SAJC 08 EY JC2 H2Hist P2 SAJC

ST. ANDREW'S JUNIOR COLLEGE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION 2008 HISTORY 9731/2 Paper 2: History of Southeast Asia, 1900-1997 Wednesday 10/09/2008 Additional Materials: Writing Paper Cover Sheet TIME: 3 Hours INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES Answer FOUR questions in TOTAL. You must answer THE SOURCE-BASED QUESTION from SECTION A and any three essay questions from Section B. Begin each question on a separate piece of paper. DO NOT spend more than 45 minutes on any one question. INFORMATION FOR CANDIDATES All questions in this paper carry equal marks (25 marks each) You are reminded of the need for good English and clear presentation in your answers 1

Section A You must answer Question 1 ASEAN and Conflict Resolution: IS ASEAN WAY, “THE WAY”? Read the sources and then answer the question. Source A ‘There are mechanisms in ASEAN that you can use to resolve your problems. During Tun Hussein Onn’s time, a dispute started between Malaysia and Thailand over the extraction of oil in the Gulf of Thailand. For almost a year, bo th sides couldn’t agree at the official level. I went to Bangkok and met General Kriangsak Chomanan (the prime minister). He agreed to a jointly owned authority to the area. And then comes what demonstrates the ASEAN sp irit. Tun Hussein went to Thailand to sign the agreement. On the morning of the signing, Tun Hussein wanted to see the local ruins. So we went around. Then his car stopped in front of the Un iversity of Chiangmai. I thought the two prime ministers wanted to see the university. But they crossed the road and went to this little tuckshop. The Thai prime minister had said this beef kway teow shop was the best in the whole of Thailand. My prime minister said he wanted to try. I was restless. The Thai prime minister noticed and asked what was the matter. I said the signing was to be at 11 a.m. He asked if I had a copy; I had the original. He took out his pen and signed it. My prime minister signed it also. Account by Ghazali Shafie in 1997 in Asiaweek’s commemorative issue of ASEAN’s 30th anniversary. Source B The ASEAN aversion to any sort of confrontationa l stance, let alone strict laws that bind the member countries, is a pretty strong one. For example, when Singapore complained about Indonesia’s poor control of the fires at the United Nations last year, it stood alone with no outward support from other ASEAN members, and it got a thorough scolding from the Indonesians for its trouble. The “ASEAN way” may be useful in ensuring that we are at peace with one another, but it does seem to be a major hindrance when strong action needs to be taken. And surely when the health of one’s citizens is at risk, such action has to be taken. Article from The Star Online, 27th June 2007. 2

Source C Although much can be extolled abou t the attributes of ASEAN, ther e is one simple factor that merits more recognition, and that is ‘the ASE AN way.’ This winning formula refers to the way ASEAN manages its affairs by practicing consensu s, consultation, self-restraint, sensitivity, respect and many other positive ethics inhere nt in ASEAN’s common eastern culture and traditions. This more than anything else has held ASEAN together and will continue to do so as long as we do not lose our sights or compromise our principles and traditions. This “ASEAN way” is the vital ingredient for ASEAN cohesiveness, solidarity and independence. Speech by Mahathir Mohamad, ex-Prime Minister of Malaysia. Source D Thirty years after the formation of ASEAN, the Malaysian Foreign Minister called ‘the norms of acceptable conduct and behaviour one of ASEAN’s gr eat achievements’. Despite the element of exaggeration, the statement has its merit. While some of these norms were adapted from universal principles, others had their sources in what ASEAN’s founders claimed to be the unique practices of the region. Together they led to the emergence of an approach to conflict management and decision making, called the “ASEAN way”. This turned out to be a key symbol of ASEAN, helping the grouping to overcome tensions especia lly during the crucial early years of ASEAN, when the grouping was most vulnerable to such problems. Subsequently, the ASEAN way was useful in attracting new members and persuadi ng ASEAN’S external dialogue partners to see things from an ASEAN perspective, as well as in muting substantive areas of disagreement. Journal Article “Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia” by Amitav Archaya. Source E The “ASEAN process” is about the management a nd containment of problems. It is a method of interaction that is still evolving, and it is a ‘consultative process’ primarily motivated by the desire to create a stable environment. The techniques used by ASEAN to achieve this goal utilize the importance of symbolism and indirect approaches to situations which involve conflicts. The organization also practices cautious diplomacy. Conflicts are dealt with internally by the postponement of difficult issues, compartmentalization of an issue so that it does not interfere with other areas of co-operation and qu iet diplomacy. As a result, ASEAN is not capable of resolving many issues of contention among its members; it is capable of moving those issues aside so they do not prevent progress in other areas. Journal Article “ASEAN and the ARF: The Limits of the ASEAN Way” by Shaun Narine. Now answer the following question: “The ASEAN way was not designed to resolve di sputes and conflicts among the ASEAN states, making it redundant in times of crisis.” Use Sources A-E to show how fa r the evidences support this statement. 3

4 Section B You must answer 3 essay questions from this sect ion. You must support each answer with exampl es drawn from at least three countries. 1. How far can the growth of nationalism in South east Asia in the period 1900-1941 be seen as a r eaction to colonial rule? 2. Was the defeat of Japan by the Allies more of a help than a hindrance to nationalist movements in Southeast Asia? 3. “The military was pushed into a le adership role during independent Southeast Asia.” How far do you agree with this statement? 4. Have government interventions in the economies of Southeast Asia been a force for stability or in stability from 1946-97? 5. To what extent is it accurate to say that Inter-state tensions in Southeast Asia since independence have a significant lifespan? THE END