-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! The Role of Regional Armed Forces Because no all-embracing set of principles for security policies will provide clear guides for action by all concerned nations in every circumstance, future security arrangements in the Asia-Pacific region will need to be adaptable. Groups of nations will want to act when their interests are engaged—as they always have. Authority for military enforcement should normally come from the UN, although occasions may arise where nations of the region may seek logistic and other help from their neighbors to deal with communal violence It would be preferable to promote ‘security communities.’ and transnational threats. Although individual countries will not agree with all actions by other groups of nations, the cumulative effect over time of these actions will promote norms of international behavior based upon principles of nonaggression and respect for human dignity. Much of this process of developing shared expectations of peaceful change is the business of policy and diplomacy, but it has a significant mili-tary component. The armed forces of the region tend to harbor unwarranted fears of neighbors and regional powers. Regional security would be improved if the armed forces of the region tailored military capabilities and plans and conducted unilateral exercises in ways that increased transparency and warning times, raised thresholds for military action, and supported peaceful solutions over time. Military dialogue and rudimentary exercises on common tasks such as search-and-rescue operations promote under-standing and build confidence. The United States conducts peacekeeping exercises with Russia and search-and-rescue exercises with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Re-gion that includes Chinese participation. Ja-pan also conducts naval search-and-rescue exercises with Russia, and, recently, Japan and South Korea combined naval forces to provide humanitarian assistance. Japan and other regional maritime forces are cooperat-ing to improve submarine rescue capabilities that would provide a more rapid response to submarine tragedies such as one that Russia recently experienced. The information sharing and proce-dures developed through such interactions prepare armed forces to work side by side when their nations have the political will. Beyond the political challenges, there are many practical challenges to conducting combined military activities. The armed forces of the Asia-Pa-cific region have worked out procedures for bilateral operations but have not framed standardized procedures to serve as a basis for working together in multinational operations. Communications are difficult because equip-ment is not fully interoperable and because of language difficulties; yet, these are challenges that can be surmounted. The developments in East Timor have brought attention to the need for the armed forces of the region to develop capabilities to work side by side in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations. As Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, the United States, and other nations of the region contributed to the international force in East Timor, Security communities will erode zero-sum approaches to regional security. they faced a broad array of questions about how to move and sustain their forces, as well as questions of rules of engagement and operating procedures that they had not previously addressed. Operations in East Timor demonstrated that Japan, South Korea, and China could play a constructive role in Southeast Asia. South Korea provided a battalion of troops for the initial international forces sent to secure peace in East Timor and strengthened their battalion to support the UN Transition Authority. Japan provided C-130 aircraft for transporting humanitarian sup-plies within Indonesia, and China provided policemen to the UN Transition Authority in East Timor. In the future, armed forces from these nations should routinely participate in humanitarian, peacekeeping, and noncombatant evacuation operations with the nations of Southeast Asia. The Role of the United States The armed forces of the United States, in conjunction with allies and other partners in the Asia-Pacific region, have undertaken several initiatives to enhance regional readiness for combined operations. These include expand-ing regional participation in formerly bilateral exercises, improving commu-nications among the armed forces of the region, and focusing foreign assistance on capabilities to contribute to combined humanitarian and peacekeeping operations, in addition to national defense. Initiatives are underway to merge bilateral exercises into regional exercises through linkage and involvement of several participants. In Northeast Asia, efforts to link bilateral search-and-rescue exercises to involve more regional partners are ongoing. This year in Southeast Asia, Singapore will participate in the formerly bilateral Thai-U.S. exercise Cobra Gold, and plans are in place to link U.S. exercises with Thailand, the Philippines, and Singapore next year into an exercise called Team Challenge focused on peace enforcement and humanitarian assistance. Malaysia has expressed an interest in participating in future years, and other nations, including Mongolia, China, Japan, and South Korea, have been invited to send observers. To improve dialogue, the U.S. Pacific Command and component com-mands host many multinational conferences, including an annual confer-ence bringing together the chiefs of defense from the region. The Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies provides a venue for senior mili-tary officers and defense executives to exchange security perspectives dur-ing conferences, one-week senior-executive courses, and 12-week executive courses. A recent conference of communications officers from the region proposed to create a coalition-wide Asia-Pacific area network in which the armed forces can coordinate planning, operations, and routine activities. This re-sulted in the creation of an Asia-Pacific Area Network in which all armed forces with which the United States maintains relations may participate. In the future, increasing liaison-officer participation in headquarters’ staffs, and thus developing the capability to form combined staffs for operations, will also improve communications among the armed forces in the region. Underlying these initiatives is the need for sustained exchanges of officers for military education. The experience of U.S. officers who have attended foreign military colleges provides an unparal-leled understanding of how foreign armed forces see their role and approach opera-tions. Foreign officers who attend U.S. mili-tary colleges develop an understanding of the value of a professional armed force, divorced from politics and subordinate to democratic government authority. They come to appre-ciate that reliance on force rather than po-litical accommodation to resolve internal disputes stokes the fires of rebellion and drives away investment needed for national development. They also acquire a deeper appreciation of U.S. interests in maintaining international security so that all may prosper. The network of contacts they develop with Americans and officers from their region informs dialogue and becomes particularly valuable as they assume leadership roles within their armed forces. Education is a long-term investment. As in Indo-nesia and Pakistan, those who support reform in their armed forces often have attended U.S. military courses. Security partnerships support U.S. interests in sharing responsibilities for international security and ensuring the international legitimacy of military action. U.S. allies and friends should have confidence that they are full part-ners, rather than viewing the United States as “the lone superpower,” acting without consultation, coordination, and appreciation of their views. Consul-tation and coordination in the harried pace of events leading to a crisis are not enough. Instead, they must be developed and honed in the course of routine dialogue and exercises. Success requires a habit of cooperation. Fundamental Reconstruction The fundamental security challenge in the Asia-Pacific region is to trans-form the balance-of-power approach proposed by those who advocate a mul-tipolar global power structure into one that instead aims to produce security U.S. forces in South Korea and Japan do much more than deter North Korean aggression. communities in which disputes are not resolved by threats or the employ-ment of force. The process will be one of building upon bilateral security re-lationships to form a web of regional relationships and capabilities that reinforce security for individual states, discouraging armed aggression as a way of settling disputes, and developing habits of regional military coopera-tion and professional military behavior. The challenge is to nurture a security approach in Asia in which the nations • genuinely do not plan or intend to fight each other; • are willing to put collective efforts into resolving regional points of friction; • are willing to contribute armed forces and other aid to UN-mandated op-erations to support diplomatic solutions; • are willing to contribute to humanitarian operations; and • are willing to plan, train, and exercise their armed forces together to build trust and confidence and capabilities to conduct these kinds of operations. Rivalries and centers of power in Asia do exist. The challenge is to channel the energies of these centers into working together on the problems that af-fect the security and prosperity of all our states and away from intimidation and armed conflict. We cannot be naïve on this score. There is a great deal of historical distrust and antagonism in the region; a natural tendency to look for short-term, unilateral gain; and a concern that compromise and ne-gotiation will be interpreted as weakness. Habits of regional cooperation are only rudimentary. Inaction also poses dangers. Major social and economic changes are under way in China and Indonesia. Japan and India are formulating new approaches to regional security. The Korean Peninsula faces the prospect of major changes. Afghanistan is promoting a militant form of Islam and serves as a training ground for militant groups from Chechnya to the Philippines. Russia eventually will return its attention to its Far East. Unless patterns of security cooperation and combined military activity are established and nourished, there is a danger of unilateral and bilateral actions raising tensions and rival-ries in the region, which could risk conflict and inhibit peaceful development. On the other hand, security communities that share dependable expecta-tions of peaceful change will erode zero-sum approaches to regional security by creating habits of cooperation and demonstrating the benefits of partici-pation. As with our allies, discussions of regional security in the future should be dominated by what we can do together to enhance security rather than what we should not do to each other. If pursued skillfully, efforts to change mindsets in Asia over time will take hold and build durable security that will support prosperity and improve- communities in which disputes are not resolved by threats or the employ-ment of force. The process will be one of building upon bilateral security re-lationships to form a web of regional relationships and capabilities that reinforce security for individual states, discouraging armed aggression as a way of settling disputes, and developing habits of regional military coopera-tion and professional military behavior. The challenge is to nurture a security approach in Asia in which the nations • genuinely do not plan or intend to fight each other; • are willing to put collective efforts into resolving regional points of friction; • are willing to contribute armed forces and other aid to UN-mandated op-erations to support diplomatic solutions; • are willing to contribute to humanitarian operations; and • are willing to plan, train, and exercise their armed forces together to build trust and confidence and capabilities to conduct these kinds of operations. Rivalries and centers of power in Asia do exist. The challenge is to channel the energies of these centers into working together on the problems that af-fect the security and prosperity of all our states and away from intimidation and armed conflict. We cannot be naïve on this score. There is a great deal of historical distrust and antagonism in the region; a natural tendency to look for short-term, unilateral gain; and a concern that compromise and ne-gotiation will be interpreted as weakness. Habits of regional cooperation are only rudimentary. Inaction also poses dangers. Major social and economic changes are under way in China and Indonesia. Japan and India are formulating new approaches to regional security. The Korean Peninsula faces the prospect of major changes. Afghanistan is promoting a militant form of Islam and serves as a training ground for militant groups from Chechnya to the Philippines. Russia eventually will return its attention to its Far East. Unless patterns of security cooperation and combined military activity are established and nourished, there is a danger of unilateral and bilateral actions raising tensions and rival-ries in the region, which could risk conflict and inhibit peaceful development. On the other hand, security communities that share dependable expecta-tions of peaceful change will erode zero-sum approaches to regional security by creating habits of cooperation and demonstrating the benefits of partici-pation. As with our allies, discussions of regional security in the future should be dominated by what we can do together to enhance security rather than what we should not do to each other. If pursued skillfully, efforts to change mindsets in Asia over time will take hold and build durable security that will support prosperity and improve- ments in the Asian standard of living. This is a worthy goal for those who live in, are engaged in, and care about the region. Note 1. E. Adler and M. Barnett, eds., Security Communities (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998); and A. Archarya, “The Association of Southeast Asian Nations: ‘Security Community’ or ‘Defense Community’?” Pacific Affairs (Summer 1991): 159–177. *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER =========CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. =======================================================================Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> =======================================================================To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
