NJC SEA History Prelims 2008

NATIONAL JUNIOR COLLEGE General Certificate of Education Advanced Level PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 2008 HISTORY 9731/02 Higher 2 Paper 2 History of Southeast Asia, 1900-1997 26 August 2007 3 Hours READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST Write your name and registration number on the cover sheet and in the space provided on the answer paper. Write in dark blue or black ink. Write your answers on the separate answer paper provided. Section A Answer Question 1. Section B Answer any three questions. At the end of the examination, fasten all your work securely together with the cover sheet. On the cover sheet, please indicate the questions attempted. All questions in this paper carry equal marks. You are reminded of the need for good English and clear presentation in your answers. This question paper consists of 4 printed pages. [Turn over

2 SECTION A: ASEAN, 1967-1997 You must answer Question 1. ASEAN’S EXTERNAL RELATIONS 1 Read the sources, and then answer the question. Source A Reiterating our commitment to the principle in the Bangkok Declaration which established ASEAN in 1967, “that the countries of South East Asia share a primary responsibility for strengthening the economic and social stability of the region and ensuring their peaceful and progressive national development, and that they are determined to ensure stability and security from external interference in any form or manifestation in order to preserve their national identities in accordance with the ideals and aspirations of their peoples”…Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand are determined to exert initially necessary efforts to secure the recognition of, and respect for, Southeast Asia as a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality, free from any form or manner of interference by outside Powers. From the Declaration of the Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality (ZOPFAN), 1971. Source B After two days of discussions in Kuantan, Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Hussein Onn and Indonesian President Suharto agreed on what wa s officially described as a principle to clear up the Kampuchean conflict. The basic idea is simple: Vietnam should not continue to be under Soviet influence, nor should it fall into China’s grip. But the implications, say analysts, are significant: Hanoi, the two leaders seem to be saying, would be welcome to deal with ASEAN once it is rid of superpower influence. And China’s hawkish attitude towards the conflict was not welcomed…This, the Kuantan principle, is patently an attempt to dramatize the 10-year-old call for a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality. In calling on Moscow and Peking to leave Vietnam alone, Hussein was underlining the renewed urgency for the superpowers to keep out. Excerpt from the Far Eastern Economic Review, 1980. Source C ASEAN not only led the diplomatic opposition to Vietnam’s moves in Cambodia; it also actively engaged in the diplomacy that led to the political settlement of the conflict, including the “cocktail parties”, consultations with the UN Security Council, and the Paris Conference on Cambodia. Helped by a growing rapprochement between Beijing and Moscow (as well as between Beijing and Washington), and finally by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the 1991 settlement resulted in Vietnam’s disengagement from Cambodia, a constitution and UN-administered elections; and a reasonably viable and independent Cambodia. A comment by a former ASEAN Secretary General (1998-2002) made in 2006. [Turn over

3 Source D The ASEAN Regional Forum could be described as the culmination of almost two decades of steady ASEAN diplomacy. Beginning in the seventies, when ASEAN sought cooperation with its major economic partners, “Dialogue partnerships” were formed with Australia, the European Community, Japan and the United States. The Republic of Korea joined later. In the nineties, ASEAN invited China and Russia for consultations, followed by the creation of the ASEAN Regional Forum embracing almost all key players in the Asia-Pacific in the cause of regional peace. From an academic history of ASEAN, published in Thailand in 1995. Source E An atmosphere of optimism and confidence permeated this week’s first ASEAN Regional Forum in Bangkok. Despite the horrific prospects for war on the Korean peninsula, the rhetoric dwelt on the vision of pan-pacific harmony and an end to crude balances of power that passed for security. This was entirely misleading. In reality, the undercurrents of Asia’s ancient enmities and suspicions are now resurfacing in the absence of superpower stand-off. The conduct of the Bangkok forum was a clear demonstration that Beijing is expanding its influence to dominate East and Southeast Asia. The forum could have been a groundbreaking regional conference on security but the ASEAN states were almost an irrelevancy. China had taken control of the agenda and the other delegates were forced to go along with Beijing. No. There would be no multilateral talks on the Spratly Islands. No. Taiwan could not take part in any regional security arrangements. No. The first ASEAN regional forum would not move quickly to establish any formal security network to avoid potential clashes. Well before the conference, Chinese diplomats in South-East Asian capitals had called on the foreign ministries in their host countries to pass on Beijing's desire for the forum to reject any ambitious security agenda. This instruction was observed. From the Sydney Morning Herald, 28 July 1994. Now answer the following question. “ASEAN has always been a playground for foreign powers: passive to their exercise of influence in the region.” Use Sources A-E to show how far the evidence supports this statement. [Turn over

4 SECTION B You must answer three questions from this section. You must support each answer with examples drawn from at least three countries. 2. “The rise of nationalism in Southeast Asia was due more to western education than any other factor.” Discuss. 3. Did the period after the Japanese Occupation witness more changes or continuities in the development of Southeast Asian nationalism? 4. “Governments have always been a force of economic stability in independent Southeast Asia.” How accurate is this statement? 5. Why have some governments been successful at managing the minorities while others have failed? 6. How adequate is the concept of sovereignty in explaining all instances of interstate tensions in independent Southeast Asia? GOOD LUCK! Copyright Acknowledgements: Source A Declaration of the Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality, 1971. Source B Far Eastern Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 15, 4-10 April 1980. Source C Rodolfo Severino, Southeast Asia In Search of an ASEAN Community: Insights from the former ASEAN Secretary-General, 2006. Source D Peter Ho, “The ASEAN Regional Forum: The Way Forward?”, in Sarasin Viraphol & Werner Pfenning (ed.), ASEAN-UN Cooperation in Preventive Diplomacy (Thailand: MFA, 1995). Source E Sydney Morning Herald, 28 July 1994.