Foreign Policy
Authors
Donald K. Emmerson
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

August was a bloody month. There was barely time to mourn between the exploding bombs: first at the Marriott hotel in Jakarta on Aug. 5, at U.N. headquarters in Baghdad and on a bus in Jerusalem on Aug. 19, then the two in Bombay on Monday. These were the latest sites in a chronology of carnage running from Casablanca through Riyadh and Bali to Manhattan's crumbling towers.

Each atrocity involved local actors and local motives. Each was perceived differently by the local populace, and the local repercussions of each terrorist act varied widely. Yet all were attributed to a single global menace: jihad. For three years now, acts of violence done in Allah's name have made terrorism and Islam almost synonymous, not just in Westerners' vocabularies but around the world.

From this blight, who will rescue Islam?

The nearly reflexive association of Islam and terrorism is not simply the creation of rush-to-judgment pundits and politicians. Not when the terrorists proudly proclaim religious inspiration for their acts. Both Jerry Falwell and Osama bin Laden have maligned Islam. But it is, above all, the jihadists who have distilled their faith to sacred hatred - of Americans, Christians, Jews and the millions upon millions of moderate or secular Muslims who disdain this perversion from within.

Muslims respond in different ways to Islamist violence. In Jakarta a few days after 11 Indonesians and a Dutchman were killed in the blast at the Marriott, I met up with two Muslim friends. They were brimming with conspiracy theories. Why, they asked, had 20 Americans reportedly canceled their reservations before the bomb went off? Could these no-shows have known in advance of the attack? Why was the severed head of the alleged perpetrator later found on the hotel's fifth floor? Had the CIA planted it there? Why were arrests made so soon? Could the U.S., or perhaps the Indonesian military, have staged the event?

Behind their questions lay an unspoken one: How could Muslims have done such a thing?

It would be convenient if my two friends despised Americans and were products of Islamist schools. But both men hold advanced degrees from top universities in the U.S. and exhibit no obvious animosity toward Americans. That two such people could give voice to such dark misgivings about U.S. intentions shows that Islam is not alone in its association with violence.

The flip side of denial is demonization. For some in the West, the enemy is not jihadists but all Islamists. Never mind that the vast majority of Muslims who promote their faith do so peacefully. The PowerPoint charts of counter-terrorism experts that ignore Muslim diversity and feature the evil genius Bin Laden reinforce a distorted, top-down view of Islam.

Al Qaeda's responsibility is all too real. But local context matters. For jihad to succeed, an outside agitator needs inside sympathizers, and their receptivity to recruitment will depend on local circumstances. Recognizing that Muslim societies are autonomous and heterogeneous is a necessary first step to realizing that Bin Laden and his version of Islam aren't absolute control.

Defenders of Islam in the West stress the fact that most of its billion-plus adherents are moderates who reject violence. Such reassurance is far preferable to demonization. But understanding is not served by exaggerations - that Islam or Muslims are always peaceful, or that jihadists entirely lack sympathy in the Muslim world. In Muslim communities, extremist and mainstream views intersect in many places, including schools, mosques and organizations. It is in these myriad local settings that Islam's connection to violence will or won't be broken.

Regrettably, reassurance sometimes lapses into denial. In Indonesia recently, several leading Muslim figures urged journalists to stop using the words "Islam" and "Muslim" in their coverage of the Marriott bombing. I've even heard Muslims object to the phrase "moderate Muslims" because it implies the existence of immoderate ones. Islam will never be rescued by language inspectors who would substitute deflection for introspection.

Can reform rescue Islam? In principle, yes, but in practice, not necessarily. There are at least a few individuals and groups in every Muslim society striving to make the practice of their faith more tolerant of difference and dissent, less restrictive toward women, more compatible with secular democracy and less preoccupied with imposing Islamic law. Liberal American observers tend to celebrate these reformers as rescuers of Islam.

Yet the sheer diversity of Muslim societies suggests that efforts to liberalize Islamic doctrine will face varying prospects of success. Before assuming that liberals and jihadists have nothing in common, one should remember that both advocate far-reaching changes that threaten the conservative views and habits of many mainstream Muslims. Reformers deserve American support. But preventing the status quo from getting worse may be a more realistic goal of such help than winning "hearts and minds" for humanism, let alone making the Muslim world look as secular and democratic as, say, Turkey.

Is America responsible for Islam's predicament? Some U.S. actions have fueled jihad. The American presence in Iraq could become a magnet for holy warriors comparable to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Muslims pressed by Washington to oppose the hijacking of Islam by jihadists may instead decry the hijacking of U.S. foreign policy by hard- liners around President Bush.

But jihadists were fighting enemies long before the United States was born. The drive to create Islamist states is more than an attempt to check American hegemony. Different U.S. policies might shrink Muslim hostility toward U.S. actions. But intransigent theocrats will not be assuaged by the compromises necessary to resolve the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. Nor will either the failure or success of U.S.-led reconstruction of Iraq remove the reasons for Islamist violence in other Muslim societies.

Also shaky is the notion that "they hate us for our values." The democracy Americans espouse remains popular in the Muslim world. American notions of equal treatment for women are less welcome. But a woman's opportunities vary among Muslim-majority countries, including those in Asia that preceded the U.S. in having female heads of state.

Americans are disproportionally responsible for a modern world most Muslims feel they never made. Extremists have used such alienation to justify jihad. But it is not up to Americans to rescue Islam.

Non-Muslims can avoid unnecessary provocations and false reassurances. They can facilitate liberal reform. But it is Muslims, acting in diverse local circumstances, who will or won't break the cycle of jihadist demonization and naive denial that is ruining the image of their religion. Whether to rescue their faith is a choice only they can make.

All News button
1
-

11:30 a.m.: "Digital Content Industry in the Information Technology Era" Eiji Tsujimoto, Impress Corporation (Advisor: Harry Rowen) 11:50 a.m. : "Internet Business Strategy for Newspaper Companies" Hiroshi Nozawa, Asahi Shimbun Company (Advisor: Russ Hancock) 12:10 p.m.: "Venture Capital and Entrepreneurship in the Silicon Valley and the Greater China Region" Joseph Huang, AllCan Investment Company (Advisor: Marguerite Hancock) 12:30 p.m. : "How Can Japan Make Effective Industrial Policies For Promoting New Technologies and Industrial Revitalization?" Kosuke Takahashi, Development Bank of Japan (Advisor: Mike Armacost) 12:50 p.m. : "The Difference of Information Strategy Between the USA and Japan" Tatsushi Tatsumi, Sumitomo Corporation (Advisor: Marguerite Hancock) 1:10 p.m. : "Comparative Study of Technology Policy for Small Business Between the USA and Japan" Hidetaka Nishimura, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (Advisor: Mike Armacost) 1:30 p.m. : "How Can China Learn from U.S. Small Business Policies?" Tingru Liu, Infotech Ventures Comapany (Advisor: Harry Rowen) Lunch served to those who respond to Yumi Onoyama by 12:00 noon Tuesday, May 20, 2003. Please contact Yumi via email at yumio@stanford.edu.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

-

This is a presentation of joint work with Dr. Rafiq Dossani, Shorenstein APARC. About the Talk: IT (Information Technology) outsourcing has become a standard approach for many Fortune 3000 and smaller companies to achieve cost-effectiveness. However, while outsourcing at the low end of the value chain has gained acceptance, many issues remain unresolved at the high end of the IT value chain. We develop a characterization of outsourcing firms, suppliers, and tasks that is useful in providing guidelines on when to outsource, and whom to outsource to. These guidelines for IT outsourcing strategies are based on a study of US customers, and Indian IT suppliers, involving questionnaires and interviews. To our knowledge, this is first study that has captured the supplier characteristics in the level of detail, which will be discussed by Dr. Akella in his talk. Professor Ram Akella is currently professor of IE and Management, and was the founding director, SUNY Center for Excellence in Global Enterprise Management. At Stanford, the University of California, Berkeley, and Carnegie Mellon University, as a faculty member and director, Professor Akella has led major multi-million dollar interdisciplinary team efforts in high tech and semiconductors. His current research interests include in process learning, quality, fab economic models, cost of ownership and financial justification for IT Management and equipment, production planning and control, and bio-informatics. His other interests are enterprise systems, IT and software, financial engineering, high tech and e-business, and range from cell and factory level design and control to enterprise-wide coordination and logistics, including supply chain management and contracts, financial engineering and investment, demand management, e-commerce and e-business exchanges, and product and process portfolios for risk management and design capacity management.

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Ram Akella Professor, IE and Management SUNY
Seminars
-

Is unipolarity--American primacy--good or bad for the world? For Southeast Asia? For Indonesia? How dangerous or constructive is the Bush doctrine of preemption? Should the U.S. try to spread democracy abroad? If not, why not? If so, why and how--by example, persuasion, force? Has the war in Iraq squandered American "soft power"? How has that conflict affected the campaign against terrorism in Southeast Asia? Has the U.S. been ignoring the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)? Or has ASEAN become so irrelevant that it deserves to be ignored? In the run-up to Indonesia's presidential election in April 2004, should the U.S. support the incumbent, Megawati Sukarnoputri? Or would that only strengthen her Islamist opponents by enabling them to portray her as an American pawn? What grade does the Bush administration's policy toward North Korea deserve? These are among the questions to be addressed in a wide-ranging evaluation of what the United States is doing, should be doing, and should not be doing in Asia.

Jusuf Wanandi has long been Indonesia's best-known analyst of Southeast Asian regionalism and the politics and foreign policies of Indonesia and the United States. He holds leadership positions in the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific, the Pacific Economic Cooperation Council, the Prasetiya Mulya Graduate School of Management in Jakarta, and the Foundation of Panca Bhakti University in Pontianak (West Kalimantan). He heads the company that publishes Indonesia's leading English-language daily, The Jakarta Post. He co-founded Indonesia's most successful foreign-affairs think tank, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. He has co-authored or co-edited more than a dozen books, including Europe and the Asia Pacific (1998), Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region (1993), and Asia and the Major Powers (1988).

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Jusuf Wanandi Senior Fellow Speaker Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta
Seminars
-

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

E. Taylor Atkins Visiting Professor of History Speaker University of California, Berkeley
Seminars
-

How is the American-led war in Iraq affecting Asian countries and their relations with the United States? Is a clash of civilizations underway? Will Islamist rage in Southeast Asia spawn terrorist attacks on Americans there? Will Islamist parties in Indonesia be able to ride this wave of anger into power in the elections to be held in April 2004? Will the regime in North Korea take advantage of American preoccupations in Iraq and Afghanistan to escalate tensions in Northeast Asia? How will the economies of Southeast and Northeast Asia be affected by the conflict in Iraq? Will Washington's priority on ousting Saddam Hussein undermine its effort to stabilize Afghanistan? And what will the repercussions in Asia be if, against the expectation of many observers, the Iraq war turns out to be short and the seeds of Iraqi democracy are successfully sown?

Founders Room, 5th floor
Public Policy Institute of California
500 Washington Street, San Francisco

Robert Scalapino Professor Emeritus Panelist Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley
Theordore Eliot, Jr. Dean Emeritus Panelist Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
Greg Fealy Visiting Professor Panelist School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Workshops
Paragraphs

North Korea's renewed bid for nuclear weapons poses an urgent, serious foreign policy challenge to the United States. The current situation -- though it bears a resemblance to the events of 1993-1994 -- is far more dangerous and difficult. North Korea has developed longer-range ballistic missiles; South Korea's growing nationalism has put its U.S. relations on shakier ground; and the United States is distracted by the wars on terrorism and for regime change in Iraq.

Despite these challenges, good prospects still exist for a diplomatic resolution to the North Korea problem. North Korea's dire economic circumstances have made it more vulnerable to outside pressure at a time when its neighbor nations and the United States are increasingly concerned about its nuclear ambition. Military means would not only exact huge human casualties but also deepen U.S. estrangement from Seoul and diminish prospects for developing a joint strategy with other Asian powers.

Given the urgency and complexity of the current situation, appointment of a special coordinator for North Korean policy could help the administration to formulate a unified policy, sell it to Congress, coordinate it with allies, and present it to Pyongyang. In any event, a key requirement will be real "give and take" negotiations with South Korea to arrive at a coordinated strategy.

In the end, Pyongyang must choose: economic assistance and security assurance on the condition that all nuclear activities be abandoned, or dire consequences if nuclear programs continue. Any new agreement, however, must avoid the deficiencies of the 1994 Agreed Framework. It must be more verifiable, less readily reversible, more comprehensive, more politically defensible, and more enforceable through the involvement of North Korea's neighbors.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Shorenstein APARC
Authors
Daniel I. Okimoto
Gi-Wook Shin
-

During the past few years, significant economic growth, together with mature talent and huge market potential, have attracted a larger number of entrepreneurs and venture investment to create a high-tech start-up fever in China. While the outcome of these new enterprises in terms of business success and financial return are still unclear, the recent economic downturn in the United States has further fueled this trend. As a participant of venture investment activities in China during the past two years, Dr. Chwang will take a candid look at the opportunities and challenges of private entrepreneurship in China. He will discuss the interactive dynamics of this new growth in the Greater China region. He will examine the Silicon Valley influence on this phenomenon and the pros and cons of applying the Valley's model in China.

Ronald Chwang is the chairman and president of Acer Technology Ventures (ATV) America. Dr. Chwang initiated the Acer venture investment activities in North America with the launch of a $40 million "Acer Technology Venture Fund" in 1997. Subsequently, ATV's investment scope was further expanded after the successful formation of the second fund, a $260 million "IP Fund One", in May 2000, together with new investment activities in key regions of the Asia Pacific.

Dr. Chwang currently serves actively on the board of a number of ATV's portfolio companies such as Reflectivity, iRobot, and OctaSoft. He also serves on the board of the following public companies: Silicon Storage Technology Inc. in Sunnyvale, California, Acer Laboratories Inc. ,and Ambit Microsystems Corp. in Taiwan.

From 1992 to 1997, Dr. Chwang was president and CEO of Acer America Corporation. Under his leadership, Acer America's revenue grew from $200 million to $1.44 billion. Dr. Chwang has been with Acer since 1986, serving in various executive positions leading business units engaged in ASIC products, computer peripherals, and Acer-Altos server system. Before joining Acer, Dr. Chwang worked for several years in development and management positions at Intel in Oregon and Bell Northern Research in Ottawa, Canada. Dr. Chwang received his B. Eng. Degree in Honors Electrical Engineering from McGill University in Montreal, and his Ph.D. in EE from the University of Southern California.

Philippines Conference Room

Dr. Ronald Chwang Chairman and President Acer Technology Ventures
Seminars
-

Following the successful migration of semiconductor foundries business to Taiwan, IC design houses are now flowing to Asia. As a result, the opportunities for venture capital investments in Greater China are increasing. Based on on-the-ground experience gained during the past ten years dealing with high-tech venture businesses between Silicon Valley and Asia, Jesse Chen will share his unique perspective on the changing dynamics of risks, timing, business sectors etc. for optimizing investments in the high tech industry in Greater China.

Jesse Chen is managing director of Maton Venture. Maton is a global venture with strategic investors and VC partners from the U.S., Europe, Japan, and Taiwan. Launched in October 1997, Maton now has thirty-two portfolio companies across Semiconductor, Communication, Software and other Information Technology industries. As of December 2002, three have gone public and five have been acquired. Jesse currently serves as board member for eleven companies.

Before Maton, Jesse co-founded BusLogic, Inc. in 1988 and served as CEO and president until it was acquired in 1996. BusLogic designed and marketed ASIC, Board and Software for the computer storage industry. Under Jesse's leadership, BusLogic achieved twenty-two quarters of consecutive growth and profitability, yielding BusLogic's first investor more than sixty times return of investment within six years. BusLogic is now part of IBM.

Jesse also served as chairman of the Global Monte Jade Science and Technology Association from 1998 to 2000 and served as Chairman of Monte Jade West from 1997 to 1998. Monte Jade has more than one thousand high tech corporate members throughout North America and Asia and more than fifty are public companies.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Jesse Chen Managing Partner Maton Venture
Seminars
-

The trend for globalization of high-tech industries has gained momentum during the last few years. In particular, the Asia Pacific region has become an increasingly important market for U.S. high tech companies. What investors, both the public market and VCs, look for now are companies with revenue growth and a clear path to profit. The challenge for technology companies and investors is to define the roadmap to weather through the current downturn and build strength to grow when the market returns. The companies that will succeed are the ones that are close to the market, with the ability to produce their products at a reduced cost.

China, with its mass population, is undeniably an enormous market. It not only presents a broad customer base for the high-tech industry, but also an attractive low-cost manufacturing center. There is no doubt that Greater China is a lucrative region to ride the next wave of high-tech industry growth. We all want to capture this golden opportunity. How do we address this huge consumer market? How do we fully utilize the emerging labor support to lower production costs? For venture capitalists, how do we find legitimate ways to get return on our investments?

Taiwan is now China's leading trade partner and investor. Over 25 percent of Taiwan's exports are headed to China, according to the latest official statistics. With its geographic proximity, a well-established technology and business support infrastructure, as well as a common language and similar culture background, Taiwan is well positioned as a gateway to the China. In addition, Taiwan has built a well-recognized capital market in the past three decades. This highly liquid capital market is the best support for the high-tech industry as well as VC players.

In this session, Katherine Jen, a veteran venture capitalist, will lead the audience through her strategy in the quest for the next wave of high-tech industry growth and identify the key success factors.

About the Speaker

Katherine Jen is the managing partner of AsiaTech Management, LLC, a venture capital firm investing in the Silicon Valley and Asia. Katherine's successful venture capital career began in the early eighties. During her two decades in the Ministry of Finance in Taiwan, Katherine ran a $3 billion government investment fund, instrumental in the founding of successful high-tech companies such as TSMC and Moses-Vitelic. She also served on the TSMC board of directors from 1989-1993.

Katherine was one of the pioneers in Taiwan's VC industry. She led many key initiatives in venture capital legislations, including the adoption of the first Venture Capital Act in Taiwan. She helped establish the first group of venture capital funds in Taiwan, including Hotung Ventures, H&Q Asia and Walden International Taiwan (IVCIC). In addition, she founded the venture capital firm Genesis Venture in Taiwan and successfully raised its first fund. As a leader in the Taiwan financial industry, she served on the board of International Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), the largest commercial bank in Taiwan.

Based on the belief that Silicon Valley technologies can find much broader markets if they are combined with the efficient manufacturing industry in Asia, she founded AsiaTech and raised its first fund in 1997. Today, with operations in the Silicon Valley and Taiwan, AsiaTech manages three funds with strong backing from Asian-based manufacturing companies, commercial and investment banks, and government.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall, Third Floor, Central Wing

Katherine Jen Managing Partner AsiaTech Management LLC
Seminars
Subscribe to Foreign Policy