2012 H2 Hist P2

PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 2012 HISTORY 9731/2 Paper 2: History of Southeast Asia 1900-1997 Tuesday 11th September 2012 3 hours READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST 1. Answer four questions. 2. You must answer Question 1 (Section A), and any three questions from Section B. 3. Enter the questions attempted in the table below. 4. Begin each question on a new sheet of paper. 5. Detach this cover page and staple your answers to the back of this page at the end of the examination 6. Fasten all your work securely together. INFORMATION FOR CANDIDATES All questions in this paper carry equal marks. You are reminded of the need for good English and clear presentation in your answers. NAME: CLASS: This question paper consists of 5 printed pages (including this page & 1 blank page) QUESTION NO. MARKS 1 /25 /25 /25 /25 TOTAL MARKS /100

[Blank Page]

Section A You must answer Question 1. ASEAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1 Read the sources, and then answer the question. When answering Question 1 candidates are advised to pay particular attention to the interpretation and evaluation of the sources both individually and as a group. Source A Except for Singapore, which could be said to be making virtue out of necessity, all the other ASEAN member states looked at the ASEAN Common Market as a zero sum game. They all feared that they would lose more markets than they would gain. They could not believe that the whole would be bigger than the sum of the parts. Each ASEAN nation scrambled for foreign investments in manufacturing. If the five ASEAN markets had been consolidated into one, each country would become even more attractive for the particular investment, without having to offer higher tariffs and more tax and financial incentives to the MNCs. On our part, Singapore chose the manufacturing of diesel engines as our ASEAN industrial project. From nowhere, out of the blue, the other ASEAN member states claimed they have already established, or planned to establish, diesel engine plants of the specified horse-power capacity. It was clear that no ASEAN member state was prepared to concede its market to the products of other ASEAN economy’s industrial project. Low interest loans in yen offered by Japan could not overcome the zero sum mindset of the ASEAN member states. From a memoir by a former top Singapore civil servant, 2006. Source B Manufactured and semi-manufactured products now show up in the ASEAN list of exports whereas previously there were very little. This change in pattern is a healthy sign for it shows that ASEAN countries are gradually getting away from their traditional roles as producers of raw commodities and are beginning to develop their manufacturing and processing sectors. It is for this reason , member countries have realised that there are great potentials to increase both intra -ASEAN and extra-ASEAN trade, and that member countries can complement one another in their economic growth. From a keynote address delivered by Singapore’s Trade Department, 1976. Source C Certain members on se veral occasions have displayed a bazaar rather than co -operative spirit by insisting on taking more than giving, as evidenced in the case of industrial joint ventures

implemented in the early 1980s . In this connection, some members of Asiaweek magazine’s Economic Board have expressed the opinion that, on the economic side, ASEAN “isn’t working at all” while others have conceded that there has been some “moderate achievement”. Also, there is no common market in the making. The panel lists attributed this to “ political and cultural differences between member states and different states of economic development they have so far attained”, a forecast which is somewhat different from mine. From former Thai Foreign Minister Thanat Khoman in an academic journal, 1988. Source D In the economic field , the most significant results coming out of the agreement that was signe d during the first ASEAN Summit were the decisions to establish ASEAN large scale industrial projects and to institute preferential trading arrangements in order to facilitate the expansion of trade among ASEAN countries in basic commodities, particularly in the products of ASEAN industrial projects. Additionally, they also decided to formulate joint approaches to economic problems. Out of these decisi ons, a host of related activities took place in subsequent years. In the Second ASEAN Summit, which took place in Kuala Lumpur in 1977, the allocation of regional projects (such as the urea projects) was firmed up. From keynote address delivered by Malaysian Foreign Minister Ghazali Shafie at a conference in USA, 1981. Source E Prime Minister Lee added: “The idea of having to compete on par within ASEAN and having to open, to lower one’s barriers of taxes and having factories wither away because they are i nefficient and so on, immediately makes it a taboo word. ” He stressed that the first priority was t o get on with what the regional association has agreed on – and that was the preferential trading agreement. He also said, “Let us concentrate on what we hav e achieved – the preferential trading agreement. Let us get on with the five projects and let the experience of this implementation and our discussions with the Japanese and Australians and the New Zealanders be a process of education which must take place.” Mr Lee said another important objective was to consolidate the organisation of ASEAN whose members were at different states of economic growth, following different administrative systems, political philosophies and economic methods of development. Acco rding to him, it took nearly 10 years for ASEAN to come to a preferential trading agreement. It was 10 years of talks and 10 years of watching what happened in Europe – how Western Europe progressed. From The Straits Times, 29 April 1977. Now answer the following question. How far do Sources A -E support the view that regional economic cooperation in ASEAN was not feasible?

Section B You must answer three questions from this section. You must support each answer with examples drawn from at least three countries. 2 To what extent were the nationalist leaders across Southeast Asia motivated by anti - colonialism in the period before World War Two? 3 ‘The t hreat of communist influence was overrated. ’ Discuss with reference to the decolonisation process in Southeast Asia? 4 How valid is the claim that the role of local ‘outsiders’ should be credited for the economic development in independent Southeast Asian states? 5 Which strategy was the most important in promoting national unity in independent Southeast Asian states: education or religion? 6 How far do you agree that regional security was achieved through bilateral efforts in Southeast Asia? [END]