VFA

As a muslim i think it can affect our rights, In our discussion our professor mention a lot of negative things about his topic, at first i really dont have an idea of VFA and i dont know why, i think VFA despite of a lot of people are against this, i think it will continue to cooperate and help us, but its good to hear some of the benefits of it and we owe americans in colonizing our country. I think we should continue to give them permition to enter our country with no limitations because we are actually benefiting for it.

SONA NOYNOY and GMA

Former president gloria macapagal arroyo gave her state of the nation address in batasan, quezon city. im not interested with sona's at all but i have to hehe that why only watched it on youtube so that i can recall some statements and differentaite two president. The former president did not discuss things about charter change and focused only on the ongoing global crisis for food and oil. the muct awaited issue of scrapping VAT was denounced by the president. '' If we remove the VAT, business confidence will decline, interest rates will go up, the more the value of the peso will fall, and the more commodity prices will rice. It will strip the majority of out people of the means to ride the world food and energy crisis'' president said. I think the only thing that I hate about her sona is she is speaking in english as if everyone in our country understand what her saying is, I think sona helo us think and gives us benefits in some ways but i think lies our still in her statements in that day.

Our new elected president Benigno Noynoy Aquino gave his state of the nation address this year and i felt faith in our country, i think he is gonna change something and big in our country, after his sona, people expected that his gonna state all of the prolems and not gonna skip things, but he did, his SONA is more on corruption matters among government officials, but i hope his not gonna focus only on demanding aout governement officials but also the reason for our country to survivie, and i hope everyone will support him. hmm the only thing that i dont like about Noynoy's SONA is MERONG PASOK..

Peace process in Mindanao

In our discussion about this topic, it did affect me a lot because i'm a muslim and what im hearing about muslims now a days and entering college i feel really lonely and alone in our school, like what happen in mindanao massacre, but I became interested in this topic because sometime my friends asking me why, what about this things, sometime its really annoying but in the long terms im happy because i can defend what is really happening and why they are doing that. In our session today is intersting and hearing new things about islam community.

SONA

In our discussion about the SONA, the first thing that comes to my mind is lying and i dont know why, but after our discussion about this and what our prof said that Noynoy's admin will pointing mistakes of the precious administration,and they will find it hard to say who maid these problems, even if Noynoy present in his sona some solution it doesn't mean that it will be fix. I think they should move on, on the past mistakes that made by our former president, i think we should learn and try to concentrate to our future and for the better of out country. After Noynoy's sona i think that other filipino also fill the strength that we should have and lift up our country, and we should still be proud for our country.

Exam!

ASEAN membership

I choose ASEAN membership because I already have a background about this for the last 3 years and as of now we are still discussing and try to expand more about ASEAN and their members, and Philippines is still a member of the International organization which is ASEAN, but first I have to indicate the general background about the ASEAN membership for you to have a review about some issue. I have stated also the introduction of Philippines entering the International organization the ASEAN, and some issues about The new ASEAN charter will do little to improve the regional grouping’s human rights reputation as long as Burma continues to dictate the agenda this can help to understand how issues in ASEAN can be fixed and to help other countries to improve the issues in human rights, you will see that it also reflect from our previous discussion like the Realsin and Liberalsim which deals with the decisions of countries and their partnership of the Internaional organization. Realism was dominant during the cold war and I think it will help to understand the problems and how the ASEAN help the countries and make a a good result for that problem, I indicate some problems and issues about the ASEAN and how they maximize their power to be more useful for the members of the international organization. The importance of power in all states and what I heard is that this theory is an antidote to international institutions. The interest of this theory is survival of the state, and if all states are trying to be powerful there is a security dilemma. Liberalism is an economic interdependence between states and spread of diplomacy. The last is the Constructivism theory is changing norms of sovereignty, human rights, and ideas in politics. I knew that every theory has disadvantages and advantages like liberalism; I thought that it is the best theory because of its advantages that was read and was discussed in the class. I think you reflect also The Philippine History, Institutions and Decision Making Processes in Foreign Policy because it talks about policies how they make their decisions for their country to survive and develop. In this chapter I will explain first the overall introduction and background about the ASEAN for you to have a review and answers your questions and explain why the Philippine government should formulate foreign policies.

ASEAN was come first by an organization called the Association of Southeast Asia, commonly called ASA, an agreement consisting of the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand that was formed in 1967. The bloc itself was established when foreign ministers of five countries Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand met at the Thai Department of Foreign Affairs building in Bangkok and signed the ASEAN Declaration, more commonly known as the Bangkok Declaration. The five foreign ministers Narciso Ramos of the Philippines, Adam Malik of Indonesia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore, Abdul Razak of Malaysia, and Thanat Khoman of Thailand are considered as the organization’s Founding Fathers. The motivations for the birth of ASEAN were so that its members’ governing best could concentrate on nation building, the common fear of communism, reduced faith in or mistrust of external powers in the 1960s, as well as a desire for economic development; not to mention Indonesia’s ambition to become a regional hegemony through regional cooperation and the hope on the part of Malaysia and Singapore to constrain Indonesia and bring it into a more cooperative framework. The Melanesian state of Papua New Guinea was accorded observer status. Throughout the 1970s, the organization embarked on a program of economic cooperation, following the Bali Summit.

During the 1990s, the bloc experienced an increase in both memberships as well as in the drive for further integration. Malaysia proposed the creation of an East Asia Economic Caucus composing the then-members of ASEAN as well as the People's Republic of China, Japan, and South Korea, with the intention of counterbalancing the growing influence of the United States in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) as well as in the Asian region as a whole. This proposal, however, failed since it faced heavy opposition from Japan and the United States. Despite this failure, member states continued to work for further integration. The Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) scheme was signed as a schedule for phasing tariffs and as a goal to increase the region’s competitive advantage as a production base geared for the world market. This law would act as the framework for the ASEAN Free Trade Area. After the East Asian Financial Crisis of 1997, a revival of the Malaysian proposal was established in Chiang Mai, known as the Chiang Mai Initiative, which calls for better integration between the economies of ASEAN as well as the ASEAN Plus Three countries. Aside from improving each member state's economies, the bloc also focused on peace and stability in the region. The Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty was signed with the intention of turning Southeast Asia into a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. It became fully effective after the Philippines ratified it, effectively banning all nuclear weapons in the region. At the turn of the 21st century, issues shifted to involve a more environmental perspective. The organization started to discuss environmental agreements. These included the signing of the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution as an attempt to control haze pollution in Southeast Asia. Unfortunately, this was unsuccessful due to the outbreaks of the Malaysian haze and the Southeast Asian haze. Other environmental treaties introduced by the organization include the Cebu Declaration on East Asian Energy Security, the ASEAN-Wildlife Enforcement Network, and the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, both of which are responses to the potential effects of climate change. Climate change is of current interest.

ASEAN has subscribed to the notion of democratic peace, which means all member countries believe democratic processes will promote regional peace and stability. Also, the non-democratic members all agreed that it was something all member states should aspire to. The leaders of each country, particularly Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia, also felt the need to further integrate the region. Beginning in, the bloc began creating organisations within its framework with the intention of achieving this goal. ASEAN plus Three was the first of these and was created to improve existing ties with the People's Republic of China, Japan, and South Korea. This was followed by the even larger East Asia Summit, which included these countries as well as India, Australia, and New Zealand. This new grouping acted as a prerequisite for the planned East Asia Community, which was supposedly patterned after the now-defunct European Community. The ASEAN Eminent Persons Group was created to study the possible successes and failures of this policy as well as the possibility of drafting an ASEAN Charter. In 2006, ASEAN was given observer status at the United Nations General Assembly. As a response, the organization awarded the status of "dialogue partner" to the United Nations. Furthermore, José Ramos-Horta, then Prime Minister of East Timor, signed a formal request for membership and expected the accession process to last at least five years before the then-observer state became a full member.

ASEAN celebrated its 40th anniversary since its inception, and 30 years of diplomatic relations with the United States. ASEAN stated that it aims to complete all its free trade agreements with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand, in line with the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community by 2015. The ASEAN members signed the ASEAN Charter, a constitution governing relations among the ASEAN members and establishing ASEAN itself as an international legal entity. During the same year, the Cebu Declaration on East Asian Energy Security in Cebu, by ASEAN and the other members of the EAS, which promotes energy security by finding energy alternatives to conventional fuels. A Free Trade Agreement with the ASEAN regional block of 10 countries and New Zealand and its close partner Australia was signed. Apart from consultations and consensus, ASEAN’s agenda-setting and decision-making processes can be usefully understood in terms of the so-called Track I and Track II. Track I refers to the practice of diplomacy among government channels. The participants stand as representatives of their respective states and reflect the official positions of their governments during negotiations and discussions. All official decisions are made in Track I. Therefore, "Track I refers to intergovernmental processes”. Track II differs slightly from Track I, involving civil society groups and other individuals with various links who work alongside governments. This track enables governments to discuss controversial issues and test new ideas without making official statements or binding commitments, and, if necessary, backtrack on positions.

Although Track II dialogues are sometimes cited as examples of the involvement of civil society in regional decision-making process by governments and other second track actors, NGOs have rarely got access to this track; meanwhile participants from the academic community are a dozen think-tanks. However, these think-tanks are, in most cases, very much linked to their respective governments, and dependent on government funding for their academic and policy-relevant activities, and many working in Track II have previous bureaucratic experience. Their recommendations, especially in economic integration, are often closer to ASEAN’s decisions than the rest of civil society’s positions.

The track that acts as a forum for civil society in Southeast Asia is called Track III. Track III participants are generally civil society groups who represent a particular idea or brand. Track III networks claim to represent communities and people who are largely marginalized from political power centres and unable to achieve positive change without outside assistance. This track tries to influence government policies indirectly by lobbying, generating pressure through the media. Third-track actors also organize and/or attend meetings as well as conferences to get access to Track I officials. While Track II meetings and interactions with Track I actors have increased and intensified, rarely has the rest of civil society had the opportunity to interface with Track II. Those with Track I have been even rarer. Looking at the three tracks, it is clear that until now, ASEAN has been run by government officials who, as far as ASEAN matters are concerned, are accountable only to their governments and not the people. In a lecture on the occasion of ASEAN’s 38th anniversary, the incumbent Indonesian President Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono admitted:

“All the decisions about treaties and free trade areas, about declarations and plans of action, are made by Heads of Government, ministers and senior officials. And the fact that among the masses, there is little knowledge, let alone appreciation, of the large initiatives that ASEAN is taking on their behalf.”

This was an issue about The new Asean charter will do little to improve the regional grouping’s human rights reputation as long as Burma continues to dictate the agenda

ONE Caring and Sharing Community” that is how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, in its newly launched charter, envisions itself some four decades after its creation.
This is probably a far cry from the self-image that the leaders of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines the bloc’s five original members had in mind when they first joined forces during one of the most incendiary periods of the Cold War era. At the time, the governments running these countries were more interested in preventing the spread of communism, bolstering nationalist sentiment and building up their economies than in showing their citizens how much they cared.

Much has happened since then. The original members of the bloc have witnessed the end of a war that consumed Indochina and left a tragic legacy in Cambodia; been through a period of breakneck economic growth; and evolved, albeit erratically, toward somewhat more accountable forms of governance.

But perhaps the most significant development has been Asean’s expansion to include Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Burma and Cambodia. It now covers an area roughly half the size of China, with a population to match. On the surface, all of this bodes well for the grouping’s future. But Asean’s drive to encompass virtually all of Southeast Asia has come at a price, as the newer members, especially those that joined after 1997, are significantly less developed, both economically and politically. With the introduction of the new charter, however, Asean hopes to accelerate its integration by putting it on a similar legal footing to the European Union, making it, in the words of the association’s secretary-general, Surin Pitsuwan, “more rules-based and more people oriented.”

But Asean’s reluctance to act on its own rules may be the greatest obstacle to realizing its long-term goal of establishing an EU-style union. Critics charge that the bloc’s longstanding policy of non-interference in the domestic affairs of member states enshrined in the charter alongside “the principles of democracy, the rule of law and good governance, respect for and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms” will continue to serve as an excuse to do nothing, even in the face of blatant violations. Underlining Asean’s lack of will in enforcing acceptable norms of behavior among its members was its failure to respond effectively to egregious abuses perpetrated by Burma in late 2007, at the very moment Asean was preparing to make a binding commitment to transform itself from a regional assemblage of ruling elites into a “people-oriented” community.

The charter officially came into effect last year on December 15, but was ratified at the 13th Asean Summit in Singapore less than two months after Burma’s military regime moved to crush the largest popular protests against its rule in nearly two decades. At the time of the junta’s crackdown on massive monk-led demonstrations, Asean broke with its customary reticence about the affairs of its members to express “revulsion” at the bloodshed. In an official statement, nine of the bloc’s 10 foreign ministers said they were “appalled to receive reports of automatic weapons being used” on crowds, causing hundreds of casualties. The ASEAN Charter serves as a firm foundation in achieving the ASEAN Community by providing legal status and institutional framework for ASEAN. It also codifies ASEAN norms, rules and values; sets clear targets for ASEAN; and presents accountability and compliance.

The ASEAN Charter entered into force on 15 December 2008. A gathering of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers was held at the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta to mark this very historic occasion for ASEAN.

With the entry into force of the ASEAN Charter, ASEAN will henceforth operate under a new legal framework and establish a number of new organs to boost its community-building process.

In effect, the ASEAN Charter has become a legally binding agreement among the 10 ASEAN Member States. Much of this consternation undoubtedly stemmed from the likely consequences for Asean’s efforts to raise its standing in the international community. Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo, speaking on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York at the time of the crackdown, put it bluntly: “Our credibility is at stake; our collective reputation has been besmirched. Unless we put things right, and set Myanmar to a new course, we will all be affected and dragged down with Myanmar.” This sudden recognition of collective responsibility was short-lived, however. Ahead of the Singapore summit in November, Burma backed by Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos succeeded in blocking the UN special envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, from delivering a briefing on the country’s situation to a gathering of Asean and other Asian leaders. Ironically, Asean’s eagerness to introduce its historic charter may have helped to lift the Burmese regime out of the hot seat.

Basically this International organization aims and purposes of the association are to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region through joint events in the spirit of equality and partnership. In explaining the Philippine government should formulate foreign policy, Basically, government in other countries not only the Philippines make policies for their country because in every issues in your own country will also affect other countries around you specially your economy. It traces the growing awareness of the importance of global health in foreign policy circles, and the growth of global health diplomacy at levels. The importance of international diplomatic engagement for building global policies to address the ongoing threats of HIV/AIDS, influenza pandemics, insufficient vaccine supply, maternal and child health problems, and the need for strengthening health systems around the world, as well as for advancing national security objectives. If your country is having problems it may cause effect also with others and find that your country is having difficulties, other countries might intervened to your properties because your country is not developing anymore. In order to protect you country or certain country you must have a government whose educated people that build institutions to teach citizens for a country to have good examples for others and it will also help the country to develop.

http://www.aseansec.org/
http://www.aseanfoundation.org/
http://www.aseannation.com/index.htm