Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality

Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality

Index
Index....................................................................................................................1 Introduction.........................................................................................................1 Background.........................................................................................................2 Discussion............................................................................................................3 Conclusion...........................................................................................................6 Bibliography........................................................................................................8

Whats in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. William Shakespeare. Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene 2 Words like Southeast Asia and unicorn enable us to discuss topics about which we would not otherwise be able to hold a conversation, but we should be wary of attributing any more solidity to these concepts than the facts will allow. J.R.E. Waddell, An Introduction to Southeast Asian Politics (Sydney: John Wiley. 1972), p. 31

Introduction
This paper is about what Southeast Asia (SEA) is and how it can be defined and if the concept is useful as a tool, to study the region. The focus in this paper is whether or not SEA can be defined as a region. In the paper I will show some of
1

Both are from Emmerson 1984. Pp. 1

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality the different ways to define SEA as a region, I will bring forward some of the implications that comes from the different definitions of the region. I will show that the naming and definition of the region, Southeast Asia, can be a useful tool when studying the region. To this I will borrow theories and arguments mainly from Donald K. Emmerson, supplied by a few other scholars and some internet sites.

Background
The name Southeast Asia has an interesting etymology. If we start with the second word, Asia, we can track it back through the millennia till around 1235 B.C. when a Hittite king has reported, that he had conquered a place or people called Assuva. In the time that followed the Greeks adopted the word Assuva, but pronounced it more like todays Asia and they used this term for the landmass across the Aegean, but they did not go to SEA (Emmerson 1984:2). If this is all correct, it was not until the colonization of SEA, the word Asia was brought back to Asia and readopted by the people living in Asia. If we then look at the word Southeast it is clear that it is not the people living in SEA, who made this name, it was foreigners. We in the Western countries think Southeast Asia is a logical name to give a region which is south of China and east of India2, which is Southeast Asia. Regions like Asia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia etc. has come into existence trough historical, political and cultural processes (Hjer 2010:20) and SEA can be defined in many different ways, for example, by language groups (families), countries, geographical position, nature life, religion etc. and the same can be said about the countries; they too can be divided in different ways. Today the borders are mainly politically constructed; many places near the borders, the people speak the same language and have the same culture as the people on the other side of the border. Some scholars have sought to make appropriate borders inside and around the region, this time with religion, history, ethnology, geomorphology or biogeography as the starting-point.
2

These countries were already well known at that time and people knew approximately where India and China was on the map, so it was easy to understand the concept behind naming the region Southeast Asia.

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality There were many, mostly European, authors who argued against a political definition of SEA, because it would have political influence on the colonial powers.

Discussion
Through the time there has been many different toponyms which has been used for the region of SEA and in the parentheses, their main users, are Further India (British), Hinterindien (Germans), llnde ultragangetique (French), Nanyang (Chinese), and Nanyo (Japanese) (Emmerson, 1984:4). These toponyms all have that in common, that they are vague; some are ancient, obscure or obsolete, all are vague. These names are all defined by outsiders, who look at the region from their own point of view and using already known landmarks (India and China) to place and define the whereabouts of SEA. In the West we take the name, SEA, for granted, and we will be surprised to know, that the name still is not fully legitimated by the Southeast Asians. For them to reach the same conclusion it is necessary first to compare the concept of Southeast Asia with its nearest equivalent, the Middle East, which also is an obscure and obsolete toponym, that has to be compared with the older term Near East to be understood, we also see this in SEAs relation to the Far East. Most who study SEA, say that they study something real, like a rose, in the written texts and the cultural monuments, and not something unreal, like a unicorn. If we follow Emmersons (1984) idea, we need to combine both rose and unicorn, and write about a spaceship when we write about SEA. Both are something that does not quite exist but eventually would. What is now SEA, could, according to Emmersons Southeast Asia: Whats in a name? (1984), in the long run be redivided into something else, for example, Soviet Far East and American Far West, or it could be divided between South Asia, East Asia, and Oceania. But Emmerson thinks, nevertheless, that SEA is going to prove somewhat more stable than the region to which it refers: the name does not refer to someone from abroad who 3

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality named it, like Near and Far East does. The name has a taste of independence and it is therefore easier for the inhabitants to use. And for specialists it is easier to be a Southeast Asianist than, lets say, an Orientalist (which could mean procolonial). SEA is in a kind of Humpty Dumpty position (Emmerson, 1984:4) because the name is neither rooted in reality nor in fantasy; it is neither a rose nor a unicorn. The name tells us a bit about how powerful the European colonial powers were at the time. As we can see throughout the history, it is the victorious that get to write history and name the places; an example of this is Alexander the Great, and he named many major cities Alexandria3, in SEA it was the colonial powers, because of the long period in which they were in power and controlled the region, and in the case of SEA the colonial powers just named the region out from its geographical location, seen from a European point of view. Unlike the colonial powers, Germans and Austrians where not hampered by any geographical limits, as they did not own any territory, but still they used the term Southeast Asia when mentioning the region. In later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the two Germans, Adolf Bastian and Franz Heger together with the Viennese P.W. Schmidt, travelled around in the region making comprehensive studies. As I understand it, they were the first, together with Robert Heine-Geldern, that made use of the name SEA in the academic world. In the 1930s it was already written by a lot of different people like, Americans, Chinese, Italians, Russians, and Vietnamese etc. Even though there were scientists using the name Southeast Asia, it was war that made it popular and well known. Before 1942 and the allies warfare against Japan, SEA had just been a geographic convenience and actually it was only a few scholars, a side Heine-Geldern and his colleagues, which really thought of the term Southeast Asia as a legitimate name, but making war meant making maps and political decisions. Doing the war the South-East Asian Command (SEAC) made the decision of the name and which
3

(http://www.denstoredanske.dk/Rejser,_geografi_og_historie/Gr%C3%A6kenland/Det_klassiske_Gr %C3%A6kenland/Alexander_3._den_Store Map, accessed on 2 December 2010)

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality countries it contained (this was later altered a bit however). Some of SEAs borders against China were and still are a bit blurred and the result of a gentlemens agreement (Emmerson, 1984:8). World War 2 (WWII) affected SEA in three important ways. First, the region was made visible. There were established Southeast Asian studies at the University of Londons School of Oriental and African Studies and at Yale University, in respectively 1946 and 1947. Second, after the name Southeast Asia was legitimated, its range could be reduced so that parts of SEA could be left out, without needing to change its name, and there were no longer parts of Southeast Asia which was also part of East Asia or South Asia, but it was a region on its own. Third, Southeast Asia gained a strong political connotation. Even if Southeast Asia was still a minor scholarly subject, it was of major political interest and still is just look at the resent political event in Burma. In the decades following WWII, many foreign scholars disagreed about SEAs boundaries. Because of the Theravada Buddhism4 and the old headquarter of SEAC on Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), many included this island and omitted the Philippines, this because the Philippines stood outside the main stream of historical developments (Hall in Emmerson, 1984:11) in the region. It was not until the late 1970s that it finally was decided that SEA was to consist of ten nations: Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines and (at that time) to-be-independent Brunei. This mean that Ceylon, Formosa (Taiwan), the Andamans etc. were no longer considered part of the region. Because the region is not defined by the inhabitants, it is not fully legitimated, this can be seen in the disagreements around in the region, about borders and what should be considered part of SEA. Nevertheless the overall line of the borders are set, this mean that the disagreements are somewhat limited and it means that even if multinational organizations as Association of

Theravada Buddhism was the religion of most of mainland SEA.

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)5 go out of existence6, its ex-members are not likely to cease being SEA.

Conclusion
As a conclusion I will say that, It makes no sense to project SEA back in time (Platt, Verbal communication, September 7th 2010), since SEA is a new name, which doesnt have a comparative history, or consist of a comparative people. It has many different histories and many different peoples, and the borders around SEA and the borders within SEA tell us more about politics and economic matters, than they do about culture or language, but if we go inside the region and look, we can see that the present SEA is a region made out of nations, the people in the different nations, do not see themselves as Southeast Asians, but as Thais, Indonesians or whatever country they are from. Since the start of the colonization, SEA has been a topic in Western politics; some of the reason for this is explained in 1943, when Heine-Geldern said, Research on the regions cultures and languages was a matter of urgent practical necessity. Because even though SEA outwardly [was] of purely academic character it provided the decision-makers in Europe and America with the basic knowledge and information, which we are now so frantically striving to improvise. (Heine-Geldern in Emmerson 1984:4). Knowing what is SEA and what is not, is important in time of war, as we see SEAC only operated in SEA, so they needed to know the borders of the region and thus they made them, and as I said in the discussion, the name SEA has a taste of independence and is therefore easier for the inhabitants to use, and it is easier too, for specialists to say they are an Southeast Asianist than Orientalist. Furthermore the name does not refer to an outside name giver like Near and Far East does.
5

Founded 8 August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand. It is mainly an economic organization with the aim to accelerate the economic growth and cultural developments in the region, to promote Southeast Asian studies and promote regional peace and stability (http://www.aseansec.org/about_ASEAN.html accessed on 1 December 2010). 6 This could happen if ASEAN do not come to an agreement with the Indochinese countries; this could very well be in a far future, since ASEAN is ruled by capitalism and Indochina is ruled by communism.

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality As Emmerson notes, [n]ations come and go why shouldnt regions? so why fight over something that is only partly real, the political and by foreigners set borders should not stop any of the governments, inside the region, from cooperating, reality should matter more than a name thats half rose and half unicorn. SEA is a region of awaking and emerging nations. (Heine-Geldern in Emmerson, 1984:9), so I think that only the future history of SEA will show us if the external definition of the region can become truly meaningful to its inhabitants and I also think it is important, when studying SEA and its borders around and within the region, and the different territories, then to listen to both scholars, indigenous people and external actors alike. (Hjer 2010:20). ASEAN show us that there is a growing consciousness of unity; through the name alone Association of Southeast Asian Nations, they acknowledge that they are one region, and by joining together they stand stronger, politically and economically7. If I follow my own theory for a moment, I will say that the five countries, which joined and made ASEAN in the beginning, not necessarily had to join together; they could eventually have joined with countries from outside the region, for example, Indonesia could have joined with Australia, and Thailand with, but instead they joined together inside the region, which was defined by foreigners, and by that they acknowledged that there was a bond. Southeast Asia can be envisaged as a dynamic and everchanging part of Asia and the world, with no fixed boundaries, because there is a constant redefinition of the territories (Hjer 2010:20). In conclusion, the concept of SEA is useful, when one wants to study the region and need to refer to it and I think there might be a growing consciousness about being a unified region, a bit like the EU. However still the people have not fully accepted the concept, so for studying the people one cannot really say: I study the people of SEA. because it is many different people, not yet one.
7

This is a good thing, when looking at the location between two really strong economies, China to the north and India to the west.

Bastian Friborg 040788-1907 Southeast Asia: Myth or Reality

Personal note I know that, I have some contradicting conclusions, but this I have chosen because SEA has many contradicting elements and I dont think one can take one of them and make it the truth. We need it all to understand. Even though I didnt have any hope for being able to connect all the different elements in SEA, I want to make it clear that it can be a contradictory region.

Bibliography
Book Emmerson, D. 1984. Southeast Asia: Whats in a Name? Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 15(1), 1-21. Article Hjer, Lars. 2010. Asia borders, territorialisation and regionalization. Profile/Asian Dynamics. Pp. 20. Verbal communication Platt, Martin. 7 September 2010. Websites http://www.aseansec.org/about_ASEAN.html, accessed on 1 December 2010. http://www.denstoredanske.dk/Rejser,_geografi_og_historie/Gr %C3%A6kenland/Det_klassiske_Gr%C3%A6kenland/Alexander_3._den_Store, map, accessed on 2 December 2010