<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:opensearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Recent Posts in 'Arms race in Asia' | sgForums.com</title>
    <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <ttl>60</ttl>
    <atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://politics.sgforums.com/open_search.xml"/>
    <description></description>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Bionic Animals @ Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:06:43 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="font-style: italic;"&gt;We will never know
when the day will come when the mad Islamic zealots and rhetoric
succeed in taking over the control of the government of our
neighbours. Their target will be the Muslim minority bastion of
Singapore. Skinning us will be akin to skinning Israel given our
close relation. I rather we be ready and bomb them in their own
backyard. &lt;img title="Twisted Evil" src=
"/images/emoticons/classic/icon_twisted.gif" alt=
"Twisted Evil" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:06:43 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7177841</guid>
      <author>Bionic Animals</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by LazerLordz @ Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:40:03 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Well, if push comes to shove, eradication of the root motivation
will be of the utmost priority.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Iranian people better do something to ensure that those mad
mullahs in charge don't lead them down the path of ruin.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:40:03 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7177396</guid>
      <author>LazerLordz</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Arapahoe @ Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:38:35 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;I personally feel that the threat will have
to come from terrorism in the region..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
tt's a world wide trend that the world is facing right now...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
the talibans and al-qaeda have proven that guerrila warfare is a
sticky business for governments...they will keep going at the
government forces till the government falls.....fidel castro...ho
chin min have all proven tt.....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
thus...if the threat comes from terrorism....wad's the point of
purchasing all these conventional weapons that r onli suitable for
use in conventional warfare...&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It would be a matter of time the spread of iranian arms into
SEA.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:38:35 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7177389</guid>
      <author>Arapahoe</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Arapahoe @ Sun, 23 Sep 2007 01:19:32 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;i can see that the original 6 Asean come out with some kind of a
loose pact. Can't speak about the other members Cam, Viet, Mynmar,
laos&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 01:19:32 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7176576</guid>
      <author>Arapahoe</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by LazerLordz @ Thu, 20 Sep 2007 19:45:32 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;are u trying to imply that the threat comes
from ASEAN itself or outside ASEAN?&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There is a higher chance of an external threat.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
ASEAN itself is already a constructivist's nightmare..&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 19:45:32 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7164963</guid>
      <author>LazerLordz</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:49:10 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;are u trying to imply that the threat comes from &lt;span class=
""&gt;ASEAN&lt;/span&gt; itself or outside &lt;span class=""&gt;ASEAN&lt;/span&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:49:10 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160952</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by LazerLordz @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:47:36 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;I personally feel that the threat will have
to come from terrorism in the region..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
tt's a world wide trend that the world is facing right now...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
the talibans and al-qaeda have proven that guerrila warfare is a
sticky business for governments...they will keep going at the
government forces till the government falls.....fidel castro...ho
chin min have all proven tt.....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
thus...if the threat comes from terrorism....wad's the point of
purchasing all these conventional weapons that r onli suitable for
use in conventional warfare...&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Counter-terrorism efforts are being taken care of prior to this
build-up.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
So..why are they doing a conventional buildup? &lt;img title="Cool"
src="/images/emoticons/classic/icon_cool.gif" alt="Cool" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:47:36 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160942</guid>
      <author>LazerLordz</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:44:07 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I personally feel that the threat will have to come from
terrorism in the region..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
tt's a world wide trend that the world is facing right now...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
the talibans and al-qaeda have proven that guerrila warfare is a
sticky business for governments...they will keep going at the
government forces till the government falls.....fidel castro...ho
chin min have all proven tt.....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
thus...if the threat comes from terrorism....wad's the point of
purchasing all these conventional weapons that r onli suitable for
use in conventional warfare...&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:44:07 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160920</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by LazerLordz @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:32:17 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;i tink it's gonna take a lot of effor for
SEA to gain integration in terms of defence..basically...we r just
veri suspect of each other motives..i tink that if there's relli an
concerete for a pact..it shd start with ASEAN...we basically can't
have a pact when all the countries have basically gone mad in
shopping for bombs and tanks....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
good example is our recent purchase of the hilmar...the range is
60KM...if it's a weapon use for defence by SAF...they r gonna be
kidding..u do your own calculation on the size of sg&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like some of us here have said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Look beyond the purchases itself, and look at the roles of these
new purchases.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It's more than just an arms race I feel, it's something bigger that
may pose a threat to ASEAN's security.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:32:17 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160871</guid>
      <author>LazerLordz</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:27:07 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;i tink it's gonna take a lot of effor for SEA to gain
integration in terms of defence..basically...we r just veri suspect
of each other motives..i tink that if there's relli an concerete
for a pact..it shd start with ASEAN...we basically can't have a
pact when all the countries have basically gone mad in shopping for
bombs and tanks....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
good example is our recent purchase of the hilmar...the range is
60KM...if it's a weapon use for defence by SAF...they r gonna be
kidding..u do your own calculation on the size of sg&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:27:07 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160844</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by LazerLordz @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:20:48 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;actually.....can anyone envisage a defence
pact which involves Israel in the Middle East...?? i tink we have
the same issue in SEA too&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;No, it is less likely to be a problem to form a loose defence
pact here.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 23:20:48 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160789</guid>
      <author>LazerLordz</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 22:21:23 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;actually&#8230;..can anyone envisage a defence pact which involves
Israel in the Middle East&#8230;?? i tink we have the same issue in
&lt;span class=""&gt;SEA&lt;/span&gt; too&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 22:21:23 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160404</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Shotgun @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 22:13:41 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I don't think we will ever see an ASEAN defence coalition until
an external threat surfaces. =)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Even so, there is no guarantee that some of ASEAN members would not
choose to collaborate with the external threat.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Eg. Thailand.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 22:13:41 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7160349</guid>
      <author>Shotgun</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by hunter @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:57:28 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;back in the early nineties...the guards and armour in the little
rich oil state were the ''protection parties'' to the sultanate....
&lt;img title="Cool" src="/images/emoticons/classic/icon_cool.gif"
alt="Cool" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:57:28 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7159092</guid>
      <author>hunter</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Atobe @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:07:58 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="color: darkred;"&gt;Here is an article that will help
to balanced out the frightening thoughts of an arms race in Asia -
as seen from a third party's point of view.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="color: darkgreen;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class="large"&gt;Singapore: An important link in U.S.
Navy forward presence&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span class="small"&gt;Sea Power, Dec 1999 by Prina, L
Edgar&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
From the end of World War II, through the Korean and Vietnam
conflicts and Desert Storm in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. Navy
maintained a key base in the Philippines, one that played a major
role in support of the national strategy aimed at peace and
stability in the Western Pacific. But when, in 1992, the Philippine
Senate rejected an agreement that would have extended the U.S. stay
at the Subic Bay base, the Navy had to move out within three
years.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The question then became this: Could the loss of Subic, which had
contributed so much to the training and readiness of U.S.
forward-deployed forces, be offset by making arrangements with
other countries for access to bases within their borders? The
answer, of course, has been "not entirely." Subic was special. But
after the Navy terminated its presence there in 1992, the United
States concluded a series of access agreements and other
arrangements with its Southeast Asian friends and allies who have
wanted a continued U.S. military presence in the area.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Important among these countries is Singapore, a prosperous
island-nation with a population of three million-and a deep harbor.
It sits astride the junction of the Pacific and Indian Oceans near
the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula. Singapore was the site of
a major British Royal Navy base for more than a century-until
Imperial Japanese Army forces, led by Gen. Tomoyaki Yamashita, "the
Tiger of Malaya," captured it in 1942, in the early days of the war
in the Pacific. Singapore became an independent nation within the
British Commonwealth in 1964. The majority of its population is
ethnic Chinese.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The arrangements Washington has made with Singapore include the
privilege of port calls, the use of repair facilities and training
ranges, logistic support, and participation in combined naval
exercises. As the U.S. Defense Department noted in its East Asian
Strategy Report last year, these arrangements have become of
increasing importance to the U.S. presence overseas. For example,
Singapore announced in early 1998 that its Changi Naval Station,
which will be operational in the year 2000, would be available to
U.S. naval combatants. The station includes a pier that can
accommodate U.S. Navy aircraft carriers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When Defense Secretary William S. Cohen visited Singapore in
October 1999, he and Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and his deputy,
Tony Tan, discussed the importance of the Changi port expansion to
the U.S. naval presence in the region. Cohen visited Changi, where
land is being reclaimed to push the port further out to sea. "This
is a sign of the strength and scope of our security partnership,"
he told reporters. "The United States is grateful for Singapore's
support."&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Prime Minister Goh enunciated the view of most members of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) during his meeting
with President George Bush in early 1992. He said that a
substantial U.S. economic and security presence was needed to
maintain a stable balance of power in the region, and that peace
was the dominant factor that had permitted ASEAN states to expand
their markets, especially to the United States.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Pentagon has valued Singapore's cooperation for years. Its East
Asian Strategy Report, cited above, had this to say: "Singapore has
been Southeast Asia's leading advocate of a continued United States
military presence. Singapore actively searches for ways to keep the
United States engaged in the region, whether in multilateral
institutions, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Regional Forum, or by expanding U.S. military-access opportunities
in Singapore itself."&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the Report, even before the United States began
negotiations with the Philippines over the Subic naval base in the
early 1990s, &lt;strong&gt;Singapore offered to conclude an access
agreement that would help disperse the U.S. presence in the region
and &lt;span style="text-decoration: underline;"&gt;spread the political
responsibility of hosting American forces&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The 1990 Access Memorandum of Understanding has been instrumental
in sustaining U.S. presence in Southeast Asia. Although fewer than
200 U.S. personnel are permanently assigned to duty in Singapore,
the United States conducts a variety of naval and air training,
most notably fighter-aircraft deployments that occur approximately
six times a year. A naval logistics unit --Commander, Logistics
Group, Western Pacific (COMLOGWESTPAC)that was relocated from Subic
Bay assists in fleet support and coordinates bilateral naval
exercises in Southeast Asia. &lt;strong&gt;In addition to this logistics
center, which is headed by Rear Adm. Stephen R. Loeffler, the Naval
Regional Contract Center and six other agencies moved from Subic to
Singapore&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span class="small"&gt;&lt;a href=
"http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3738/is_199912/ai_n8875082"
rel="nofollow"&gt;Copyright Navy League of the United States Dec
1999&lt;br /&gt;
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights
Reserved&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:07:58 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7157938</guid>
      <author>Atobe</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Short Ninja @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:08:16 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by tripwire:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;its not in the interest of brunei to be
part of FPDA.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
to do so... brunei would be directly antagonizing indonesia.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
furthermore... FPDA is made up of;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2 bickering neighbour, who can never agreed except that durian
taste good.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1 far away "power", with no taste for durian and even less stomach
to go head on against indonesia across such a vast distance.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1 no wing power with an army less then a division, but got more
sheep then human....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
and lets not even start with the remaining one.. who just spent
money upgrading their servicewomen's breast instead of upgrading
their forces.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;img title="Smile" src=
"/images/emoticons/classic/icon_smile.gif" alt="Smile" /&gt;
&lt;img title="Smile" src="/images/emoticons/classic/icon_smile.gif"
alt="Smile" /&gt; &lt;img title="Smile" src=
"/images/emoticons/classic/icon_smile.gif" alt="Smile" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:08:16 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7157071</guid>
      <author>Short Ninja</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by tripwire @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:25:39 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;its not in the interest of brunei to be part of FPDA.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
to do so... brunei would be directly antagonizing indonesia.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
furthermore... FPDA is made up of;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2 bickering neighbour, who can never agreed except that durian
taste good.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1 far away "power", with no taste for durian and even less stomach
to go head on against indonesia across such a vast distance.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1 no wing power with an army less then a division, but got more
sheep then human....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
and lets not even start with the remaining one.. who just spent
money upgrading their servicewomen's breast instead of upgrading
their forces.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:25:39 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7156908</guid>
      <author>tripwire</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Atobe @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:02:50 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by Arapahoe:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;wonder why the Brit did not pull Brunei
along into FPDA?&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="color: darkred;"&gt;The answer can be taken from a
news report dated 1994 in &lt;a href=
"http://www.iht.com/articles/1994/01/13/edleif.php" rel=
"nofollow"&gt;the International Herald Tribune&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="color: darkgreen;"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class="large"&gt;So
Far So Good for Wealthy Brunei&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;span class="small"&gt;By Michael LeiferPublished: THURSDAY, JANUARY
13, 1994&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN, Brunei&lt;/strong&gt;: How does a small state that
has grown immensely rich by exporting oil and natural gas cope with
a vulnerable independence? The question is pertinent as Brunei
enters its 11th year of independence this month.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Brunei comprises two enclaves of less than 6,000 square kilometers
(2,300 square miles) on the northern coast of Borneo. It is divided
by the Malaysian state of Sarawak. The sultanate has just over a
quarter of a million people. Because of threats to its separate
identity from Indonesia and Malaysia in the 1960s and '70s, it was
a reluctant candidate for independence after nearly a century as a
British protectorate.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It has relied greatly on diplomacy to protect a historical identity
that dates to the 14th century. Yet defense through diplomacy is
hardly a guarantee of survival at the end of the 20th century. The
government has been very conscious of the experience of Kuwait. It
has thus begun building up its armed forces and is expected to
purchase its first squadron of fixed-wing combat aircraft, probably
British-made Hawk jet fighters, as well as a new generation of
off-shore patrol vessels.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Brunei has pursued the diplomacy option with skill, joining as many
international clubs as possible. It has established ties with more
than 30 states, many of which have an interest in supporting the
sultanate's continued independence. Japan, for example, buys
substantial amounts of oil and gas from Brunei.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
After independence, Brunei joined the United Nations, the
Commonwealth and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. In
September 1992 it joined the Nonaligned Movement. Its most
important affiliation, however, has been with the Association of
South East Asian Nations. ASEAN membership has provided a form of
collective security.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The theory of collective security assumes that all states in an
international organization share an interest in safeguarding each
others' independence from challenge. In ASEAN, collective security
among member states has been achieved without military commitments.
Instead there is a working respect for national sovereignty. Such
respect has become the operating premise of the group, which was
set up in 1967 to provide an institutional structure for managing
potential conflicts between members.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Brunei joined ASEAN at an opportune time. The group was then
challenging Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia as a
violation of national sovereignty. Since then, Indonesia and
Malaysia, which were instrumental in forming ASEAN, have built a
strong stake in its continued cohesion and viability. Any renewal
of the former threat to Brunei would do irreparable damage to
ASEAN, which is probably the most successful regional organization
in the postcolonial world.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The end of the Cold War has served Brunei's security interests.
ASEAN recently launched a major initiative to promote a
multilateral security dialogue between virtually all East Asian
powers, including China, Japan, Vietnam and South Korea. The United
States, Canada and Russia are also involved. This initiative, known
as the ASEAN Regional Forum, is intended to cope with new strategic
uncertainties in the Asia-Pacific region. It will work only if it
caters to the interests of the smaller states.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Brunei has external defense links with Britain, which maintains a
battalion of Gurkhas in the sultanate. The future of that unit is
in doubt. The agreement expires in 1998, but the year before
Britain will have relinquished its hold on Hong Kong, site of the
Gurkha brigade headquarters. Brunei would like the arrangement to
continue, but Britain's position is equivocal.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Brunei has not opted to join the Five-Power Defense
Arrangements concluded in 1971 between Britain, Malaysia,
Singapore, Australia and New Zealand.&lt;/strong&gt; Although a
consultative pact and not a binding mutual defense treaty, that
accord is used by its members to promote security cooperation,
including regular military exercises. So far &lt;strong&gt;Brunei has
deferred to Indonesian objections to its membership. Jakarta argues
that defense arrangements set up to deal with a once assertive
Indonesia have become an anachronism&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A more promising avenue being explored by Brunei is an agreement
with the United States that would allow American forces occasional
access to Brunei's port and airfield, in line with similar
agreements between Washington and other ASEAN countries.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
ASEAN membership is no guarantee of independence for Brunei. But it
does provide a measure of assurance to one of the few postcolonial
states that regarded independence as a threat, not a
blessing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
-&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The writer, professor of inter national relations at the London
School of Economics and Political Science, contributed this comment
to the International Herald Tribune&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:02:50 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7156732</guid>
      <author>Atobe</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Arapahoe @ Wed, 19 Sep 2007 03:40:52 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;wonder why the Brit did not pull Brunei along into &lt;span class=
""&gt;FPDA&lt;/span&gt;?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 03:40:52 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7156395</guid>
      <author>Arapahoe</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by coolant @ Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:07:50 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by LazerLordz:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;And that might be the reason why we are
pulling ASEAN along for integration..&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dude, I&#8217;d rather say the most stupid thing that SG will do is to
form such a common ASEAN defense coalition that u mentioned from
time to time. Such a defense coalition will only greatly increase
the city state&#8217;s chance of involving in a hot war. To make it
vivid, let&#8217;s say some Boleh force hot-engages some outside force in
south china sea, SAF under such common defense liability, may be
required to hot pursue as well, even though it doesn&#8217;t have any
deemed interests in such area. By hot pursuing, it&#8217;s subject to
hostile retaliation strike from that outside force being engaged by
the ASEAN coalition. Most likely quite superior in projection
firepower, the outside force could launch simultaneously attack
both in bohleh country or Sg, but now you need ask yourself a
question: can your beloved homeland, being a tiny island, withhold
the same amount of projection power as your neighbor countries in
vast farmland? A war even lasted in hours can destroy your
achievement built in decades. And you know Singapore, being a
financial, communication, high tech center, the most valuable
assert, besides human factor, is the stability. Now you want to
risk this great assert to a wide, more risky integrated Asean
common defense? You want expensive weapons purchased by our
taxpayer&#8217;s hardly earned money to be used in such a meaningless
integrated asean common defense? Those vast farmland countries can
recover faster from any war even being directly struck. But not
Singapore, if you&#8217;re weak, don&#8217;t be surprised that people ask you
to pay double of his water, ask railway stations to be built in
Orchard road, etc, etc.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
No, judged by the government&#8217;s policy, Sg is more keen to build
warm relationship with outside regional power like China and India,
and meantime, relying more on credible power like US pacific force
rather than your integrated Asean force, meanwhile, building
credible defense force to deter any daring neighbors.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:07:50 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7147048</guid>
      <author>coolant</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:32:39 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by chino65:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;I disagree. And to say this is a great
disrespect especially to those who fought and died in this region
and elsewhere.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
But anyway...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whatever one's perception of history is, what's clear is that
everyone wants to be boss of their own destiny.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I think that soldiering and politics are two entirely diferent
things...we see the politicans letting down the soldiers more often
than the other way....&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is undeniable that those that died are martyr and heroes but it
is the politicans that make the move in the chess game. Soldiers as
history has proven it are only pawns.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thus, to criticise the policies and history of a country doesn't
bring with it disrespect to those who died for their country's
cause&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:32:39 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7147002</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by FG42 @ Mon, 17 Sep 2007 03:00:48 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The Brits are the most unreliable protectorate since WW2.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
She had an agreement with Poland n France to help in defending
against possible attacks but played out both of them nicely.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
She even fired upon the french's fleet before leaving france
fearing that these ships fell into the hands of the germans who
will use against their own fleets. She failed to protect the her
colonies in asia n australia and as a result, we were over-run by
the japs.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Lucky for australia, she stayed almost intact with american's
helping and that is why aussies are close ally of the us until
today.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
When we were independent, didnt they pulled out their troops as
well knowing that we had almost no troops to defend against
potential attacks from the north n south?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If not for the oil in brunei, would she had fought for her?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 03:00:48 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7146087</guid>
      <author>FG42</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by Fingolfin_Noldor @ Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:34:21 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by chino65:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;I disagree. And to say this is a great
disrespect especially to those who fought and died in this region
and elsewhere.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
But anyway...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whatever one's perception of history is, what's clear is that
everyone wants to be boss of their own destiny.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It doesn't change the fact that the Royal Navy's power
projection capabilities have been quite negligible for the last 2
decades. It might improve with the launch of their 2 new aircraft
carriers, but their navy, to put it bluntly, has been operating low
for a long while. Even if they had 2 carriers, one will be in dock
while the other will be out at sea. The same happened with the
Invincible class, where at least one remained in dock while the
rest went out to sea. Why the Falklands was a near disaster as it
is.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whereas I cannot prove that Brunei has a defence pact with
Singapore, we have very close relations else where. THey even peg
the Brunei dollar to the Sing Dollar. Besides, some things aren't
quite so announced.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:34:21 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7145709</guid>
      <author>Fingolfin_Noldor</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by chino65 @ Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:23:52 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by mozzi190:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;The UK doesn't have a particularly good
track record in terms of coming to the needs of others. Poland and
Norway in '39 and '40...Malaya in '41...Palestien in '49 and now
they are literally being chased out of Basra in '07&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I disagree. And to say this is a great disrespect especially to
those who fought and died in this region and elsewhere.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
But anyway...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Whatever one's perception of history is, what's clear is that
everyone wants to be boss of their own destiny.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:23:52 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7145175</guid>
      <author>chino65</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Arms race in Asia replied by mozzi190 @ Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:11:00 +0800</title>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_from"&gt;Originally posted by chino65:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div class="quote_body"&gt;Brunei was a protectorate of England from
1888 to 1984.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Half a world away and wouldn't help? Go read up on history and
don't belittle people who came in times of our need.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The point is, if we have defence pact with Brunei, please prove it.
What is far-fetched or not is not the point.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The UK doesn't have a particularly good track record in terms of
coming to the needs of others. Poland and Norway in '39 and
'40...Malaya in '41...Palestien in '49 and now they are literally
being chased out of Basra in '07&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:11:00 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">politics.sgforums.com:1164:278444:7144511</guid>
      <author>mozzi190</author>
      <link>http://politics.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/278444</link>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
