TAN, Eugene K. B.

English

Eugene K.B. Tan

Crossref

The Review of Faith & International Affairs

FAITH, FREEDOM, AND US FOREIGN POLICY: AVOIDING THE PROVERBIAL CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS IN EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA

Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University

Singapore Management University 
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 
Research Collection School Of Law School of Law 
3-2013 
Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding the proverbial 
clash of civilizations in East and Southeast Asia 
Eugene K. B. TAN 
Singapore Management University, eugene@smu.edu.sg 
Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research 
 Part of the Asian Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Religion Law 
Commons 
Citation 
TAN, Eugene K. B.. Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in 
East and Southeast Asia. (2013). Review of Faith and International Affairs. 11, (1), 76-78. Research 
Collection School Of Law. 
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2384 
This Journal Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at Institutional Knowledge at 
Singapore Management University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Research Collection School Of Law by an 
authorized administrator of Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. For more information, 
please email library@smu.edu.sg. 
FAITH, FREEDOM, AND US
FOREIGN POLICY: AVOIDING
THE PROVERBIAL CLASH OF
CIVILIZATIONS IN EAST AND
SOUTHEAST ASIA
By Eugene K.B. Tan
I
s American foreign policy exceptional
because it is religious or—put less
contentiously—“faith-based?” This is a
question that attracted much debate, but
no consensus, during the recent presidential
election cycle. What is much clearer is that the
foundation of American society and political
identity is very much grounded in the
commitment to religious freedom.
There is no doubt that a prominent theme of
American foreign policy is its singular
commitment to monitoring and promoting
religious freedom across the globe. This faith
dimension is a unique strength of US foreign
policy in the 21st century, whether one views it as
a contemporary expression/variation of “manifest
destiny” or of Woodrow Wilson’s world-saving
prerogative. While its actual impact is hard to
determine, promoting religious freedom and
eradicating religious persecution are crucial to the
larger effort of promoting a broader suite of
fundamental liberties in emerging democracies
and sustaining those liberties in established
democracies.
As a result of the 1998 International
Religious Freedom Act, the annual International
Religious Freedom Report has become a
cornerstone of the US government’s efforts to
promote religious freedom globally. The Report,
which describes the state of religious freedom in
every country, except the USA, provides a
putative starting point for dialog between the
United States and the various countries, often as a
part of the overall promotion of human rights. In
East and Southeast Asia, China, North Korea,
Vietnam, and Myanmar remain countries of
concern, and the American effort to curb religious
persecution in these countries is commendable
and crucial.
In promoting religious freedom overseas,
American efforts invite a multi-stakeholder
collaboration. Civil society is encouraged into
overseas assistance and development initiatives.
We see the increased mobilization of faith-based
non-governmental organizations and their multi-
faceted networks, working with USAID and
other governmental agencies in on-the-ground
activities delivering emergency, humanitarian,
Eugene K.B. Tan is an assistant professor of law at the Singapore
Management University School of Law. He is also a Nominated Member of
Parliament in Singapore’s legislature. He has been associated with and
benefited from being involved in the Institute of Global Engagement’s various
initiatives in East and Southeast Asia.
76 | volume 11, number 1 (spring 2013) © 2013 Institute for Global Engagement
D
ow
nl
oa
de
d 
by
 [
Si
ng
ap
or
e 
M
an
ag
em
en
t U
ni
ve
rs
ity
] 
at
 0
0:
12
 1
7 
N
ov
em
be
r 
20
17
 
Published in Review of Faith and International Affairs, March 2013, Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 76-78. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2012.760982
welfare, and socio-economic provisions and
partaking in intellectual exchange and
engagement. Herein lies another strength of
American foreign policy vis-à-vis religious
freedom: the ability to make a real difference in
the lives of people through leadership by action
and example, through the force of compelling
ideas and principles, all relatively unhindered by
realpolitik, strategic power plays, and geopolitical
considerations.
The promotion and celebration of the unique
value of religious freedom, which at its core
requires the United States to showcase the
commitment of American society and government
to religious freedom both domestically and
internationally, are crucial in generating a mindset
shift on various fronts. One such shift is
inculcating and nurturing the appreciation for
religious freedom as the prerequisite to the
development of stable and progressive states. In
turn, this requires an impartial, plural yet tolerant
civic culture. Often, the absence of religious
freedom signals the absence of other core freedoms
and rights such as the freedom of speech.
Another mindset shift coheres around the
recognition of the indivisibility of national
security and religious freedom. National security
cannot be sustained when citizens feel that their
religious freedom and identity are not secured.
This is probably the most under-rated strength of
American foreign policy. Indeed, in a post-9/11
world, it is a truism that religion and national
security are now even more intimately
intertwined. The scourge of religion-inspired
terrorism has driven home the message that to
manage such existential threats, the ethical
approach is to ensure that citizens’ religious
identities remain secure. Looking at religion
solely as a security threat is manifestly inadequate
in keeping state and society safe.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the
primary weakness of US foreign policy, particular
in Southeast Asia which is home to the largest
Muslim community in the world, was that it was
driven by the Beltway’s overwhelming concerns
over archipelagic Southeast Asia as the “second
front” in the “global war against terror.” To be
clear, a military or coercive response is needed
where there is a clear and present danger.
However, the United States cannot lose sight of
the end goal of terrorists, which is to inflict terror
and division on a society, unraveling its resilience
and cohesion such that it implodes. Military
warfare and coercive legislation and enforcement
are grossly inadequate in winning the hearts and
minds of a community. A muscular and
militaristic approach to counter-terrorism can
very easily play into the terrorists’ binary strategy
of “us versus them.” The American counter-
terrorism efforts in Southeast Asia were too
militaristic in intent and practice. For instance,
US commando units were deployed in the
Philippines, ostensibly to “train” the Philippines
military to combat the Moro Islamic Liberation
Front insurgency in Mindanao and especially to
target Abu Sayyaf networks. The war on terror
came to be seen as an all-out war against Islam. By
framing the conflict as an existential battle against
“evil,” the Bush administration alienated hearts
and minds and diminished popular support in the
crucial “war of ideas” in Southeast Asia.
Promoting religious freedom globally is a
work in progress. As the Pew Forum’s September
2012 study, Rising Tide of Restrictions on Religion,
points out, 75 percent of the world’s population
has restricted ability to freely practice their faith.
As a viable counterweight to political and secular
ideologies, religion has been both a unifying and a
divisive force throughout the course of human
history. In today’s interconnected world, the
transnational dimension has brought with it
heightened concerns that religion could
undermine a government’s ability to protect a
state’s security and sovereignty. Hence, religion is
still regarded with ambivalence, if not suspicion,
by many governments in East and Southeast Asia.
Given the tendency to regard secular and religious
loyalties as competing or even conflicting, many
governments acutely feel the imperative and the
need to maintain vigilance and to “keep God in
place.”
At the same time, religion continues to play a
role, to varying degrees, in the construction,
political legitimation, and integration of the
many nations (or ethnic groups) found in each
Asian state. In fact, since the late first
millennium, itinerant traders, seafarers, pilgrims,
and colonialists have brought with them
eugene k.b. tan
the review of faith & international affairs | 77
D
ow
nl
oa
de
d 
by
 [
Si
ng
ap
or
e 
M
an
ag
em
en
t U
ni
ve
rs
ity
] 
at
 0
0:
12
 1
7 
N
ov
em
be
r 
20
17
 
Buddhist, Confucian, Hindu, Islamic, and
Christian precepts, ideals, and norms to much of
East and Southeast Asia. Much less appreciated is
the fact that religious values and ethos continue to
endow valuable lessons on public leadership,
public morality, learning and virtue, and the
dignity of the individual. And because religion
has the power to mobilize, motivate, and enforce
behavior, norms, and values—especially among
ethnic minority groups—it can be a powerful
nation-building resource. Thus, religion-wise,
Asia is not a tabula rosa. Many religions have long
co-existed in Asia and they continue to nourish
and sustain these heterogeneous communities.
The virtues of religious freedom are not alien to
Asia but need nurturing given the dominant
imperatives of governance, control, and economic
growth.
In exhorting the virtues of religious freedom,
a holier-than-thou approach lacking in cultural
and political sensitivity and one partial towards
Christianity will not only have limited efficacy,
but might undermine the larger effort of
promoting religious freedom. The United States
and its many non-governmental organizations
need to be mindful of and attuned to local
conditions and sensitivities. Even as it seeks to
promote religious freedom, over-zealous
missionary proselytization, especially in Muslim-
majority countries, can potentially give rise to
fears and a moral panic of the perceived
subversion and colonization of indigenous values
and beliefs within the host society and
government.
The promotion of religious freedom is hard
work. It requires a combination of calibrated
approaches including government-to-
government engagement as well as people-to-
people dealings, engaging a broad coalition of
stakeholders. The imperative and ideal of
religious freedom is not particularly suited to
political pontification. It will instead benefit
immensely from religious freedom being
recognized not merely as the bundle of rights that
undergird religious worship and propagation, but
also requiring other rights fundamental to
unleashing the full potential of any human
society. Additionally, the empirically verifiable
fact that religious freedom can provide protection
against societal instability, religious extremism,
and violence should be emphasized.
Ultimately, the people in a society must
desire religious freedom, since the substance of
religious freedom cannot be willed to life by force
or legislative fiat. While seemingly tangential, as
the US government seeks a broader shift away
from the Middle East to making the Asia-Pacific
region the strategic pivot, there is the need to
ensure that the promotion of religious freedom as
part of its foreign policy is not conflated with its
defense objectives and priorities.
Conclusion
Regardless of whether American foreign policy
is “faith-based” or not, the United States, through
its domestic and foreign policy, can be the “city
upon a hill”: a powerful beacon for the rest of the
world. The perennial challenge is to ensure that
the lived reality of America’s promotion of
religious freedom reinforces the virtues and value
of diversity, pluralism, respect, and tolerance,
even on foreign soil. This, in and of itself, is soft
and smart power at work where the USA is a
shining exemplar for the world. v
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2012.760982
faith, freedom, and us foreign policy: avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in east and southeast asia
78 | volume 11, number 1 (spring 2013)
D
ow
nl
oa
de
d 
by
 [
Si
ng
ap
or
e 
M
an
ag
em
en
t U
ni
ve
rs
ity
] 
at
 0
0:
12
 1
7 
N
ov
em
be
r 
20
17
 


Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in East and Southeast Asia

Singapore Management UniversityInstitutional Knowledge at Singapore Management UniversityResearch Collection School Of Law School of Law3-2013Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding theproverbial clash of civilizations in East andSoutheast AsiaEugene K. B. TANSingapore Management University, eugene@smu.edu.sgDOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2012.760982Follow this and additional works at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_researchPart of the Asian Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Religion LawCommonsThis Journal Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University. Ithas been accepted for inclusion in Research Collection School Of Law by an authorized administrator of Institutional Knowledge at SingaporeManagement University. For more information, please email libIR@smu.edu.sg.CitationTAN, Eugene K. B.. Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in East and Southeast Asia.(2013). Review of Faith and International Affairs. 11, (1), 76-78. Research Collection School Of Law.Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2384FAITH, FREEDOM, AND USFOREIGN POLICY: AVOIDINGTHE PROVERBIAL CLASH OFCIVILIZATIONS IN EAST ANDSOUTHEAST ASIABy Eugene K.B. TanIs American foreign policy exceptionalbecause it is religious or—put lesscontentiously—“faith-based?” This is aquestion that attracted much debate, butno consensus, during the recent presidentialelection cycle. What is much clearer is that thefoundation of American society and politicalidentity is very much grounded in thecommitment to religious freedom.There is no doubt that a prominent theme ofAmerican foreign policy is its singularcommitment to monitoring and promotingreligious freedom across the globe. This faithdimension is a unique strength of US foreignpolicy in the 21st century, whether one views it asa contemporary expression/variation of “manifestdestiny” or of Woodrow Wilson’s world-savingprerogative. While its actual impact is hard todetermine, promoting religious freedom anderadicating religious persecution are crucial to thelarger effort of promoting a broader suite offundamental liberties in emerging democraciesand sustaining those liberties in establisheddemocracies.As a result of the 1998 InternationalReligious Freedom Act, the annual InternationalReligious Freedom Report has become acornerstone of the US government’s efforts topromote religious freedom globally. The Report,which describes the state of religious freedom inevery country, except the USA, provides aputative starting point for dialog between theUnited States and the various countries, often as apart of the overall promotion of human rights. InEast and Southeast Asia, China, North Korea,Vietnam, and Myanmar remain countries ofconcern, and the American effort to curb religiouspersecution in these countries is commendableand crucial.In promoting religious freedom overseas,American efforts invite a multi-stakeholdercollaboration. Civil society is encouraged intooverseas assistance and development initiatives.We see the increased mobilization of faith-basednon-governmental organizations and their multi-faceted networks, working with USAID andother governmental agencies in on-the-groundactivities delivering emergency, humanitarian,Eugene K.B. Tan is an assistant professor of law at the SingaporeManagement University School of Law. He is also a Nominated Member ofParliament in Singapore’s legislature. He has been associated with andbeneﬁted from being involved in the Institute of Global Engagement’s variousinitiatives in East and Southeast Asia.76 | volume 11, number 1 (spring 2013) © 2013 Institute for Global EngagementDownloaded by [Singapore Management University] at 00:12 17 November 2017 Published in Review of Faith and International Affairs, March 2013, Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 76-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2012.760982welfare, and socio-economic provisions andpartaking in intellectual exchange andengagement. Herein lies another strength ofAmerican foreign policy vis-à-vis religiousfreedom: the ability to make a real difference inthe lives of people through leadership by actionand example, through the force of compellingideas and principles, all relatively unhindered byrealpolitik, strategic power plays, and geopoliticalconsiderations.The promotion and celebration of the uniquevalue of religious freedom, which at its corerequires the United States to showcase thecommitment of American society and governmentto religious freedom both domestically andinternationally, are crucial in generating a mindsetshift on various fronts. One such shift isinculcating and nurturing the appreciation forreligious freedom as the prerequisite to thedevelopment of stable and progressive states. Inturn, this requires an impartial, plural yet tolerantcivic culture. Often, the absence of religiousfreedom signals the absence of other core freedomsand rights such as the freedom of speech.Another mindset shift coheres around therecognition of the indivisibility of nationalsecurity and religious freedom. National securitycannot be sustained when citizens feel that theirreligious freedom and identity are not secured.This is probably the most under-rated strength ofAmerican foreign policy. Indeed, in a post-9/11world, it is a truism that religion and nationalsecurity are now even more intimatelyintertwined. The scourge of religion-inspiredterrorism has driven home the message that tomanage such existential threats, the ethicalapproach is to ensure that citizens’ religiousidentities remain secure. Looking at religionsolely as a security threat is manifestly inadequatein keeping state and society safe.In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, theprimary weakness of US foreign policy, particularin Southeast Asia which is home to the largestMuslim community in the world, was that it wasdriven by the Beltway’s overwhelming concernsover archipelagic Southeast Asia as the “secondfront” in the “global war against terror.” To beclear, a military or coercive response is neededwhere there is a clear and present danger.However, the United States cannot lose sight ofthe end goal of terrorists, which is to inﬂict terrorand division on a society, unraveling its resilienceand cohesion such that it implodes. Militarywarfare and coercive legislation and enforcementare grossly inadequate in winning the hearts andminds of a community. A muscular andmilitaristic approach to counter-terrorism canvery easily play into the terrorists’ binary strategyof “us versus them.” The American counter-terrorism efforts in Southeast Asia were toomilitaristic in intent and practice. For instance,US commando units were deployed in thePhilippines, ostensibly to “train” the Philippinesmilitary to combat the Moro Islamic LiberationFront insurgency in Mindanao and especially totarget Abu Sayyaf networks. The war on terrorcame to be seen as an all-out war against Islam. Byframing the conﬂict as an existential battle against“evil,” the Bush administration alienated heartsand minds and diminished popular support in thecrucial “war of ideas” in Southeast Asia.Promoting religious freedom globally is awork in progress. As the Pew Forum’s September2012 study, Rising Tide of Restrictions on Religion,points out, 75 percent of the world’s populationhas restricted ability to freely practice their faith.As a viable counterweight to political and secularideologies, religion has been both a unifying and adivisive force throughout the course of humanhistory. In today’s interconnected world, thetransnational dimension has brought with itheightened concerns that religion couldundermine a government’s ability to protect astate’s security and sovereignty. Hence, religion isstill regarded with ambivalence, if not suspicion,by many governments in East and Southeast Asia.Given the tendency to regard secular and religiousloyalties as competing or even conﬂicting, manygovernments acutely feel the imperative and theneed to maintain vigilance and to “keep God inplace.”At the same time, religion continues to play arole, to varying degrees, in the construction,political legitimation, and integration of themany nations (or ethnic groups) found in eachAsian state. In fact, since the late ﬁrstmillennium, itinerant traders, seafarers, pilgrims,and colonialists have brought with themeugene k.b. tanthe review of faith & international affairs | 77Downloaded by [Singapore Management University] at 00:12 17 November 2017 Buddhist, Confucian, Hindu, Islamic, andChristian precepts, ideals, and norms to much ofEast and Southeast Asia. Much less appreciated isthe fact that religious values and ethos continue toendow valuable lessons on public leadership,public morality, learning and virtue, and thedignity of the individual. And because religionhas the power to mobilize, motivate, and enforcebehavior, norms, and values—especially amongethnic minority groups—it can be a powerfulnation-building resource. Thus, religion-wise,Asia is not a tabula rosa. Many religions have longco-existed in Asia and they continue to nourishand sustain these heterogeneous communities.The virtues of religious freedom are not alien toAsia but need nurturing given the dominantimperatives of governance, control, and economicgrowth.In exhorting the virtues of religious freedom,a holier-than-thou approach lacking in culturaland political sensitivity and one partial towardsChristianity will not only have limited efﬁcacy,but might undermine the larger effort ofpromoting religious freedom. The United Statesand its many non-governmental organizationsneed to be mindful of and attuned to localconditions and sensitivities. Even as it seeks topromote religious freedom, over-zealousmissionary proselytization, especially in Muslim-majority countries, can potentially give rise tofears and a moral panic of the perceivedsubversion and colonization of indigenous valuesand beliefs within the host society andgovernment.The promotion of religious freedom is hardwork. It requires a combination of calibratedapproaches including government-to-government engagement as well as people-to-people dealings, engaging a broad coalition ofstakeholders. The imperative and ideal ofreligious freedom is not particularly suited topolitical pontiﬁcation. It will instead beneﬁtimmensely from religious freedom beingrecognized not merely as the bundle of rights thatundergird religious worship and propagation, butalso requiring other rights fundamental tounleashing the full potential of any humansociety. Additionally, the empirically veriﬁablefact that religious freedom can provide protectionagainst societal instability, religious extremism,and violence should be emphasized.Ultimately, the people in a society mustdesire religious freedom, since the substance ofreligious freedom cannot be willed to life by forceor legislative ﬁat. While seemingly tangential, asthe US government seeks a broader shift awayfrom the Middle East to making the Asia-Paciﬁcregion the strategic pivot, there is the need toensure that the promotion of religious freedom aspart of its foreign policy is not conﬂated with itsdefense objectives and priorities.ConclusionRegardless of whether American foreign policyis “faith-based” or not, the United States, throughits domestic and foreign policy, can be the “cityupon a hill”: a powerful beacon for the rest of theworld. The perennial challenge is to ensure thatthe lived reality of America’s promotion ofreligious freedom reinforces the virtues and valueof diversity, pluralism, respect, and tolerance,even on foreign soil. This, in and of itself, is softand smart power at work where the USA is ashining exemplar for the world. vhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2012.760982faith, freedom, and us foreign policy: avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in east and southeast asia78 | volume 11, number 1 (spring 2013)Downloaded by [Singapore Management University] at 00:12 17 November 2017 

https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4342&amp;context=sol_research

Faith, freedom, and US foreign policy: Avoiding the proverbial clash of civilizations in East and Southeast Asia

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University

Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University