NST Leader: Embracing Timor-Leste
DESPITE backing from Malaysia and Indonesia, certain Asean members have reservations about Timor-Leste's membership to the bloc. The country is politically and economically underwhelming, unable to make significant contributions and once accepted, potentially burdensome to the grouping.
Yet, because of its troubled economy, incapacitated institutions and political volatility, Timor-Leste badly needs Asean like a fish needs water, as membership can help it overcome its problems.
World Bank data show Timor-Leste's economy had shrunk for three straight years since 2020, from a high of US$3.62 billion to just US$2.08 billion in 2023. But the worst could be over, as the government in Dili announced on March 25 that Timor-Leste's gross domestic product grew four per cent last year.
The country is also bogged down by underdeveloped infrastructure and education system, as well as poor English fluency, prejudicing its ability to participate in Asean initiatives.
Yet, Timor-Leste is a diamond in the rough, blending natural beauty, and rich history and culture, underscoring its huge potential for tourism.
The capital of Dili has a unique Portuguese colonial charm and its biodiverse Coral Triangle is teeming with marine life. By 2030, Timor-Leste's tourism revenue from Asean travellers is estimated to be US$150 million. Its people are warm and generous, so much so that in 2005, Timor-Leste, despite its impoverishment, donated US$100,000 for South Asian tsunami victims.
Timor-Leste broke free from Indonesia in 2002, after its citizens overwhelmingly chose independence in a United Nations-sponsored referendum in 1999.
In efforts to be an Asean member, Dili has ticked every box: an observer since 2002, participated in meetings and discussions, aligning development plans with Asean economic integration and signed key treaties.
They also prioritised infrastructure development, including improvements to its international airport, while strengthening economic and institutional frameworks.
Timor-Leste understands that an Asean membership is a lifeline that will translate to access to regional markets and investment opportunities. Still, the future looks promising: by October, Timor-Leste is expected to become Asean's 11th member, underscoring that membership isn't confined to enriching the already wealthy.
It also proves that Asean isn't just paying lip sevice to talk of economic prosperity. By embracing Timor-Leste as a full-fledged member, Asean shows it's not just what a country brings to the table that matters, but also how the grouping stays true to its original goal of uplifting the region.
And this aligns with Malaysia's "prosper thy neighbour" ethos. If we help a friendly nation grow and prosper, everybody wins.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
43 minutes ago
- The Star
One down, two to go
HONOLULU 2011 – US President Barack Obama hosted many world leaders including from Russia, China and Japan for the annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit. A few of us, part of the Malaysian media delegation, were walking back to the hotel after a quick lunch. It was a short walk. Big mistake. Just as we were about to cross the road (the hotel was about 50m away), our group was stopped by the local police. The Chinese leader and delegation were staying in the vicinity and the entourage was about to leave the hotel. For security reasons we had to wait for more than 30 minutes. No questions asked, we understood. Pattaya 2009 – Asean Summit. Thailand was forced to cancel the summit as thousands of anti-government protesters forced their way into what was supposed to be a secured area. Thai army personnel made no attempt to stop hundreds of red shirt protestors, loyal to Thaksin Shinawatra and seeking to oust Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, as they barged into the media centre, breaking the glass doors and toppling metal detectors, among other things. There was a lot of confusion, shouting and for some of us at the media centre, the fear was real. One protestor checked my media tag, took a photo with me and mumbled sorry, obviously realising his group was at the wrong place. The mayhem in Pattaya was brought by a security lax during the Asean Summit there in Thailand in 2009. Fast forward to this week. As Malaysia hosted the 46th Asean summit in Kuala Lumpur, many Malaysians took to social media venting their annoyance when the government announced road closures before and during the summit. Typical Malaysians, we don't like to be inconvenienced. What many of us do not realise is that some leaders are from high risk countries – they are susceptible for attacks. Malaysia as the host does not want any of these leaders exposed to any potential threats. A security lax will show the world our incompetence and potentially a major embarrassment for the government, as what had happened in Thailand during the Asean summit. It was a relief all around as the summit held at Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre came to an end Tuesday evening. Many worked behind the scenes. We don't know them, we don't see them but they were the frontliners and backroom officials making sure everything was in place. They will be the first ones facing the brunt from the guests. It is not easy to please everyone. Complaints about access to certain venues, the missing flags or wrong sitting arrangements were plenty. For the record, three main summits were held – the 46th Asean Summit, the second Asean-Gulf Cooperation Council and the inaugural Asean–GCC–China summit, attended by leaders of 17 countries with different interests and priorities. After each summit, a leaders' joint statement would be issued, for failure to issue one shows the inability of the chair to persuade the rest to be onboard. A joint statement carries more weightage in terms of the commitment of Asean members and all other external partners involved. It demonstrates the collective political will to undertake what the leaders have agreed and spur officials to ensure implementation of the cooperation agreed. There were whispers during the summit when several countries tried to include paragraphs on highly complicated issues which not all of Asean members were ready to address to ensure balance in the outcome document. Good sense prevailed at the very last minute and the joint statement was issued. Big decisions were made at this summit including the adoption of the Kuala Lumpur Declaration on 'Asean 2045: Our Shared Future' which will serve to guide Asean's direction over the next two decades. When the decision for Timor Leste's accession as the 11th member of Asean at the 47th Asean Summit in October was announced, it was met with tears of joy among Timorese officials at the summit venue. It has been a long 14 years. Officials said one Asean member state was adamant that Timor Leste goes through the process before its accession as a full member but Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan swung into action to get the full consensus. It was later brought to the leaders level where a final decision was made to admit Timor Leste. 'It is not a question of one member state against Timor Leste but rather asking it to fulfil all the conditions first. Without Asean consensus, it will further delay getting Timor Leste into the family. 'This year is all about inclusivity and yet one family member is not 100 percent in the Asean house. If we want to strictly follow the roadmap, it was near impossible for Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam to be a full member of Asean back then. 'We should give them leeway and give a timeframe to fulfill the requirements. Admit them first. We have to help them,' said one official With four months to go, Timor Leste, which was granted observer status in 2022, will now have to comply with the requirements and more importantly going through their own legislation process. The Asean chair statement stated that ministers and senior officials have been given the task to undertake the procedural steps for the admission of Timor Leste and expedite negotiations on the key agreements. Another summit which received much attention and described as ambitious is the Asean-GCC-China Summit, held for the first time. In a joint statement released on Wednesday, Asean, the GCC or Gulf Cooperation Council ( Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates) and China, said they were committed to enhancing economic cooperation. 'We recognise that Asean, GCC and China encompass diverse and complementary economies which create enormous potential, broad prospects and new opportunities for greater cross-sectoral trade, investment, and economic collaboration,' the leaders said. They also expressed grave concerns over the developments in West Asia and condemned all attacks against civilians and called for a durable ceasefire and to allow the unhindered delivery of fuel, food and medicine throughout Gaza. It is interesting to note that China has long been a close partner for Asean while relations between the grouping and Arab countries have only recently started gaining momentum. Will there be another trilateral summit when the Philippines takes over the Asean chair next year? 'We hope other Asean member states understand that Malaysia is doing this for the grouping. We have always put Asean's interest as priority in initiating new initiatives for Asean. With the Asean-GCC-China Summit we are just opening up the opportunity, building a bridge beyond our region,' said a Malaysian official. A lot of praises came from all around for the participation, substance and overall organisation of the summits. The second summit will be held in October. However, for the exhausted officials, it is only a brief respite as the next big meeting is just weeks away – the annual Asean foreign ministerial where they will be joined by their dialogue partners from Australia, China, Canada, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, United Kingdom and the United States among others. Now that, to me, is the highlight of the Asean chairmanship with issues like the South China Sea, a contentious one among claimant states and user states which includes powerful countries. Given the action on the ground in recent months, there will be no doubt that some countries would want stronger language in the outcome document. Others outside the region would also want to have a say about the SCS. Yet, it is important to maintain consistency when dealing with the issue.
The Star
43 minutes ago
- The Star
Lessons from big cities that cut back cars
CITIES around the world trying to limit driving have faced objections – namely that the measures would limit personal freedom, cost too much, destroy commerce or have negligible effects on air quality. Now the first data from these experiments in New York, London and Paris has trickled in. They offer some clues about whether cutting speed limits, charging traffic for entering a city centre and penalising drivers of the most polluting cars can reduce congestion and improve air quality, without causing too much disruption. These lessons are helpful because cities, where problems with traffic and poor air quality are frequently more severe than in less urban areas, are often moving more quickly in restricting vehicle emissions than countries or states. In Europe, cities are outpacing laws and national regulations to cut traffic pollution, according to the think tank Transport & Environment. As of April this year, 35 cities have committed to introducing 'zero emissions zones' – where diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles will be banned. Still, early results from some cities show reducing traffic is not enough. Take Oslo, which has pioneered lower speed limits, car-free zones and improvements to public transport, walking and cycling. Norway's widespread adoption of electric cars has also helped reduce smog. But the city still suffers from high levels of particulate pollution from tire wear, wood-burning stoves and dust from gravel and salting on icy roads. While restricting fossil-fuelled vehicles won't solve those problems, there is evidence that it helps clean the air and has other benefits too. Here's what policy makers and city dwellers can learn from other early adopters. > New York The city introduced a policy on Jan 5 charging cars up to US$9 (RM38) a day to enter certain parts of Manhattan. Travel time data from the first three months of the charging zone suggests commuting times are down on some of the busiest routes, in particular the bridges and tunnels that connect Manhattan with New Jersey, Brooklyn and Queens. A site run by student brothers Joshua and Benjamin Moshes has been tracking travel times based on Google Maps traffic data on various routes affected by the New York congestion pricing since the policy was introduced in January. They found travel times have also dropped during weekends, while there's been little change on other routes going from one part of Manhattan to another. That suggests people are choosing to take public transport or cutting out less urgent travel, they say. In Boston and Chicago, which the Moshes use as a control, traffic levels have not changed significantly. > Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo introduced 50kph speed limits on the city's outer ring road in October 2024, despite opposition from France's transport minister and conservative opponents. A report from the city's urban planning department found that the new, lower speed limit, introduced on Oct 1 last year, has already had some positive effects. In the following five months, air quality improved by 12% and traffic accidents dropped by 17%, compared to the same period in the previous year. There are also signs that congestion is lower. Hidalgo, who has said she won't seek re-election next year, isn't finished with her plans to reduce car traffic and encourage walking and cycling in Paris. Her office also banned motorised through-traffic from the city centre in November. Local workers, residents and taxis are still able to drive into the zone, but anyone passing through to go somewhere else will be fined €135 (RM651) once enforcement begins. > London The city's ultra-low emission zone has been in place for over five years. The restrictions, which place a daily charge on driving old gasoline or diesel vehicles, initially covered a small area of the city centre. It was subsequently expanded to cover an almost 1,554km square area, making it the largest in the world. London has had a separate congestion charging zone, which means almost everyone who drives into the city's core must pay, since 2003. When London mayor Sadiq Khan announced the expansion in 2022, the decision was met with warnings that high street shops would wither away and small businesses would struggle to survive. ULEZ, as the area is known for short, became a contentious topic in local elections, and Khan's opponent, from the right-wing Conservative Party, made it a central part of her pitch to voters in the mayoral election last year. (Khan won). In March, the mayor's office released data suggesting that ULEZ had a positive impact on air quality, while causing little disruption to shops in the outskirts of London, an area which was only included in the zone in August 2023. In particular the change has cut emissions of nitrogen oxides, air pollutants linked to lung problems, asthma and inflammation, by between 33% and 39%, while footfall and spending in shops has not dropped, according to data from Mastercard Inc. Almost 97% of vehicles driven within the zone are now compliant with the emissions standards, the report said. Vans, which were much more likely to be caught up by the changes, have been slower to switch, but over 90% are now compliant, compared with just 12% in 2017, before the zone was introduced. 'Everyone in the capital is now breathing cleaner air because of ULEZ,' said Christina Calderato, Transport for London's director of strategy, commenting on the report. — Bloomberg News/TNS
The Star
3 hours ago
- The Star
Stop scaring future world leaders off US campuses
HERE'S yet another way in which US President Donald Trump is making America neither Great Again nor strong, but weaker, and for a long time to come: He's sabotaging the US-centred trans-national intellectual and personal networks that have amplified American power by breaking the pipeline of future leaders of foreign countries who were educated and shaped in the US. His administration is doing that by expelling, harassing, or intimi-dating foreigners at US univer-sities. It revoked the visas of more than 1,400 international students on American campuses. In some cases, the government alleged that students were pro-Palestinian protesters, in others that they committed 'crimes', even if those turned out to be unpaid parking tickets or were even non-existent. Many of the revocations had no clear rationale at all. As part of the specific showdown between the White House and Harvard University, the administration threatened to stop the institution from enrolling international students altogether; however, on Friday a federal judge temporarily halted the ban. Before that, the many lawsuits brought by international students over their visa statuses caused enough chaos that the government promised to restore due process to its review of student visas. Whether it does or not, though, the damage may already be done. No matter how many students this bureaucratic jihad ultimately forces to go home, it will dissuade myriad other young talents abroad from applying to study in America in the first place. Why should they subject themselves to legal risk or hostility (on top of America's outlandish tuition costs) when they could instead get their degrees in other countries? And among those bright young things forming new ideas, expertise, and friendships outside rather than inside of the US will be some of tomorrow's world leaders. To grasp what America in the coming years will miss out on, consider the subtle but influential webs of soft power that have long been among the boons of America's status as an educational superpower. When covering the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, or again the global one of the late 2000s, I often heard that negotiations among countries and institutions went better than expected – and better for the US, in particular – because a lot of the people in the meetings had spent time on the same campuses, studied under the same professors, or even sat in the same classrooms. They wore different garb and spoke English in different accents. But they shared the language and mentality of, say, Harvard's Kennedy School, or the economics departments at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology or the University of Chicago. Mario Draghi, for example, has been an Italian and a European central banker (as well as a prime minister of Italy), just as Raghu-ram Rajan ran India's central bank and the research side of the International Monetary Fund, among other things. But both got their PhDs at MIT, and were influenced by Stanley Fischer, a titan of finance (and himself a former central banker of Israel). As a professor at MIT, Fischer in fact mentored future central bankers on most continents except Antarctica. Mark Carney, a former central bank governor in Britain and Canada (and Canada's current Prime Minister), is not among them – he went to Harvard instead. In some cases, these biographies make for stories of stunning success for the individuals as well as for the world and the host country, the US. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is a Nigerian who studied at Harvard and MIT, then went on to reform Nigeria's economy in two stints as Finance minister, before working at the World Bank and running the World Trade Organisation. She's still Nigerian, but now a US citizen as well. The list of US-educated heads of state is also long. For ambitious Latin Americans and Africans, a stint or two on an American campus is practically a rite of passage. The founding father of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, sent his younger son to Stanford and the elder to Harvard's Kennedy School; that one later became Singapore's third prime minister. Taiwan's current president got his master's degree from Harvard; his predecessor got hers from Cornell. The Jordanian king also studied in America (at Georgetown), as did much of his policy elite. Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, did not, but that makes him an outlier among Saudi royals. The Israelis love to take a swing through American campuses, including incumbent Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu (MIT and Harvard). On it goes, from Moldova to South Korea and Indonesia, where the current president did not study in the US but his influential Finance Minister, Sri Mulyani Indrawati, did (University of Illinois); she has called her American years formative. Whether an American educa-tion always makes foreign leaders more pro-American or pro-Western, or even just more capable, is moot. At a minimum, though, it lets international students see the world and their own countries through American eyes, narratives, metaphors, and references. It gives them a literal and figurative vocabulary with which they will later run international organisations or negotiate with the White House. The scholar Joseph Nye defined soft power as the ability to get others to want what you want. To the extent that a US education gets others to think as Americans think, it is the ideal tool of soft power, if you choose to see it that way. There are of course many other reasons for the US to host international students – about a million a year as of last count. Foreigners who study in America go on to invent and pioneer new technologies and business models at disproportionate rates, and most do it in and for the US. If the Trump administration pushes them away, those talents will innovate in and for China instead, or other adversaries and competitors. But the ability to form intellectual and personal networks across the world is enough reason to keep American education cosmopolitan, as opposed to barricading the ivory tower and closing American minds. In that way, education is like trade: enriching when it's open, corrosive when it closes. The benefits I'm describing pay out slowly, admittedly, and Trump isn't known for his attention span or long-term planning. But some rewards can be immediate, even if hard to quantify. Bilal Erdogan (Indiana University and Harvard) has surely talked at least some sense about America into his father, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. And as relations between the US and China become ever tenser, it surely helps both countries that Xi Jinping can turn to his daughter Mingze for discreet pointers about the Yanks. She too reportedly went to Harvard, though under an alias. Little else is publicly known, not even whether she paid all her parking tickets. – Bloomberg Opinion/Tribune News Service
