The Impact Of Military Engagements On The Peace, Economy And Political Stability Throughout Southeast Asia Essay

the United States wanted to stay in the philippines because of a desire to have bases close to China’s markets, so they could eventually trade easier. Instead of just sticking in the region of North America and dealing with their affairs. The United States seems to have by saying that it would be "cowardly and dishonorable" ( Document C) if they were to leave that Philippines alone and vulnerable. Once again their attitude comes into play, making them believe that their only choice is to be the good guy and help the Philippines out because they are the best for the job even though the Filipinos clearly just want to be left to their own devices and become their own country. "It is not necessary to own people to trade with them" (Document D).

A small country such as North Vietnam was able to win a war against a superpower like the United States of America, through, namely, tactics – such as Guerrilla Warfare -, the ignorance of their enemy, the attitude of the South Vietnamese, as well as a strong leader such as Ho Chi Minh. The Vietnam War was a major conflict (of the Cold War) which lasted from 1959 to 1975 , with US involvement from 1964 to 1973 . US reasons for their involvement in the war was their fear of “The Domino Effect” - or – the US fear that communism would spread to Vietnam and Southeast Asia, making them a major threat to national security. The Fall of Saigon marked the end of the war in 1975.

They also used the Spanish conflict to gain control of other Spanish lands in the Latin Americas, Puerto Rico and Guam to expand their economy by searching for new markets abroad. For instance, the Americans looked to expand into the east in the 1890s to access raw materials and to export over produced goods to help the American economy. The annexation of Hawaii on July 7, 1898, was an effort to create a stronger economy because it was considered the ‘’crossroads to the Pacific’’ so by annexing Hawaii the, the Americans were able to gain access to other countries such as the Philippines which they purchased for 20 million dollars displaying motives of expansion. In 1901 when the Filipinos wanted independence the US refused which led to the killing of 50,000 to 200,000 Filipinos in a war between the Philippines and the USA which suggests that the motive for the war in the Philippines was to keep their economic influence and to show the great military power of the US. This was not uncommon in American foreign policy as they also went to war in Vietnam to uphold their values of capitalism but unlike in the Philippines, it was unsuccessful. Therefore, Vietnam was typical of US foreign policy as the events in the Philippines gave the US confidence to intervene in other Asian

During the years of the Vietnam War, the economy of the country itself was nowhere near that of some of its major Asian country counterparts. After the war, the economies of North and South Vietnam rose which made foreign countries help with the

The Vietnam War was between North and South Vietnam. South Vietnam was allies with anti-communist countries such as the United States, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, New Zealand, Thailand, Khmer Republic, Kingdom of Laos, and Taiwan. For North Vietnam, it had the support of communist allies such as People’s Republic of China, Soviet Union, Pathet Lao, Khmer Rouge, and North Korea. The United States aimed to prevent the spread of communism in the world, through its strategy of containment throughout the Cold War which led to the start of the Vietnam War. After World War II, the Soviet Union rose as a superpower due to strong influences in Eastern Europe, including China and Korea. The Soviet Union was viewed as the biggest rival in post-war threat to democracies and capitalism, as well as a form of communism to the United States and Western allies.

During the 1960’s he United States entered the conflict in Vietnam, mostly in fear of the spread of Communism. Without ever officially declaring war, the American nation entered the conflict under the claim “that it was defending South Vietnam against aggression from the North” (Anderson and Bourassa). It wasn’t until 1961 that the United States formed an official treaty with South Vietnam, agreeing to provide “provide military and economic assistance” (Badertscher and Goodwin) and would later sponsor a coup in 1963 that would result in the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, the first president of South Vietnam.

An argument favoring America’s involvement in Vietnam is that capitalist country South Vietnam would be overthrown by communist North Vietnam, unless The United States became involved in Vietnam to control the spread of communist activity. The United States feared communist ideals spreading globally during the 1950’s and replacing capitalism, this fear urged action to aid South Vietnam. Leading up to Vietnam war, the French colonized South Vietnam but were weakened by the calamity of World War 2. The United States sought to protect corporate interests and with an ever increasing shift in the global market towards communism, grew weary of strickend trade among the Indonesian region of the globe. The strength of this argument is that without United States involvement, the financial climate would shift for the worst, and communistic views would

In addition to the ongoing confrontations in Europe, there were also other hostilities in which the United States and the Soviet Union found themselves on opposite sides. From 1945 to 1949 there were several confrontations in Asia. Chinese Communists defeated the Kuomintang in a civil war, and then China negotiated a 10-year treaty of alliance and aid with the Soviets. The United States opposed this. Then the United States occupied southern Korea at the end of World War II and the Soviets responded by occupying northern Korea. Shortly after the Korean War ended, the communists in Viet Nam (Viet Minh) announced their independence from France. This led to war with France which later turned into the Vietnam War; again the United States and the Soviet Union were on opposite sides.

The process of decolonization in Southeast Asia was not totally a violent struggle due to the divers natures of the process of decolonization and the fight for independence in the various Southeast Asian nations. Furthermore, although the struggle for the withdrawal of the colonial masters was lined with bloodshed and violence, there were still moments in which peaceful negotiations managed to take place, rendering the process of decolonization in Southeast Asia a largely violent struggle as one cannot say that it was totally violent due to the differing situations that occurred in the different Southeast Asian nations during the process of

The Arab world today is shrouded in controversy. Political instability and armed conflicts are portrayed as the norm throughout the Middle East. According to the pseudo regional specialists, the causes behind all the conflicts faced are obvious, religion and radicalism. Yet this fails to answer the question, “why”, which opens the door to better understand the foundation of the present day Arab states. This questions the origins to why the Arabs chose to leave the Ottoman Empire and take support from the British Empire, which at the time seemed contradictory. Unless British involvement with the Arabs had enticed the revolution, then to what extent did European Jihadist propaganda sway the Arabs to revolt against the Ottoman Empire in 1916? This paper will discuss that the Arab revolt against the Ottomans was in an effort take control of the Arab territories for themselves without the need for external influence to push them into making the decision. As such, the alternative explanation would be that Sharif Hussein was influenced by the British into believing that the revolt was his opportunity to liberate the Arabs from the Ottomans. Illustrating this point will be by examining circumstances that had led to the Arab’s decision, understanding how European intervention and motives shaped the revolt, and assessing the incentives the Arabs had for revolting.

As soon as there were men, there was war. The history of warfare can be traced all the way back to one of the earliest known civilizations, Mesopotamia. Since the development of organized city-states, warfare has been used to settle disputes, including disagreements over land, resources, and religious beliefs.

In EU there are many common factors such as democracy, human rights, they have a common enemy, all the EU countries external security is guaranteed from US, converging economic interests and strong political will. However, in South Asia, all these factors are absent. Therefore, not any factor can be taken as an example to South Asia. Some of the most important examples which can be used in South Asia include:

As far as we are concerned, unlike other Asian countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and others, Thailand military forces portrayed a significant concern pertaining to internal turbulence within Thailand. (Simon, 2000, p. 13) This is because, for several decades, since communist aggression and until todays, internal security has become the main core focus of Thailand military forces in the aspects of defence and security of Thailand (Taylor, 2013, p. 12); compared to other aspects such as external defence. Before discussing or deliberating the roles of Thailand military forces in internal security, it is better for us to understand the definition of internal security because it might raise confusion as it both aspects are associated closely with the national interest of a country. As coined by the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste National Parliament (2003), internal security is defined as an activity or program advanced by the State (Government) with the aims to guarantee order, security and public peacefulness, to safeguards people and goods, to prevent law-breaking and contribute to guarantee the normal functioning of the democratic institutions. Through this clear definition, it is clear that external security and internal security are different with each other. In Thailand, the military undertook a crucial role of internal security pertaining to the Burmese refugees and insurgency in the southernmost of Thailand insurgency by the Malay-Muslim insurgent. (Taylor,

Since the fall of the authoritarian New Order regime and the reform of 1998, Indonesia experienced political changes and are in the process of transitioninginto a more democratic country. These changes characterized by the rise of large scale communal conflicts either between ethnic or religious. Conflict violence based on ethnic takes place in Sambas, West Kalimantan (Klinken, 2007, Tanasaldy, 2012) and Sampit, Central Kalimantan (Klinken, 2007). While large scale interreligious communal violence occurred in Ambon, Maluku (Bertrand, 2002); North Halmahera, North Maluku (Wilson, 2005, Duncan, 2013) and Poso, Central Sulawesi (Arragon, 200, McRae, 2013).

the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) when it was formed on August 8, 1967 by