conference held from 21-22 February 2004 at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, London.
Brief Summary
Since independence in 1947, the Indian armed forces have been involved in any number of challenges to India’s national security. Domestically, these have included the (sometimes forcible) incorporation of the Princely States, left-wing terrorism in Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal, armed insurrections in Assam and the Northeast, Punjab and Kashmir. International challenges to national security have led to armed conflicts with Portugal (over Goa), China (over Ladakh and the Northeast frontier area), and Pakistan (over Bangladesh and Kashmir).
The Indian armed forces also have sent an Indian Peace-keeping Force to Sri Lanka, prevented the overthrow of the government of the Maldives, and participated in almost 40 United Nations (UN) peacekeeping activities throughout the world. Given the ongoing (threat of) violence in the Northeast and Kashmir, and disputed national borders on its north and west, the Indian armed forces will continue to serve as crucial guarantors and defenders of the country’s national security.
Despite the numerous domestic and international challenges to India’s security, successive national administrations have given little serious attention to military matters, especially in terms of the strategic role of the armed forces as a tool of government. With few exceptions, decisions dealing with challenges to national security have been reactive, tactical, and/or confined to the prime minister and an informal coterie of advisors rather than proactive, strategic and/or the result of a formal consultative process within the governing party, the armed forces and non-governmental experts.
In a marked departure from previous national governments, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has sought to address national security issues both proactively and strategically in line with its philosophy of achieving a strong India. This presentation begins by examining the strategic vision, such as it is, of the BJP. It then shows how this led to the extraordinary security decision to become an overt nuclear weapons state in 1998, and how this status affected India’s response to the armed challenge in Kargil in 1999 faced by the BJP-led coalition which immediately preceded the NDA government.
This is followed by an examination of the NDA’s national security as outlined in the seminal Reforming the National Security System: Recommendations of the Group of Ministers of 2001, before describing the near-war situation which developed between India and Pakistan in the spring-summer of 2002.
The presentation finishes with a conceptualisation of NDA national security policy as “strong at home, engaged abroad” as evidenced by defence spending on external and internal security, the military’s deployment on peacekeeping duties, and defence cooperation with other countries. In simple terms of law-and-order, to be strong at home is primarily a function of the local, state and central para-military forces (CPFs); at least when the outstanding issue of securing the Kashmir border is settled. As Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, this issue cannot be resolved by force alone.
Thus, ensuring the internal security of India is best served by normalising relations with Pakistan. For the NDA, the best means of doing this is by using the economic self-interest of both countries to propel a slow but steady progression of normalisation, including the opening of transport links, sporting exchanges and people-to-people contact.
Given the unusual but obvious personal chemistry of Indian Prime Minister Atul Behari Vajpayee and Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf, the growing realisation of the populations on both sides that the threat and use of violence has for too long held back the economic development of South Asia as a whole and their countries in particular, and the crowding out of the BJP’s hindutva ideology by promises of “bijli, sadak, pani” (electricity, roads, water), there may never be a better time for trying to peacefully resolve the differences between India and Pakistan. Then again, Musharraf has recently survived two attempts on his life, and Vajpayee is advanced in years. Will Indo-Pakistan rapprochement survive their passing?
In today’s world, to be engaged abroad is primarily a function of the economic, technological and moral strength of a nation. Certainly, the growing success of economic liberalisation measures introduced almost fifteen years ago is finally appearing to push India up the global radar, and “make trade, not war” may be the best way to describe the NDA’s efforts to open up trade with the hitherto relatively untapped markets of China and the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Association (ASEAN). After decades of lobbying, the NDA has also seen fit to tap into the pent-up nationalism of non-resident Indian (NRIs) and people of Indian origin (PIOs) by passing the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill to facilitate the reacquisition of Indian citizenship by children of Indian citizens and former Indian citizens belonging to 16 specified countries.
While concentrating on the more traditional military aspect of national security means this presentation cannot fully judge whether “strong at home, engaged abroad” has made India more secure under the NDA, it can offer some indications as to how defence-related decisions have impacted/will impact the country’s safety as a whole. The most momentous defence decision made in recent years was not to overtly demonstrate the country’s nuclear weapons capabilities in 1998, but to refrain from using them during the Kargil Conflict in 1999 and the build-up of armies along the Indo-Pakistan border in 2002.
For, while the first decision brought down global opprobrium and economic sanctions upon India, and caused Pakistan to become the seventh declared nuclear weapons state, it did little to change the nuclear war-fighting doctrine of either country. Indian strategists had always envisaged an Indian nuclear bomb as a defensive weapon only; similarly their Pakistani counterparts always saw their bomb as a means of negating India’s superiority in conventional arms in the event of a war which threatened…threatened what exactly?
The answer to the above question is why the latter decisions—refraining from using nuclear weapons during the 1999 Kargil Conflict and the 2002 border build-up—are more important than the 1998 nuclear tests themselves, for they taught Indian and Pakistan leaders the rudiments of fighting a war when both sides have the power to inflict unprecedented horrors on their enemy. In the Kargil example, the Indian leadership learned that if they could fight a relatively high-intensity but geographically limited war, nuclear weapons need not enter into the equation.
While this prudence, in terms of resisting attacking supply lines and bases across the Line-of-Control (LoC), cost additional hundreds of military lives, it prevented an escalation which, if it had resulted in a nuclear response, would have killed many millions of Indian civilians. Pakistan, on the other hand, seemed to learn very little; once again their strategic planning in terms of calculating the probable outcome(s) of their actions was abysmal, once again, they found themselves reacting to Indian moves rather than controlling them.
The 2002 border build-up taught different lessons. The Pakistan defence decision-making hierarchy, now under the direct control of Musharraf, the architect of the Kargil misadventure, was once again reacting to rather than controlling events and, as such, was predicating its responses wholly on decisions made by the Indian leadership. Now that the burden of escalation rested with itself only, the NDA administration forwent the muscular response of war many were advocating as a suitable response to the unprecedented attack on the Lok Sabha and other bloody provocations.
Instead, they decided that as the chance of nuclear war, however remote, could not be discounted as an option which might exercised by the Pakistani leadership—under just what circumstances the Indians still could not predict with any certainty—the best option available was to use international pressure to wring promises of concessions from Musharraf regarding securing the LoC from infiltration. It seemed little reward for so much effort in the face of so much provocation. Yet, the lessons learned were vital:
Force as a means of settling national disputes between South Asian states—at least between those equipped with nuclear weapons—was finished.
India could not take its rightful place in the world if relations with Pakistan continued to fester.
From these lessons came the NDA’s current focus on economic, technological and diplomatic engagement with the world.
Download the Conference Programme (pdf)
Brief Summary
Since independence in 1947, the Indian armed forces have been involved in any number of challenges to India’s national security. Domestically, these have included the (sometimes forcible) incorporation of the Princely States, left-wing terrorism in Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal, armed insurrections in Assam and the Northeast, Punjab and Kashmir. International challenges to national security have led to armed conflicts with Portugal (over Goa), China (over Ladakh and the Northeast frontier area), and Pakistan (over Bangladesh and Kashmir).
The Indian armed forces also have sent an Indian Peace-keeping Force to Sri Lanka, prevented the overthrow of the government of the Maldives, and participated in almost 40 United Nations (UN) peacekeeping activities throughout the world. Given the ongoing (threat of) violence in the Northeast and Kashmir, and disputed national borders on its north and west, the Indian armed forces will continue to serve as crucial guarantors and defenders of the country’s national security.
Despite the numerous domestic and international challenges to India’s security, successive national administrations have given little serious attention to military matters, especially in terms of the strategic role of the armed forces as a tool of government. With few exceptions, decisions dealing with challenges to national security have been reactive, tactical, and/or confined to the prime minister and an informal coterie of advisors rather than proactive, strategic and/or the result of a formal consultative process within the governing party, the armed forces and non-governmental experts.
In a marked departure from previous national governments, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has sought to address national security issues both proactively and strategically in line with its philosophy of achieving a strong India. This presentation begins by examining the strategic vision, such as it is, of the BJP. It then shows how this led to the extraordinary security decision to become an overt nuclear weapons state in 1998, and how this status affected India’s response to the armed challenge in Kargil in 1999 faced by the BJP-led coalition which immediately preceded the NDA government.
This is followed by an examination of the NDA’s national security as outlined in the seminal Reforming the National Security System: Recommendations of the Group of Ministers of 2001, before describing the near-war situation which developed between India and Pakistan in the spring-summer of 2002.
The presentation finishes with a conceptualisation of NDA national security policy as “strong at home, engaged abroad” as evidenced by defence spending on external and internal security, the military’s deployment on peacekeeping duties, and defence cooperation with other countries. In simple terms of law-and-order, to be strong at home is primarily a function of the local, state and central para-military forces (CPFs); at least when the outstanding issue of securing the Kashmir border is settled. As Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, this issue cannot be resolved by force alone.
Thus, ensuring the internal security of India is best served by normalising relations with Pakistan. For the NDA, the best means of doing this is by using the economic self-interest of both countries to propel a slow but steady progression of normalisation, including the opening of transport links, sporting exchanges and people-to-people contact.
Given the unusual but obvious personal chemistry of Indian Prime Minister Atul Behari Vajpayee and Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf, the growing realisation of the populations on both sides that the threat and use of violence has for too long held back the economic development of South Asia as a whole and their countries in particular, and the crowding out of the BJP’s hindutva ideology by promises of “bijli, sadak, pani” (electricity, roads, water), there may never be a better time for trying to peacefully resolve the differences between India and Pakistan. Then again, Musharraf has recently survived two attempts on his life, and Vajpayee is advanced in years. Will Indo-Pakistan rapprochement survive their passing?
In today’s world, to be engaged abroad is primarily a function of the economic, technological and moral strength of a nation. Certainly, the growing success of economic liberalisation measures introduced almost fifteen years ago is finally appearing to push India up the global radar, and “make trade, not war” may be the best way to describe the NDA’s efforts to open up trade with the hitherto relatively untapped markets of China and the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Association (ASEAN). After decades of lobbying, the NDA has also seen fit to tap into the pent-up nationalism of non-resident Indian (NRIs) and people of Indian origin (PIOs) by passing the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill to facilitate the reacquisition of Indian citizenship by children of Indian citizens and former Indian citizens belonging to 16 specified countries.
While concentrating on the more traditional military aspect of national security means this presentation cannot fully judge whether “strong at home, engaged abroad” has made India more secure under the NDA, it can offer some indications as to how defence-related decisions have impacted/will impact the country’s safety as a whole. The most momentous defence decision made in recent years was not to overtly demonstrate the country’s nuclear weapons capabilities in 1998, but to refrain from using them during the Kargil Conflict in 1999 and the build-up of armies along the Indo-Pakistan border in 2002.
For, while the first decision brought down global opprobrium and economic sanctions upon India, and caused Pakistan to become the seventh declared nuclear weapons state, it did little to change the nuclear war-fighting doctrine of either country. Indian strategists had always envisaged an Indian nuclear bomb as a defensive weapon only; similarly their Pakistani counterparts always saw their bomb as a means of negating India’s superiority in conventional arms in the event of a war which threatened…threatened what exactly?
The answer to the above question is why the latter decisions—refraining from using nuclear weapons during the 1999 Kargil Conflict and the 2002 border build-up—are more important than the 1998 nuclear tests themselves, for they taught Indian and Pakistan leaders the rudiments of fighting a war when both sides have the power to inflict unprecedented horrors on their enemy. In the Kargil example, the Indian leadership learned that if they could fight a relatively high-intensity but geographically limited war, nuclear weapons need not enter into the equation.
While this prudence, in terms of resisting attacking supply lines and bases across the Line-of-Control (LoC), cost additional hundreds of military lives, it prevented an escalation which, if it had resulted in a nuclear response, would have killed many millions of Indian civilians. Pakistan, on the other hand, seemed to learn very little; once again their strategic planning in terms of calculating the probable outcome(s) of their actions was abysmal, once again, they found themselves reacting to Indian moves rather than controlling them.
The 2002 border build-up taught different lessons. The Pakistan defence decision-making hierarchy, now under the direct control of Musharraf, the architect of the Kargil misadventure, was once again reacting to rather than controlling events and, as such, was predicating its responses wholly on decisions made by the Indian leadership. Now that the burden of escalation rested with itself only, the NDA administration forwent the muscular response of war many were advocating as a suitable response to the unprecedented attack on the Lok Sabha and other bloody provocations.
Instead, they decided that as the chance of nuclear war, however remote, could not be discounted as an option which might exercised by the Pakistani leadership—under just what circumstances the Indians still could not predict with any certainty—the best option available was to use international pressure to wring promises of concessions from Musharraf regarding securing the LoC from infiltration. It seemed little reward for so much effort in the face of so much provocation. Yet, the lessons learned were vital:
Force as a means of settling national disputes between South Asian states—at least between those equipped with nuclear weapons—was finished.
India could not take its rightful place in the world if relations with Pakistan continued to fester.
From these lessons came the NDA’s current focus on economic, technological and diplomatic engagement with the world.
Download the Conference Programme (pdf)
EIAS Research Agenda Presentation: An EU-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement: Sharing Benefits of Globalisation?
Dr Willem van der Geest
This presentation was made at the Ninth ASEF University Session in Manila, February 4-8, 2004
In the aftermath of the stalled launch of a new WTO round of global trade talks (December 1999), Singapore and Japan initiated a joint study into the feasibility and desirability of a possible bilateral Free Trade Agreement. The subsequent negotiations led to a 'New-Age Economic Partnership Agreement' signed in January 2002, reducing barriers in trade and investment in goods as well as services, technical standards and public procurement.
New initiatives for economic cooperation in, inter alia, human resource development, science and technology and SMEs were agreed. During 2000 talks had also began between Singapore and the United States and these are resulting in a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA).
Responding to these developments, several other ASEAN countries initiated negotiations towards bilateral FTAs with other major players, most notably Thailand (with India) as well as Malaysia (with Japan and others). Moreover, China stated its intention to enter into a Free Trade Agreement with the ASEAN by 2012.
It is against this background of deepening of trade and investment links between the several ASEAN Member States (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand) and several major players that the question of a possible EU-ASEAN FTA is investigated.
The stalling of the multi-lateral trade talks in Cancun in September 2003, implying that the Doha Development Agenda process will not be able to reach agreement within the time-frame set, also provides a new argument for assessing the scope for an inter-regional free trade agreement between EU and ASEAN.
This lecture note addresses the possible opportunities and risks to the European Union of entering into negotiations with ASEAN Member States with a view to realising a bilateral EU-Singapore FTA.
It assesses the pre-feasibility of such a course of action, while noting a number of questions which deserve further policy discussion as well as economic and statistical analysis. At this stage a simple 'for or against' evaluation will be premature, in view of the multitude of scenarios at both the bilateral and multilateral levels.
Full Presentation: An EU-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement?" by Dr Willem van der Geest
This presentation was made at the Ninth ASEF University Session in Manila, February 4-8, 2004
In the aftermath of the stalled launch of a new WTO round of global trade talks (December 1999), Singapore and Japan initiated a joint study into the feasibility and desirability of a possible bilateral Free Trade Agreement. The subsequent negotiations led to a 'New-Age Economic Partnership Agreement' signed in January 2002, reducing barriers in trade and investment in goods as well as services, technical standards and public procurement.
New initiatives for economic cooperation in, inter alia, human resource development, science and technology and SMEs were agreed. During 2000 talks had also began between Singapore and the United States and these are resulting in a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA).
Responding to these developments, several other ASEAN countries initiated negotiations towards bilateral FTAs with other major players, most notably Thailand (with India) as well as Malaysia (with Japan and others). Moreover, China stated its intention to enter into a Free Trade Agreement with the ASEAN by 2012.
It is against this background of deepening of trade and investment links between the several ASEAN Member States (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand) and several major players that the question of a possible EU-ASEAN FTA is investigated.
The stalling of the multi-lateral trade talks in Cancun in September 2003, implying that the Doha Development Agenda process will not be able to reach agreement within the time-frame set, also provides a new argument for assessing the scope for an inter-regional free trade agreement between EU and ASEAN.
This lecture note addresses the possible opportunities and risks to the European Union of entering into negotiations with ASEAN Member States with a view to realising a bilateral EU-Singapore FTA.
It assesses the pre-feasibility of such a course of action, while noting a number of questions which deserve further policy discussion as well as economic and statistical analysis. At this stage a simple 'for or against' evaluation will be premature, in view of the multitude of scenarios at both the bilateral and multilateral levels.
Full Presentation: An EU-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement?" by Dr Willem van der Geest
22 January 2004, EIAS, Brussels
Guest Speaker:
H.E. Mr. Tariq Fatemi, Ambassador of Pakistan to the European Union, with contributions by H.E. Mr. P.K. Singh, Ambassador of India to the EU, H.E. Mr. Maudud Ali, Ambassador of Bangladesh to the EU, H.E. Mr. Narayan S. Thapa, Ambassador of Nepal to the EU, and H.E. Mr. C.R. Jayasinghe, Ambassador of Sri Lanka to the EU.
H.E. Mr. Tariq Fatemi, Ambassador of Pakistan to the European Union, will speak on behalf of Pakistan as the host country of the SAARC Summit and presently holding the Chairmanship of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). All the SAARC Ambassadors to the EU in Brussels have kindly agreed to assist at the meeting and participate in the Q&A which will follow Ambassador Fatemi's introduction and assessment of the outcomes and implications of the Summit.
Opening Speech by H.E. Mr Tariq Fatemi
Comments by SAARC Ambassadors
Question and Answer Session
Photos of the Event
Guest Speaker:
H.E. Mr. Tariq Fatemi, Ambassador of Pakistan to the European Union, with contributions by H.E. Mr. P.K. Singh, Ambassador of India to the EU, H.E. Mr. Maudud Ali, Ambassador of Bangladesh to the EU, H.E. Mr. Narayan S. Thapa, Ambassador of Nepal to the EU, and H.E. Mr. C.R. Jayasinghe, Ambassador of Sri Lanka to the EU.
H.E. Mr. Tariq Fatemi, Ambassador of Pakistan to the European Union, will speak on behalf of Pakistan as the host country of the SAARC Summit and presently holding the Chairmanship of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). All the SAARC Ambassadors to the EU in Brussels have kindly agreed to assist at the meeting and participate in the Q&A which will follow Ambassador Fatemi's introduction and assessment of the outcomes and implications of the Summit.
Opening Speech by H.E. Mr Tariq Fatemi
Comments by SAARC Ambassadors
Question and Answer Session
Photos of the Event
Friday, 20 January 2004 12.30-14.30
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
(Metro: Arts-Loi/Kunst-Wet)
Guest Speaker: Mr. Muktar Jumaliev
First Deputy Minister for Foreign Trade of the Kyrgyz Republic, Bishkek
In December 1998, Kyrgyzstan became the first country among the former Republics of the Soviet Union to join the WTO. It still remains the only Central Asian WTO Member State, and faces strong protection measures in trade with its neighbouring countries.
Central Asia's integration into the multilateral trade system is of utmost importance for Kyrgyzstan, which has put considerable efforts into the trade liberalisation of the region. However, an efficient mechanism for dispute settlement still remains to be developed for the region.
Mr Jumaliev is the First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of External Trade and Industry of the Kyrgyz Republic. Mr Jumaliev is in charge of the multilateral and bilateral trade negotiation within the WTO as well as developing foreign trade and promoting exports.
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
(Metro: Arts-Loi/Kunst-Wet)
Guest Speaker: Mr. Muktar Jumaliev
First Deputy Minister for Foreign Trade of the Kyrgyz Republic, Bishkek
In December 1998, Kyrgyzstan became the first country among the former Republics of the Soviet Union to join the WTO. It still remains the only Central Asian WTO Member State, and faces strong protection measures in trade with its neighbouring countries.
Central Asia's integration into the multilateral trade system is of utmost importance for Kyrgyzstan, which has put considerable efforts into the trade liberalisation of the region. However, an efficient mechanism for dispute settlement still remains to be developed for the region.
Mr Jumaliev is the First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of External Trade and Industry of the Kyrgyz Republic. Mr Jumaliev is in charge of the multilateral and bilateral trade negotiation within the WTO as well as developing foreign trade and promoting exports.
Friday, 16 January 2004 from 12.30-14.30
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
(Metro: Arts-Loi/Kunst-Wet)
Guest Speaker: Prof Chang Hsu-Cheng
Member, Legislative Yuan Taiwan and Presidential Advisor
Last December the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan passed a controversial referendum law. The referendum is expected to be called at the same time as the forthcoming Presidential elections on March 20th 2004.
It will focus on the threat that Taiwan faces from missiles on the Chinese mainland, calling for their removal. The referendum law has increased tensions across the Straits between China and Taiwan.
Professor Chang Hsu-Cheng will lead a delegation from Taiwan to visit the Belgian Senate, offering a perspective on the recent political developments in China-Taiwan relations. The delegation will discuss the motives for the recent vote in the Legislative Yuan.
Professor Chang Hsu-Cheng is an Abroad Member of the Legislative Yuan and Advisor to the Democratic Progressive Party. He has been a Professor of Political Science at Pennsylvania State University since 1970 and was honoured with the 1992 Asian-American Award for Outstanding Professional Achievement.
Photos of the Event
European Institute for Asian Studies (EIAS)
Rue des Deux Eglises 35, B-1000 Brussels
(Metro: Arts-Loi/Kunst-Wet)
Guest Speaker: Prof Chang Hsu-Cheng
Member, Legislative Yuan Taiwan and Presidential Advisor
Last December the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan passed a controversial referendum law. The referendum is expected to be called at the same time as the forthcoming Presidential elections on March 20th 2004.
It will focus on the threat that Taiwan faces from missiles on the Chinese mainland, calling for their removal. The referendum law has increased tensions across the Straits between China and Taiwan.
Professor Chang Hsu-Cheng will lead a delegation from Taiwan to visit the Belgian Senate, offering a perspective on the recent political developments in China-Taiwan relations. The delegation will discuss the motives for the recent vote in the Legislative Yuan.
Professor Chang Hsu-Cheng is an Abroad Member of the Legislative Yuan and Advisor to the Democratic Progressive Party. He has been a Professor of Political Science at Pennsylvania State University since 1970 and was honoured with the 1992 Asian-American Award for Outstanding Professional Achievement.
Photos of the Event
