ALFP
A s i a L e a d e r s h i p F e l l ow P r o g r a m

Sharing Asia’s Experience
for the Future of the World

Contents

P

1

PrefaceP

2

About ALFP
Roundtable Talk:

P

4

P

18

The Thinking of Asian Public Intellectuals Today:P

27

Fellows Voices

30

List of ALFP Fellows

32

Number of ALFP Fellows by Country/Region

P

PIntellectual Exchange in Asia̶
The History and Signiﬁcance of the ALFP

Reuniting with the Asia Leadership Fellows

Preface
The Asia Leadership Fellow Program (ALFP) is a joint program of the JapanFoundation and the International House of Japan (I-House) launched in 1996
for the purpose of creating a network of public intellectuals deeply rooted inand committed to civil society in Asia.
This was a period of accelerating globalization, and Asia, a region
encompassing diverse cultures and ethnicities as well as possessing abundant
human and natural resources, was undergoing rapid economic development.
It was also during this time that many countries in Asia were striving tocreate new norms and value-orientations for the future of the region̶as awave of democratization was sweeping through Asia following the end of theCold War.
Against this backdrop, the ALFP was conceived with the hope ofproviding a forum for public intellectuals in Asia to engage in candid
discussion about the future of the region and to share their own knowledge
and experience. Between 1996 and 2018, the ALFP offered select leadersin Asia, individuals active in a broad range of endeavors extending beyond
the parameters of their respective nations, the opportunity to reside fortwo months at I-House in Tokyo and engage in collaborative activities anddialogue as ALFP fellows.
While continuing to deepen their thinking and expand their activities,
these fellows have come to form a network connecting civil society in Asia.
For over two decades, a total of 139 fellows from 17 Asian countries andregions participated in the program.
In 2018, the long history of this fellowship program came to a close. Since
then we have shared the fruits of the collaborative work of the fellows with awider audience through a lecture series and the publication of an e-magazine.
This brochure was compiled in a continuing effort to advance the aims of
the program. By looking back on the ALFPʼs activities for the past quarter
century and reviewing both the signiﬁcance and remaining challenges of the
program, we hope to lay a foundation for the further development of cultural
exchange in Asia.

December 2020
The Japan Foundation Asia Center
The International House of Japan1

AboutALFP

Why Asia? Why ALFP?

Two Months as a Fellow

More than 60 percent of the worldʼs population
lives in the region called Asia, where different
social institutions, economic systems, cultures,
religions, and ethnicities coexist. This richdiversity at the same time brings a wide rangeof difficult problems̶socioeconomic disparity,environmental deterioration, and racial, religious and cultural conﬂict, among others. The
ALFP believes that the key to breakthroughlies in the solidarity of concerned people who
initiate action while respecting each otherʼscultural background and values.

A L FP fellows selected from countr ies andregions in Asia stayed in Japan for two months
and took part in various forms of dialogue
including resource seminars by experts andopinion leaders, a field trip to learn aboutsocial issues and local initiatives speciﬁc to anarea of Japan, interaction with the Japanesepublic, and workshops for fellows to share theirexpertise and regional and global concerns.
Free and open discussion in both formal andinfor mal settings was the highlight of the
program and provided the foundation for future
networking among Asian intellectuals.

ALFP aims to…

Address issues

Work together

through dialogue̶beyond cultural,by sharing

disciplinary,knowledge andand geopoliticalexperiencebackgrounds

Respect diverse

Build a foundation

values andalternative voices

2 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

for civil society,for solidarity andcooperation

A Br i e f H i s to r y o f A L F P （Japanese fiscal year）
1996

ALFP launchedTwo-month fellowship program organized in Japan every autumn until 2018 (except for 2005 and 2012)

2001

ALFP Reunion Conference 2001
Conﬂict Management in the Face of Globalization:
Initiatives, Alternatives, and Imagination
August 3‒7, 2001, Bangkok and Surat Thani

2005

ALFP Reunion Conference 2005
Asia as a Community: Concept or Reality?
June 26‒30, 2005, Fukuoka and Busan2006

ALFP Panel at the International Convention of Asia Scholars 4 (ICAS 4)
Identity, Security and Democracy: Contradictions in a Globalizing Asia
August 20‒24, 2005, Shanghai

ALFP Reunion Conference 20 05

ALFP Alumni Publication
The Community of Asia: Concept or Reality?
(Anvil Publishing Inc., 2006)

Park Won Soon (20 0 0 Fellow, Korea)
receives the Ramon Magsaysay Awardin Public Service

ALFP 10th Anniversary Project: ALFP Forum in Hawaii
The Community of Asia: Concept or Reality?
May 19‒20, 2006, Honolulu / co-hosted by the East-West Center
Palagummi Sainath (20 03 Fellow, India)
receives the Ramon Magsaysay Award
in Journalism, Literature and Creative
Communication Arts

2007

2012

Fellow Seminar So, Are You Still Asian Enough?
Latest Perspectives on Tolerance, Governance and Identity
July 5, 2012, Jakarta

Fouzia Saeed (2010 Fellow, Pakistan)receives the Battle of Crete Award

ALFP website launched
Fellow Seminar Let s Talk about the Future of Japan and Asia
from the Perspective of Civil Society with Active Civic Leaders in Japan
February 2, 2013, Tokyo
ALFP Special Symposium The Future of Civil Society in Asia
February 6, 2013, Tokyo
Fellow Seminar Asian Intellectuals Discuss the Present
Conditions and the Future of East Asia
February 7, 2013, Tokyo / co-organized by Waseda University
Institute of Asia Paciﬁc Studies

Kong Rithdee (2010 Fellow, Thailand)
receives the Knight of the Order ofArts and Letters

2014

2015

ALFP Panel at the International Convention of Asia Scholars 9 (ICAS 9)
Seeking Our Commons in Asia: Visionary Collaboration of the Asia
Leadership Fellow Program Over Two Decades
July 6‒8, 2015, Adelaide

2016

Ambeth R. Ocampo (2014 Fellow, Philippines)
receives the Fukuoka Academic Prize
Urvashi Butalia (20 0 0 Fellow, India)
receives the Goethe Medal 2017

2017
2018

ALFP Special Symposium in 2013

Fellowship program terminated
ALFP e-magazine Voices of Asia launched● 1st, 2nd and 3rd issues of e-magazine published
ALFP Lecture Series launched● Lecture Series #1 Journalism in Asia: Searching for the Truth
October 14, 2018, Tokyo● Lecture Series #2
Bridging Divides and Disparities in Asia
February 19, 2019, Tokyo2019

ALFP Lecture Series #1 in 2018

● Lecture Series #3
Religion in Asia: A Possible Role for Peacebuilding
September 4, 2019, Tokyo

Lecture Series #4 Documentary Filmmaking in Asia: Hopes and Challenges
January 25, 2020, Tokyo●●

4th, 5th and 6th issues of e-magazine published

ALFP Lecture
Series #4 in 20203

Roundtable Talk

Intellectual Exchange in Asia―― The History and Significance of the ALFPThe Asia Leadership Fellow Program (ALFP) terminated in autumn 2018, withthe 2018 fellows being the last to participate in the program. Since then, we
have continued to share the fruits of the over twenty years of collaborative
work more widely in society through a lecture series and the publication ofan e-magazine, inviting former fellows as speakers and writers respectively.
The ALFP network has expanded across national boundaries as a platform
for bringing together voices of civil society in search of creative solutions to
the issues surrounding Asia. To reflect back on the ALFP, we convened aroundtable discussion among four individuals closely involved with the program
to consider its signiﬁcance within the broader history of intellectual exchange in
Asia. (Conducted at the International House of Japan, January 2020)

Ogawa: Today, I am pleased to welcome Mr.

involvement in the ALFP? Then, I would like

Tatsuya Tanami from the Nippon Foundation,

to hear your views on Asia, or on the situation

Professor Lee Jong Won from Waseda University,

between Japan and Asia at present, and con-and Professor Chiharu Takenaka from Rikkyo

clude our discussion with your evaluation of the

University̶who are all closely associated with

ALFP.

the ALFP. I hope we can use this time to review

Tanami: I joined the staff of the International

the process leading up to the birth of the ALFP

House of Japan (I-House) in 1973 and wasand the signiﬁcance of the program, while also

involved in intellectual exchange between Japanlooking back on Japanʼs relations with Asia andand the United States, and between Japanthe various structural changes that have taken

and Asia, until 1999. This was the era whenplace in the region over the past quarter of a

Yoshiyuki Tsurumi ※ 1 and Mikio Kato ※ 2 were

century. First, will each of you explain yourpioneering Asian Studies and cultural exchange※1＝ Yoshiyuki Tsurumi (1926 ‒1994) served as Program Director at the International House of Japan from 1963 to 1969, where hedeveloped person-to-person exchange programs with Asia such as the Asian Intellectual Cooperation Program. As a scholar in Asianstudies, he taught at Sophia University and Ryukoku University. Major publications include Banana to nihonjin (Bananas and the Japanese;
Iwanami Shinsho, 1982) and Namako no me (The Eye of the Sea Slug; Chikuma Gakugei Bunko, 1990).
※ 2 ＝ Mikio Kato (1936‒2020) joined the staﬀ of the International House of Japan in 1959 and served as Program Director, AssociateManaging Director, and Executive Director. He was actively involved in intellectual and cultural exchange between Japan and the UnitedStates, and Japan and countries in Asia. Publications include Rokkufera-ke to nihon (The Rockefellers and Japan: Five Generations
Spanning the Paciﬁc; Iwanami Shoten, 2015). He was awarded the Japan Foundation Special Prize in 2003.

4 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Tadashi Ogawa

Tatsuya Tanami

Professor, Atomi University
Tadashi Ogawa joined the Japan Foundation in 19 8 2. Heserved as Director-General of the Japan Foundation in New
Delhi and then in Jakarta before assuming his current positionin 2017. His research covers international cultural exchange
policy, contemporary culture in Asia, and comparative religion
and society. Publications include Indoneshia taminzoku kokka
no mosaku (Indonesia as Multiethnic Nation; Iwanami Shinsho,
1993), Tero to kyusai no genri shugi (Fundamentalism: Twisted
Terror and Salvation; Shincho Sensho, 2007), Sengo beikoku no
Okinawa bunka senryaku (American Postwar Public Diplomacy
in Okinawa; Iwanami Shoten, 2012), and Indoneshia Isuramu
taikoku no henbo (Indonesia: Transformation of an Islamic GreatPower; Shincho Sensho, 2016).

Special Adviser, Nippon Foundation; Managing Director,
Center for Human Rights Education and Training
Tatsuya Tanami graduated from the Department of Spanish
Studies at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies in 1973 andjoined the staﬀ of the International House of Japan. As Program
Director from 1990 to 1999, he was involved in intellectual andcultural exchange with the United States and countries in Asia,and in international human resource development programs
such as the Nitobe Fellowship Program. He went to the Nippon
Foundation in 1999, where he served as Executive Director
until 2017 and was responsible for its leprosy programs, the API
Fellowships Program, and programs to promote understanding ofJapan.

Lee Jong Won

Chiharu Takenaka

Professor, Graduate School of Asia-Paciﬁc Studies,
Waseda University
Lee Jong Won served as an assistant professor in the Schoolof Law at Tohoku University, a professor at Rikkyo University s
College of Law and Politics, and a visiting fellow at Princeton
University before assuming his current position in 2012. Hespecializes in international political science and contemporary
Korean studies. Publications include Rekishi toshiteno nikkan
kokko seijoka (Normalization of Japan-South Korean Relations as
History; coauthored, Hosei University Press, 2011) and Kokusai
seiji kara ka ngaeru higashi ajia kyo d otai (The East Asian
Community in the Context of International Politics; coauthored,
Minerva Shobo, 2012).

Professor, College and Graduate School of Law and Politics,
Rikkyo University
Chiharu Takenaka served as a professor at Meiji Gakuin University before assuming her current position in 20 0 8 . She
specializes in international politics, South Asian (Indian) politics,
and gender studies . Publications include S e k a i w a n a z enakayoku dekinaino? Boryoku no rensa o toku tame ni (WhyCan t the World Get Along? To Untie the Chain of Violence; CCC
Media House, 2004), Tozoku no indo shi (The Bandit Historyof India; Yushisha, 2010), and Gandi heiwa o tsumugu hito
(Gandhi, A Man Spinning Peace; Iwanami Shinsho, 2018).

5

at I-House. I learned a great deal from themwhile working on both traditional intellectualinterchange programs※3and experimental

programs like the ALFP. Before the inception of
the ALFP, I-House and the Japan Foundation had
already been conducting intellectual exchangewith Asia, but we began running up against thelimitations of the existing approaches aiming at
the betterment of mutual understanding. And
this brought us to the fundamental questionof what could actually come out of exchanges
among intellectuals. This then led us to explore
a new direction in cultural exchange and a new
multilateral framework for intellectual exchange.
I consulted with Mr. Ogawa, who was with theJapan Foundation back then, and the ALFP waslaunched as something of an experiment.
Later, I transferred to the Nippon Foundationand established a program called the Asian
Public Intellectuals (API) Fellowships Program,which was an extended version of the ALFPin terms of duration of the program, criteria,
and scale of activities. The API Fellowships
were terminated in 2015, and with the ALFP
also having come to a close, I feel we havecome to the end of an era. Both programs had
the mission of discovering intellectual leadersin Asia, nurturing trust among them, andencouraging them to later collaborations basedon that mutual trust. Accordingly̶and as a ﬁnal
step in the programs̶I feel Japanʼs duty now is
to take leadership in thinking of some possible
mechanism to further stimulate the ideas of the
fellows for collaborative activities and pass themon to the future.
Lee: I was fortunate enough to be given the
chance to work with the ALFP from its ﬁrst year,
in 1996. I was invited as a guest to the retreat
conference held immediately after the fellows
arrived in Japan. The experience left a deep
impression on me, and I remained involvedin the ALFP for a decade or so thereafter as
an advisory committee member. The firstthing to note is that whereas many intellectual
exchange programs up to then were organizedon a bilateral basis, the ALFP was a multilateral

6

A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

program. It was clearly diﬀerent from traditional
intellectual exchange. Since the concept ofregion-building in Asia was important from thestandpoint of my own field of specialization
as well, its being multilateral particularly
resonated with me. The idea of East Asia as aregion had emerged since around the 1980s,
ﬁrst economically, and I was curious to see howthat framework would play out in the context ofinternational politics.
The second point I found interesting wasthat, although the ALFP was funded by Japan,
it was not designed solely for the interest ofJapan. The purpose of the program was not tobe beneﬁcial for scholars specializing in Japanor for Japan itself, but to facilitate regional
exchange and networking among intellectuals
in Asia. It was refreshing to see a program that
did not aim to serve oneʼs national interest ina narrow sense. The third point was that the
ALFP invited fellows from diverse backgrounds
and disciplines. This group resided together andengaged in dialogue̶it was like mixed martial
arts matches of intelligence and great minds,
so to speak. Such an approach had not existed
before and struck me as very fresh. I liked the
new model of assembling, say, academics, poets,
dramatists, journalists, and activists in the samesession. The individual fellows were also freespirits who crossed boundaries in every sense,
engaging in a lively discussion. I found thistruly inspiring and gained a great deal from mydecade of involvement.
Takenaka: I also was involved in the programfrom its early years. This was around the time I
returned from my research in the United States.
I remember my husband, Kiichi Fujiwara of
the University of Tokyo, and I welcomed someof the first fellows like Kwok Kian-Woon andJanadas Devan from Singapore, and Diana
Wong from Malaysia, along with Mr. Tanami,
at our house. Going back further, I had taken
part in an international conference in Kiyosato
in July 1984, organized based on the ideasof Mr. Tanami, who was then active in the
Program Department at I-House. The event wasa prototype of what would be the Asia-Pacific※4Youth Forum (APYF ) .

countries, disciplines, and gender. It constantly

It invited young leaderssought out the frontier in selecting fellows,from neighboring countries in Asia as well as

not restricting eligibility to urban elites; infrom countries in North and South America tomany ways, the program broke conventional

Japan to engage in free discussions about thebarriers. Normally, a fellowship is a grant given

present and future of our society in the Asia-

to individuals for conducting research, or is

Pacific region. This type of dialogue-baseda sort of award presented to those who haveprogram had not existed before, and to a young

made some exceptional achievement. Thus, it isparticipant like myself, it provided a fresh,quite rare to ﬁnd a fellowship that falls outside

creative experience of international intellectual

these definitions even from an international

exchange.

perspective. The ALFP is even rarer in that itTrue to its historical origins, I-House had

aims to foster solidarity and promote networking

promoted international exchange primarily

among the fellows and alumni. To this day, I

between Japan and the West, centering on the

believe the program is one of a kind.

United States. Later, in the midst of Japanʼs

Ogawa: Allow me to elaborate a little more

growing economic power, the focus shifted toon the establishment of the ALFP. In 1990,

what should be the nationʼs role as a major

the Japan Foundation formed the ASEAN

actor in international society. At that time, I

Culture Center ※ 5 to introduce the cultures

remember Mr. Tanami saying that he wantedof ASEAN countries to Japan through a new

to expand the horizon to Asia and the Pacific,

type of operation. In 1995, this was expanded

to promote internationalization outside of thatto cover all of Asia with a larger number ofJapan-US framework. I see the ALFP as the

programs and disciplines with the opening

realization of his vision. Around 2000, whenof the Asia Center ※ 6̶which was establishedthe participation eligibility expanded to South

with funding under the Peace, Friendship, andAsia with the invitation of Urvashi Butalia

Exchange Initiative,※7 a project which had beenfrom India, I became more involved in theannounced by then Prime Minister Tomiichi

program and a few years later started serving

Murayama in the previous year, aiming at theas an advisory committee member. Multilateralpromotion of friendship between Japan andinternational dialogue and exchange continue toneighboring countries in Asia over a period ofstand out as the programʼs distinguishing feature

ten years. At that time, I was at the Asia Center

today. The ALFP steered clear of sectionalism,

serving as Assistant Director of the Intellectual

adopted a nongovernmental framework, andExchange Division and had to develop a raft ofcarefully considered the representation of

new programs. It was around then, I think, that

※3 ＝ Back then the term intellectual interchange was chosen over
two terms among the founding members of I-House in the 1950s.

intellectual exchange

after extensive discussions concerning the※ 4 ＝The program invited youths from diﬀerent countries and regions in the Asia-Paciﬁc to live under the same roof, think about anddiscuss common regional issues, and through that, to deepen mutual understanding and solidarity and to broaden the circle of exchange.
The program originated from the Paciﬁc Asrama conference established in 1974. It was renamed the Asia-Paciﬁc Youth Forum (APYF) in
1995 and was jointly operated by the International House of Japan and the Japan Foundation from 1996.
※ 5 ＝The ASEAN Culture Center was established in January 1990 to introduce the diverse culture of Asia with a focus on ASEAN
countries. In October 1995, it was expanded and reorganized into the Japan Foundation Asia Center Department (the former Asia Center).
※6＝The former Asia Center was integrated into the Japan Foundation headquarters through the major reorganization of departments in2004.
※ 7＝The Peace, Friendship, and Exchange Initiative was the government s ten-year plan marking the ﬁftieth anniversary of the end ofWorld War II. It was inaugurated to look squarely at Japan s history of relations with neighboring countries in Asia and, by furthering mutual
understanding with these countries, to work together and build forward-looking relations.

7Mr. Tanami approached me with the idea ofaround and thinking, shouldnʼt they be seeking

launching a new type of fellowship.

solutions by taking concrete action? That was

The relationship between the JapanFoundation and I-House up to that time was oneway: the Japan Foundation provided funding,

my concern, one shared by others.
The basis for this idea was a study report on
the future of cultural exchange, Reconstituting

and I-House received it. But Mr. Tanami andthe Human Community , ※ 8 published in the

I had a similar vision that we deal with each

early 1970s, which was a relatively unknown,other as equals and launch a fellowship. Being asecret bible for those of us engaged in cultural

government-aﬃliated organization, it was a new

exchange. It was the record of a conference held

challenge for the Japan Foundation to partnerin the early 1970s with 16 intellectuals fromwith a private organization, acknowledge each

Japan, Southeast Asia, Africa, the Middle East,otherʼs strengths, and manage an intellectualIndia, and the United States. ※ 9 Participants

exchange program. That in itself felt extremely

included the Indonesian former rector of the

fresh, and I began discussions with Mr. Tanami

United Nations University Soedjatmoko and theabout the program.

Thai thinker Sulak Sivaraksa. The intellectuals

So, Mr. Tanami, earlier you made mention ofengaged in discussion for a period of three years

coming to feel a sense of limitation in regard

and published this report. The United States-

to traditional intellectual exchange programs.

based Hazen Foundation provided the funding,

Could you elaborate on how you felt? I am

and I-House assembled a study group fromparticularly interested in your motivation forJapan and served as its secretariat. The contents

launching a new type of program like the ALFP,of the discussions were ahead of the times: what

and in the programʼs concept and goals. Also,

to do about ever-deepening interdependence,

Professor Lee and Professor Takenaka havethe progress of science, and changing world

brought up some points that are unique to theviews; topics from advances in technology

ALFP. Could you explain your thinking at thatto changes in cultures; and problems fromtime about the programʼs design?

population to the environment. In short, theTanami: Please keep in mind that my involve-

issues were not unique to any one nation, but

ment in the ALFP only lasted for the firstregional or global in nature, and the discussions

three years of the program. That is to say, myrevolved around what cultural exchange

knowledge centers on what I did along with the

could do to improve the situation. The debate

fellows during that time.

concerning the need for ever more transnational

In terms of a sense of limitation, intellectual

cultural exchange and knowledge exchange,

exchange with Asia at the time was bilateral,in particular, inspired us to think about new

as Professor Lee pointed out: bilateral inframeworks for intellectual exchange. The ﬁnal

country-to-country and bilateral in person-to-chapter of the report stressed the importance of

person. The exchange was one-to-one, andmultilateral exchange among young people inthat was somewhat restricting. Also, the role

the Asian region in the future. This led to theof intellectuals was not clear. They produced

creation of the Asia-Paciﬁc Youth Forum (APYF)

knowledge and relayed it, but the questionthat Professor Takenaka mentioned earlier.

was whether that was really enough. Asian

Takenaka: Yes, I remember.

intellectuals back then were good at expressing

Tanami: Thus progressive ideas existed as

their ideals, but they seldom translated thoseearly as the 1970s. The Japan Foundationʼs

ideals into action. As problems were mounting inestablishment of the Asia Center later on alsosociety, the feeling grew that these intellectuals

motivated us to consider a framework forneeded to take on social responsibility to bringdiscovering more proactive intellectuals andchange through action. Rather than just sitting

working with them toward solutions. This was

8 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

ALFP was created as an embodiment of
the spirit of the times, leading half a stepahead and facilitating a network of thecivil society sector in Asia.

the starting point of the ALFP.
The 1990s was a time of signiﬁcant movement

leaders who were actively engaged in social
issues. This led to the ALFP.

in civil society, and this also led to changes

Ogawa: Now that you mention the emergencein the overall environment that should not beof a track three and the changing role of in-overlooked. Civil society started gaining antellectuals, the second half of the 1980s saw

increasing amount of power when it came toa wave of democracy spread throughout Asia.

addressing problems that politics alone could

T he Ph i l ippi nes u nder went a democr at ic

not take on. We wanted to create a framework

revolution, and South Korea and Thailand alsoof exchange that leaned toward this civil

made a transition toward democracy. Economic

society̶a framework that was neither track one

development was underway particularly in urban(governmental) nor track two (nongovernmental),areas, leading to the rise of a middle class.

but a sort of track three centering on intellectualThis middle class consisted of urban youths※8＝Reconstituting the Human Community was a study report published by the Edward Hazen Foundation, Connecticut, USA, in 1972.
The Japanese edition was translated by Yoshiyuki Tsurumi and appeared in I-House s Kokusai Bunka Kaikan Kaiho , No. 30‒31 (combined
issue), published in August 1973.
※ 9 ＝This was a cultural exchange and joint international research program organized by the Hazen Foundation in 1970. It assembled
intellectuals from the United States, India, Southeast Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Japan to conduct joint research into the ideals ofinternational cultural relations in human society.

9who demanded democracy and free discussion.

Ogawa: The Woodrow Wilson International

Mr. Tanami, being in this atmosphere, you

Center for Scholars in the United States, or themust have felt in your bones that the role ofWilson Center for short, hosted a residential

intellectuals was changing.

fellowship where all of the participants lived

Tanami: I wasnʼt alone. Many others felt theunder the same roof and engaged in dialogue.

same way. And those who understood theCan I assume you had new types of fellowships

changes in the environment, the situation, andlike the one at the Wilson Center in mind?

the role of intellectual leaders saw this as an

Tanami: Yes, we envisioned providing a space

opportunity to create something new. Now,

where everyone could stay together and engage

when it came to defining those intellectualin dialogue. As luck would have it, I-House had

leaders committed to social issues, I believe

housing accommodations, dining service, and

the ALFP was the first to use the term “publicconference rooms. We felt it was the ideal place

intellectuals.” The expression itself had been

for a residential program. The program also

around for a while. But the idea of fostering

represented a new venture for I-House. We setsocially-committed intellectual leaders who will

the fellowship period at two months because it wasplay a new role in society, and calling these

difficult to ask the busy participants to commit

people public intellectuals, started with thisany more time. We then started thinking aboutprogram.

what could be oﬀered during that time frame.

Japan intended to work with other Asian
countries as a member of Asia and as anequal partner.

10 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Ogawa: When we established the ASEAN

Ogawa: I was stationed at the Japan Foundationʼs

Culture Center, the Japan Foundation was in

New Delhi office from 1998, and was able tothe midst of cultivating connections with artists,

send off Urvashi Butalia, a leading expert on

culture figures, and intellectuals in cities suchgender studies, as an ALFP fellow in 2000.

as Jakarta, Bangkok, and Kuala Lumpur where

Masaaki Ohashi, a former ALFP fellow who later

we had overseas offices. We discovered someserved as an advisory committee member (andamazing people and wanted to connect themcurrently a professor at the University of thewith Japan. Our main scheme for extending

Sacred Heart, Tokyo), had told me that India

invitations to Asia, however, was the Japanese

was an NGO superpower, and that everyone

Studies Fellowship Program for scholars in

who works with an NGO is an intellectual. That

Japanese studies. This meant, no matter how

was how Urvashiʼs name came to mind.

amazing the people were, if they were not

Lee: Listening to Mr. Tanami and Professor

scholars in Japanese studies, we had no way of

Ogawaʼs account of the background to ALFP

inviting them. The ALFP enabled us to introduce

dating back to the 1970s, it strikes me that theto Japan the connections our overseas offices

birth and development of the ALFP correspondhad developed with people other than scholars

closely with a transformation in international

in Japanese studies. This was a huge advantage

politics and concurrent changes in Japaneseand a morale booster for the Japan Foundation,

diplomacy.

especially for those working in the overseas

Ogawa: Could you elaborate on that?

oﬃces.

Lee: From the 1970s through the 1980s and to

In the year of its inauguration, in 1996, all

the 1990s, Japan played an important diplo-of the ALFP fellows were selected from ASEAN

matic role in the process of building a regionalcountries. The program did not yet cover Southframework for East Asia. During the Ohira

Asia and East Asia. I remember discussing

administration in the late 1970s, Japanʼs foreign

the possibility of expanding eligibility to otherpolicy toward Asia evolved around the concept

countries and regions, and whether it would beof interdependence, which was first put fortheffective or not, under our limited budget, to

by Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane in theirinvite just one person from a big country likepath-breaking Power and Interdependence ※ 10

China or India.

published in 1977. In that book, they argued that

Tanami: Thatʼs right. We had extensive dis-a new dimension of international politics wascussions about expanding to East Asia.

emerging, where various transnational connec-

Lee: During the period of 1998 to 2000, when I

tions and interdependencies between not only

was conducting overseas research in the Unitedstates but also societies increased dramatically,

States, Mr. Tanami asked if I knew anyone fromthus reducing the relevance of traditional power

South Korea who would be suitable as a fellow.

politics in international relations. They named

If I remember correctly, I recommended Cho

it complex interdependence, analyzing andHong-Sup. He continues to be active today as aenvisioning a fundamental transformation ofleading journalist specializing in environmental

international politics. The Ohira administration

issues. The program was expanded to Northeast

was quick to accept this and applied it to a new

Asia including South Korea and then to SouthJapanese diplomacy.

Asia around this time, during which I was
appointed as an advisory committee member.

Furthermore, international politics in the
1970s witnessed the beginning of a long-※10 ＝ Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition , (Boston: Little, Brown andCompany, 1977).

11

term decline in the dominant American

vision have come to a standstill today, and Asia

hegemony, and the emergence of a moreis being divided by the ever-intensifying US-

horizontal international order. As a nation with

China rivalry.

a “Peace Constitution,” Japan strove to findOne of the features of Japanese diplomacy

ways to contribute to a new regional order within the process of building such frameworks

nonmilitary means ̶ economic, social, andwas that it practiced the art of “leading from

cultural.

behind,” as we saw in APEC and ASEAN Plus

When the United States showed signs ofThree. The idea of Japan leading from thedisengaging itself from Asia and retreating

front could still be seen in a negative light,

from leadership in the region since the Nixon

considering the memories of World War II and

Doctrine and the end of the Vietnam War, theJapanese colonial rule. This was the sense in

Ohira administration put forward the idea of thewhich Australian scholar Alan Rix coined thePacific Rim, which set in motion a cascade ofexpression “leading from behind.” I imagine

proposals for regional frameworks in the Asia-

Mr. Tanami and other founding members ofPacific. In close cooperation with Australia,

the ALFP were sensitive to such discourse andJapan played an important role in establishingpolicy developments, and responded to them in

APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) for

formulating their concept for the new program.

regional stability. As political democratization

It was in this context that the ALFP was createdand economic development spread in East Asia

as an embodiment of the spirit of the times,

in the 1980s, not only political and economic

leading half a step ahead and facilitating a

but also social and cultural exchanges among

network of the civil society sector in Asia.

regional states expanded dramatically. The

Ogawa: The Japan Foundation Asia Center wasconcept of East Asia began to evolve from anestablished under Prime Minister Murayamaʼsidea to a reality.

Peace, Friendship, and Exchange Initiative. As

Traditionally Japanese diplomacy put the

you said, one of its pillars was to build a future-

focus on Southeast Asia, in close relations withoriented regional community in the Asia-Paciﬁc

the ASEAN countries. When the Asian ﬁnancial

including Japan. Because the initiative marked

crisis broke out in 1997, it became an urgent

the ﬁftieth anniversary of the end of World War

task to integrate the bigger three countries inII, overcoming the negative legacy of Japanʼs

Northeast Asia in a regional cooperation system.

past was certainly in the minds of diplomaticIn this context ASEAN Plus Three̶Japan,

oﬃcials and of the staﬀ at the Japan Foundation.

China, and South Korea̶was established at

At the time of the Centerʼs founding, the Asia

the initiative of ASEAN. In this process, Japanside was on guard thinking Japan might try toplayed an important background role. Basedrecreate either a prewar Asia centering on Japan

upon the framework of ASEAN Plus Three,or a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere-a vision for an East Asian Community wasstyle Asia based on its economic advancement.

pushed forward at the initiative of South Korean

But no, Japan intended to work with other Asian

President Kim Dae-jung in the late 1990s.

countries as a member of Asia and as an equal

Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi worked

partner̶and having the ALFP in place gave thishand-in-hand with President Kim to launch a

explanation credibility.

Trilateral Cooperation among Japan, China, andTanami: Many of the Asian intellectuals

South Korea as an essential part of that vision.

who came to Japan in the era of traditional

In 2005 the first East Asia Summit meeting

intellectual exchange, in the 1960s and thewas convened in Kuala Lumpur, which was

1970s, were anti-Japan. They had a negative

expected to be a big stride toward an East Asian

image of Japanʼs bad deeds against Asia sinceCommunity. Unfortunately, efforts towards thisthe war. A typical pattern was that they would

12 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra mengage in exchange with Japanese intellectuals,

Asian countries achieved quite rapid politicalbut seize the opportunity to criticize Japan andand economic development, and civil society

assert their Asian point of view at the same

became vibrant and empowered to tackle thetime.

various challenges emerging in Asia at theThat changed starting around the 1980s.

beginning of the twenty-ﬁrst century. The ALFPAsian intellectuals were now willing to work

also focused on the construction of a newwith Japan, embracing an Asia that included

partnership among actors in civil society inJapan as a member. This was when individual

Japan as well as in that dynamically changing

countries in Asia were becoming more stable.

Asia. Naturally, civil society, democracy,

They were making the transition from dictator-and human rights became keywords in thisship to democracy. Their economies wereendeavor. Also, when international society grewpicking up. Above all, civil society was growing

more volatile owing to the crisis of terrorism

in Asia. And the ALFP was a program thatand the war on terror in the 2000s, we came

reﬂected those changes particularly well.

to address the issues of the securitization of

Lee: By putting civil society front and center

state-society relations and the violation of

in its program, the ALFP made proactive andhuman security. The issue of Islam and religious

horizontal networking possible. It gathered

tolerance became crucial as well, since many

together the leaders of civil society, like

Asian countries had a large Muslim population.

journalists and those who entered politics from

To tackle those challenges by understanding

civil movements, and provided the opportunity

each other and developing a lively discussion

to build diverse and proactive relationships

among us, it became clear that we must enlarge

across Asia.

our own perspective in order to exchange views

Tanami: When you look at it from a different

and to cover a wide range of topics such as

angle, socially-committed intellectuals arepoverty, education, discrimination, minorities,

usually anti-government. The Japan Foundationand gender equality. Whenever we started

was quite broad-minded to welcome and accept

discussions, we faced the same questions: Whatthese people.

is Asia? Who are Asians? Do we call ourselves

Ogawa: If you ask me, that is precisely the role

Asians? Do we already have a community ofof cultural exchange, and the area which cannot

Asia? Are we representing our own countries

be covered by politics or the economy. The

or speaking up for ourselves as individual

twenty-first century brought further changes

citizens? It was a refreshing experiment for all

in Asia. The optimism about the global futureof us involved in the program to go beyond

prevailing since the end of the Cold War

the familiar barriers of nationality, cultural

vanished with the September 11 attacks in the

difference, gender, ethnicity, and professional

United States. The rise of China and India wasdiscipline.

also a significant change. These circumstances

I should be careful not to fall into cultural

went on to cause a relative decline in Japanʼs

stereotyping, but it was interesting to see how

status in the world. The way we interact andthe combination of the ALFP fellows with

communicate also changed owing to the Internet

different backgrounds generated a uniquelyand social media, to the information revolution.

Asian community: the fellows from South

Professor Takenaka and Professor Lee, could

Asia were good at taking the initiative in

you tell us how these structural changes in Asia

discussion, those from ASEAN countries createdand changes in international relations affected

a harmonious atmosphere for dialogue, and

the ALFP, or how the ALFP responded to andthose from East Asia often stood out to present

discussed those issues?

a unique point of view. Japanese fellows played

Takenaka: In the 1980s and the 1990s, manyan important role in helping other fellows

13interact with people in Japanese society.

length, the ALFP set grand themes such as

Lee: Having joined the fellowsʼ discussions at

identity, security, and democracy starting in

retreat conferences, my feeling was that whether

2003. A couple of years later, it proposed theit was Southeast Asia, Japan, or South Korea, allnecessity of discussing community building in

Asian countries struggled with similar political,

Asia.

economic, and social issues at one time or

However, because the ALFP had placed

another. This is why I think fellows could blend

importance on having an open and free

in and engage with each other, and have in-discussion, some fellows criticized the idea of

depth discussions at once, though coming

limiting their dialogue to Asia. Why confinefrom diverse backgrounds. In the early years

themselves to Asia, they said. In his keynoteof the program, topics were in fact set aroundspeech at the ALFP reunion conference heldcommunity building in Asia based on common

in Fukuoka and Busan in June 2005, a leading

experiences.

intellectual from Indonesia, Goenawan

As we entered the twenty-first century, theMohamad, borrowed a quote by John Lennon.

September 11 attacks occurred, triggering the

In his characteristic, poetic way, he saidmechanism of exclusion which caused people

something along these lines: Asia is like God.

to build walls to exclude “others.” That trend

Nobody can prove or deny its existence. We

is still seen today. People have turned their

do not know where it begins, and where it

minds to division and boundaries in society

ends.

as a reaction against globalization. China

Comparatively speaking, Northeast Asians

joined the World Trade Organization in 2000,

have lived in more or less clearly-deﬁned ethnic

and soon it achieved a remarkable economic

and state frameworks for a long period of timerise, which triggered a power transition inin history. As such, I have the impression thatinternational relations. This had an influence

discussions by fellows from Northeast Asia

on various aspects of international politics,

tend to be stiﬀ, for the most part. By contrast,

particularly in East Asia. In building a regional

Southeast Asians experience diversity as aframework in East Asia, the ASEAN Plus

reality of everyday life. Accordingly, theirThree lost momentum, and the concept of the

discussions are based on diversity from theEast Asian Community started to fade aroundstart. The intellectual contribution of Southeast

2005. This was when the East Asia Summit

Asian fellows to the ALFP has been hugestarted, but, ironically, dialogue about an East

beyond description. Their ﬂexible thinking that

Asian Community quickly waned. Instead,would break down boundaries had an enormous

dealing with the new, growing power of China

impact on me as well as other intellectuals

became an important challenge for East Asia

from Northeast Asian countries. I have actuallyand international politics. Around this time,talked about this with some of the South Korean

Japanese diplomacy also started to focus less on

fellows.

the concept of community and more on creating

Tanami: Another point to consider is that it isa traditional balance of power system to deal

often difficult to produce tangible results with

with the rise of China. This shift strengthened

a program like this. What new knowledge did

Japanʼs emphasis on its national interests in thethe ALFP create? Did it build a community of

conventional, narrow sense. Formerly, Japan

intellectual leaders? Have those intellectual

tended to promote its national interests lessleaders worked together and taken visible

conspicuously than other countries. This madeaction, or launched a program and produced

Japan attractive. But it was quickly reverting

results? I believe we should follow throughto an “ordinary country” in this sense as well.

and properly verify and evaluate the outcomes

Seeking to discuss these changes at greaterof the ALFP. We should think about the future

14 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

The question is how we generate a follow-up
mechanism for translating the outcomeof the program into concrete action.

activities of the intellectual community we havefor a new, post-Cold War world order in thecreated, if there is any such community. Only

1990s, there was an eﬀort to create a regional

then can we formulate any new programs as ancommunity in Asia similar to the European

extension of that.

Union. And second, after a period of very highIntellectuals have their respective fields

expectations for globalization, the Septemberof specialization such as the environment,

11 attacks brought into relief globalizationʼshuman rights, and social development.

negative aspects and shifted the mood in Asia

Should our new direction include exploringfrom uniting to building dividing walls. The

those specific individual themes as common

world of intellectuals followed suit and turned toregional or community issues and seeking

building small walls and looking inward. Doesout solutions? Or should we invite people

this more or less sum up your views?

with diverse backgrounds and disciplines and

Takenaka: May I suggest another point of view?

foster discussions covering broader themes

The information revolution has enabled us tol i k e i d e n t i t y, d e v e l o p m e n t , c u l t u r e , a n dconnect with one another at all times. In fact,globalization? I believe the time has come to

we are never “out of touch.” We do reachrethink all of this and decide on the next step.

out, offer support, and exchange information

Ogawa: Based on our talk today, I think weamong each other all the time, on both goodcan say that the ALFP developed in line withdays and bad days. Sometimes, we are able totwo major global trends. First, in the searchreceive happy news such as wonderful awards

15

It is important to evaluate
and articulate the concept,
institutional arrangements,
and practice of the ALFP.

being presented to our colleagues. Other

new from it. Although the fellows were limited

times, we might get distressing news such as

in number, many of those who were selectednatural disaster or serious incidents affecting

have wielded a great deal of influence backour friends. The important thing is that we arehome. Sometimes I joked that I wanted to be aable to keep our ALFP community alive in thisfellow. I wished I could directly join the network

rapidly changing world.

of fellows, engage in dialogue, and participate

Ogawa: In other words, there is a way ofin collaborative activities. When you are in thecreating a community supported by new

position of an advisory committee member, youtechnology like social media. This brings us

inevitably keep a certain distance.

back to the problem raised by Mr.Tanami.

From an objective point of view, however,

Would each of you evaluate the ALFP ̶ what it

it was difficult to produce tangible results in

has achieved and what it has not been able tothe short term. If the program invited people

achieve in terms of its value and uniqueness?

in the same field of specialization and came

Lee: First, my personal impression is that theup with policy recommendations for a specificprogram is a great asset for the fellows whochallenge, then the social impact would beparticipated. The individual fellows have madeeasier to see and easier for the media to cover.

use of the ALFP network in their own work, andIn a symposium where the participants wereevery now and then have produced something

in the same ﬁeld, it would be easier to reach a

16 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra msolution. By contrast, the ALFP invited people

whole. The fellows themselves undertook afrom diverse disciplines to discuss a certain

tremendous variety of projects as individuals or

topic. The participants may gain a great deal

as groups but that did not lead to the creationof inspiration, but it is diff icult to arrive at andof an integrated community. This is my personalpresent a single result. This is inevitable to aview, but it seems that both the ALFP andcertain degree, considering the nature of thethe API lacked a follow-up mechanism forprogram.

translating the outcome of the program into

We have created a solid network of opinion

concrete action. That was an issue common

leaders with tremendous influence in their

to both programs. Doing so requires funding,respective countries. The limited number ofa mechanism and an organization, and above

fellows means we may not immediately arriveall, leadership. With all of this in place, it may

at concrete solutions for issues facing society.

still be difficult but not impossible to produce

But problems between states will emerge intangible results.

every era, and the role of public intellectuals is

Takenaka: I would like to acknowledge theto think about how to approach those problems

fact that the Japan Foundation, a government-from a broader perspective transcending

affiliated organization, and the Internationalvarious borders. The program was importantHouse of Japan, a private nonproﬁt organization,in that it thought ahead of the times and laidclosely worked together for a common goal andthe groundwork for the medium- to long-

carried out this intellectual exchange program

term future, where those who held importantfor such a long period of time. For a quarter-

positions in the intellectual community of theircentury, the ALFP has accomplished the unique

respective countries had the opportunity tofeat of maintaining freedom of speech and a

exchange their thoughts with one another. Itʼshigh degree of political fairness and neutrality

almost unfair to expect this type of intellectual

while promoting international intellectual

exchange to produce solutions in the short term.

exchange. It is, therefore, important to evaluate

Tanami: As Professor Lee says, the individual

and articulate the concept, institutional

fellows take what they have learned back toarrangements, and practice of the ALFP in

their home country and spread an immeasurable

those decades, and to give a proper historicalamount of knowledge and wisdom to their local

understanding of Japanʼs contribution to thecommunity and other communities. I am notdevelopment of intellectual exchange in Asia,

denying that. The results may be difficult towhile comparing that with similar programs

measure or identify and describe. The fellows

carried out by other organizations in Japan andcome together, engage in dialogue, and deliverabroad.

the results to their country and community.

Ogawa: I agree. We shall keep records andHowever, the fact remains that we may notevaluate them, including todayʼs roundtable talk.

have paid enough attention to the action that

Keeping primary sources is important not only

would take place after the program. To befor us when thinking about the next program

honest, I had the same problem with the API

but also for the studies of younger generations.

Fellowships Program that I established at the

Listening to your views today has renewed my

Nippon Foundation. The program created aappreciation of the importance of person-to-large community of remarkable fellows who

person exchange. Asia is home to countlesswere aware of various social issues and wereamazing people, many of whom are yet to becommitted to work on them. But it fell short ofdiscovered, and we have various potential ways

forming a solid community where the fellows

to connect with one another. Thank you forwould take collaborative action that could be

your time today.

presented as the results of the program as a17

ReportJakarta City on the weekend

The Thinking of Asian Public Intellectuals Today:

Reuniting with
the Asia Leadership Fellows
Tadashi Ogawa ( Professor, Atomi University)
In our world of 2020, the spirit of international

intellectuals who, instead of sitting in an ivory

cooperation is threatened by the expansion of

tower, actively speak up and engage in social

isolationism, populism, and religious extremism,

issues for the benefit of society and the larger

and democracy is on the wane in various parts

international community.

of the globe.
The Asia Leadership Fellow Program (ALFP)

What did Asia look like around 1996, when
this program began?

is a joint effort of the Japan Foundation and

The world at large was in the process of

the International House of Japan to foster

creating a new international order in the wakeinternational cooperation from Japanʼsof the Cold War coming to an end. A wave of

unique standpoint. It was designed to bringdemocratization was coming to Asia following

together Asiaʼs public intellectuals̶defined as

the demise of authoritarian regimes in the

18 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Philippines in 1986, South Korea in 1987,
and Thailand in 1991. Japan reached its own
milestone in 1995, the year marking the ﬁftiethanniversary of the end of World War II. It wasa period of positive momentum for our country,with the hope ̶while facing the past squarely̶
of building a future-oriented relationship withcountries in Asia and strengthening regionalties. This was also a time when the use of arevolutionary new communication technology,
namely the Internet, rapidly spread throughout

Dr.Jamhari

the world.
Over the twenty-two years from 1996 to 2018,

nation, with 87 percent of its population

139 public intellectuals participated in the ALFP

embracing Islam, has evolved into a successful

and enjoyed a productive time in Japan. With

democracy with sustained economic growth

the international community now facing a hostis another aspect of Indonesia that has drawnof critical challenges, what are those Asian

attention around the world.

scholars, cultural leaders, journalists, and civil

Dr. Jamhari (ALFP 2004), Deputy Rector

activists thinking? How are they responding to

at UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta (Syarif

todayʼs challenges? As one of the programʼs

Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta),

founding members, I set out to visit them andalways greets me with a gentle smile, but his

ﬁnd answers to these questions.

expression this time clouded slightly when I
asked him to share his immediate concerns

INDONESIA

Seeking Democracy

about Indonesia. His answers: “Intolerant
attitudes of Muslim youth towards minority
groups, despite living in a multiethnic,
multireligious society” and “the proliferation

My first stop was Indonesia, Southeast Asiaʼsof extremist ideology aiming to transformlargest nation, which underwent a dramaticIndonesia into a nation based on Islamic law.”reconfiguration of governance during thisInspired by the Islamic State group, some oftwenty-two-year period. Indonesiaʼs democratic

his university students have headed for Iraq

reform process began with the collapse of

to become ISIS fighters. With assistance from

Suhartoʼs authoritarian regime in 1998, triggered

Japan, he carried out an attitude survey ofby the Asian ﬁnancial crisis. After overcoming a

Muslim university students and teachers acrossturbulent transition period, the country has seen

Indonesia and found that intolerance toward

strong economic growth from around 2005,

religious minorities such as Christians has

and today over half of its population belongs toreached an alarming level.

the middle class. As the middle class continues

The cause of growing intolerance amongto grow, Indonesia is increasingly becoming

the urban middle class and educated Muslim

an academic credential-oriented society.

youth, according to Jamhari, is social change

Digitalization is also advancing. Presidential

wrought by globalization and an accompanying

elections allowing Indonesians to cast theiridentity crisis. Indonesiaʼs Islam, rooted in

votes to directly select the nationʼs top leader

traditional village communities connected byhave been held several times, and democracy

neighborhoods and blood ties, is a unique

now appears to be ﬁrmly rooted in this country.

faith syncretized with the indigenous culture,

The fact that the worldʼs largest Muslim

he explained. As the economy has developed,

19

traditional community bonds have been

grey hairs than the last time we met. Marco

weakened. Individuals isolated from theiris currently busy writing a new book aboutcommunities face fierce competition and are

the history of Indonesian cities. Up until two

left anxious about their future. Furthermore, themonths ago, he had served as an advisor toadvent of digitalization means information pours

Anies Baswedan, the governor of Jakarta.

into agricultural communities from the outside,

As a member of the Jakarta administrationʼs

blurring the boundaries between rural andcity-planning team, he headed the coastal

urban areas. Young people today are yearning

management committee of the Governorʼs Teamfor clear answers to the meaning of life, saysfor Accelerated Development (TGUPP). But heJamhari, and radical groups and politicalresigned this post to focus on his writing.

organizations are taking advantage of thisDuring his tenure as an urban planning expert,

spiritual hunger to win them over to their side.

Marco was committed to making sure that

And now with elections being held as a result ofaffected local residents were always consulted

democratization, political parties try to capture

and their views reﬂected in the project planning

religious voters by appealing to their religious

process. Under Suhartoʼs authoritarian regime,

identity. This is yet another factor contributing

he had witnessed many instances of people

to a rising intolerance among Indonesian youth.

being forced out of their homes, only to be

To fight this trend, Jamhari argues, Indone-

left stranded with nowhere to go. In the lastsians need to take a fresh look at and reevaluate

gubernatorial election, Marco said he supported

their own tolerant Islamic tradition and reclaim

Baswedan over Ahok, the popular former

the proud heritage of Indonesian Islam.

governor with Chinese ancestry, despite being

Indonesian International Islamic University,of Chinese descent himself. Ahok had been soslated to open in a Jakarta suburb this year, isfocused on getting things done quickly that his

designed to conduct research on Indonesian

aggressive, top-down urbanization strategies

Islam from an international perspective and will

neglected to include the participation of local

serve as a center to restore that pride. As theresidents. I presume Marcoʼs deliberate decision

deputy rector-to-be, Jamhari was hard at work

to work in the government was made out of

preparing for the opening of the new institution.

his sense of mission as a public intellectual. At

I interviewed architect Mr. Marco Kusuma-

the moment, he is quietly focused on gaining

wijaya (ALFP 2009) at the recently relocatedinsights about sustainable urban planning, andoﬃce of the Japan Foundation, Jakarta. Dressed

the coexistence of cities and nature, from thein a stylish batik shirt, Marco looked sharp

history of cities in Indonesia.

as always. I may have noticed a few more

My last interview in Indonesia was with thelegendary journalist, poet, and essayist Mr.
Goenawan Mohamad (ALFP 1997), who isthe founding editor of the leading Indonesian
news magazine Tempo . He has stepped downfrom the editorʼs post but continues to write
thought-provoking essays for the magazine.
Although Tempo was banned on publication
twice by Suhartoʼs administration, Goenawan
has risen time and time again like a phoenix
and remained committed to critical reporting on
the government. His steadfast commitment tojournalism has been recognized with prestigious

Mr. Marco Kusumawijaya

20 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra mawards at home and abroad. Upon hearing he

Mr. Goenawan Mohamad

Author

had agreed to take part in the second year of

Doing so will help build Indonesiaʼs democracy,

ALFP in 1997, I recall thinking: “Now the ALFPand democracy can counter dogmatism andbrand is ﬁrmly established.”

fanaticism. From this standpoint, he feels that

It was a surprise to learn during the interview

Indonesian society needs to place greaterthat Goenawan, the leading public intellectual

value on the study of the humanities. While

who embodies Indonesian democracy, today

distinguished higher education institutions

holds a somewhat detached view of democracy.

in the United States consider the humanities
an important part of education, IndonesianPeopleʼs hope for democracy reached a peak

universities have not internalized such dis-when the first Joko Widodo administration

ciplines and are focused only on drilling incame to power. For the ﬁrst time in Indonesian

technical training, he criticized. The veteranhistory, the democratic movement electedjournalist has his eyes fixed not on tomorrow

not an aristocrat or elite military oﬃcer but a

but far into the future.

commoner as president. But now, this hope
has turned into disillusionment. Forces are atwork to undermine democracy, and the prodemocracy camp lacks the strength to fight
back.

INDIA

Confident about
Democracy s Resiliency

No democratic institution is perfect, nor is it
responsive to the needs of every citizen. The

From Jakarta I flew to Singapore where theprocess of choosing a representative throughairport was on high alert due to the coronavirus

the election process inevitably creates apandemic, with masked personnel everywhere.

distance between the will of the voters andFrom there, a six-hour connecting flight took

the candidate, and it is impossible for theme to New Delhi, India. February weather inelected to truly represent the voices of thethe nationʼs capital was so mild and pleasant it

electorate. Elections are no panacea. We must

was hard to believe that scorching days were on

be prepared to accept that deliberate maneu-

the way. But once you step out of the airport,vering will always be a part of an election.

you notice a bad smell in the air. The pollution
is so severe that local authorities issued an

H e is pe ssi m is ti c ab o u t t h e di r e c ti on o fadvisory for people to stay indoors. Since thedemocracy in the short term. What is important

1990s, economic liberalization and the rise of IT

right now, he believes, is to nurture theindustries have produced remarkable successes,

creativity and critical spirit of young people.

but a look inside reveals the detrimental

21

With Ms. Urvashi Butalia

Prof. Mahendra P. Lamaconsequences of rapid economic development.

Ms. Saba Naqvi

novel is framed as a mother sharing with her

The day after I arrived in India, Ms. Urvashi

daughter her own account of what she suﬀered

Butalia (ALFP 2000) visited me at the Japan

during the Battle of Kohima, an experience

Foundation, New Delhi. Back when I was

she had long kept to herself. I found this work

Director-General at the Japan Foundation, New

representative of Urvashiʼs feminist project̶Delhi, Urvashi introduced me to numerous

she seeks out and documents the faint voices

public intellectuals, opening my eyes towhispering somewhere deep in the soulsIndiaʼs intellectual community, and for thatof women who were caught in the tides ofI am greatly indebted to her. A founder ofhistory and lived through tumultuous times,

a feminist publishing house that releases

the memories of which are now vanishing like

inspiring works for Indian women, she has

bubbles in the air.

contributed immensely to the development of

We should ask ourselves this: have we

Indian democracy through publishing. Her book

Japanese made any serious efforts to listen to

The Other Side of Silence (Duke University

the voices of the people, women especially,

Press, 2000), which depicts the tragedies ofaffected by the Battle of Imphal, upon whom

the partition of India in 1947 through the

we inﬂicted so much pain and destruction? This

testimony of ordinary women, is an influential

book is a must-read. Talking to Urvashi this timepiece of writing translated and published in

was once again an enlightening experience.

many countries, including Japan. In 2003, she
received the Nikkei Asia Award for Culture.

Another public intellectual I have continued
to enjoy heartwarming exchanges with since

In this meeting I learned that Urvashi

my residence in India is Professor Mahendra

continues to empower women through book

P. Lama (ALFP 2001), an international political

publishing. One of the books she published inanalyst, economist and professor at Jawaharlal

2019 that I ﬁnd especially notable is the novel

Nehru University. After the 2011 earthquake

A Respectable Woman authored by Easterine

and tsunami in Japan, the faculty and staff ofKire, a female writer from northeast India.

Sikkim University, where he was serving as

The Battle of Imphal is known as one of thevice chancellor (chancellor in practice), held abloodiest battles fought during World War II,

candlelight service commemorating the victims

and British and Japanese forces clashed in aand praying for the regionʼs recovery. He sent

ferocious encounter in Kohima. This conflictme a video clip of the gathering, and I was

inflicted tremendous damage, including lasting

deeply touched by it. Being a Tibetan Buddhist

psychological trauma, to the local people. The

from the Darjeeling Himalayan region famous

22 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

for its tea, Mahendraʼs facial features are
distinct from typical Indian men and remind meof a Japanese mountaineer, which brings me asense of aﬃnity.
Mahendra is currently in particular keeping
an eye on the geopolitical wrestling of major
powers over the northeastern states of India.
China is increasing its engagement with South
Asia through its Belt and Road Initiative, andIndiaʼs northeastern states are the gateway
to Chinaʼs expansion into South Asia. China
is now using the global environment, animal
protection, and Buddhism as tools for deepening
its relations with the northeastern states andTraditional cloth market in New Delhi

with the Himalayan Buddhist regions such as
Nepal and Bhutan, according to Mahendra. In

the Aam Aadmi Party, claiming a landslide

response, Indiaʼs Prime Minister Narendra Modi

victory over the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP

launched the Act East Policy and began serious/ Indian Peopleʼs Party) that rules the federal

efforts to develop the contended region. The

government.

northeastern states are a top priority for Indiaʼslong-term land development strategies.

Indian politics are complicated, Saba
explained. The only reason the BJP led by Prime

South Asiaʼs regional integration lags behind

Minister Modi won the national election was thethat of the European Union, hindered in large

lack of suitable candidates for the top job, shepart by tensions between India and Pakistan.

said, and the ruling partyʼs grip on power is by

India is distrustful of Pakistan and wary thatno means secure, as evidenced by their losses

it may join hands with China. An effectivein various other local elections. Understanding

solution for alleviating the mistrust between

the politics of this major power is no easy

the two neighbors, says Mahendra, would

task, requiring factor analysis as complicatedbe joint energy development. When we see

as solving a cubic equation. In Sabaʼs opinion,

how the European Coal and Steel Community

the stability of Indian society depends on(ECSC), formed by France, Germany, and otherjob security for youth. While support within

European countries to create a joint coal andtraditional family relationships serves as a safety

steel market, later evolved into the European

net for the unemployed, Saba fears that theUnion, Mahendraʼs take on the situation makes

current situation in which even highly educateda lot of sense.

young people are unable to find work or hope

Lastly, he said he was grateful to the ALFP
for providing the opportunity for him to interact
with Chinese scholars and network with Chinaʼs
intellectual community.

for the future may well push some into the armsof extremism.
Speaking with these three public intellectuals
in India, I could feel their faith in the resilience

When I met with journalist Ms. Saba Naqvi

of Indian democracy. As Urvashi argued, Indiaʼs(ALFP 2013), she seemed to have been busy

democratic system has been on the verge ofcovering Indian politics and social problems.

collapse many times in the past, but somehow it

As it happened, the Delhi Legislative Assembly

has managed to survive to this day. The current

election results had just come out the day

rise of identity-based politics shaped by Hindu

before our interview, with the current rulingnationalism is a challenge in the short term, but

party of the National Capital Territory of Delhi,

these fellows continue to believe in the ability of

23and Catholic priest, Fr. Albert E. Alejo (ALFP
2006); Ateneo de Manila Universityʼs researcherof security and conﬂict resolution, Dr. Jennifer
Santiago Oreta (ALFP 2009); freelance journalist
Ms. Marites Danguilan Vitug (ALFP 1999); andlawyer and chairperson of the Commission on
Human Rights, Mr. Jose Luis Martin “Chito”
Gascon (ALFP 2008). These ALFP fellows
Central Manila

radiated the typical cheerful and fun-loving
Filipino nature, but the stories they told me

India, a large land of great diversity, to restore
its democratic health when the pendulum
swings back once again.

were grim and harsh.
Albert, Marites, and Chito named humanrights protection in the Philippines as theirbiggest concern. The United Nations Human

PHILIPPINESFighting Authoritarianism

R ig hts Com mittee is invest igat ing alleged
extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, andforced disappearances of suspected drug-related
criminals under President Rodrigo Duterteʼs

I flew overnight from New Delhi to Manila.

“War on Drugs” campaign. The campaignʼs

Humid air told me the sea was nearby. Peering

illegal killings are a clear indication that theout the car window on the drive from thenationʼs democracy is regressing, says Marites,

airport to downtown Manila, I saw new clusters

and this situation is connected with the riseof skyscrapers rising into the blue sky and wasof authoritarian political leaders around thereminded of a bamboo forest.

world. These leaders are cleverly manipulating

Long after the fall of the Marcos regime,

their people, she added. All this makes the role

the Philippines continued to suffer a negativeof the media in holding authorities accountable

image associated with repeated coup dʼétats,through their writing and reporting all the morepolitical instability, stagnant economic growth,

important, she said, as if reminding herself as

and acute disparity of wealth between thewell.

r ich a nd t he poor. Si nce t he t u r n of t he

Albert is focused on protecting the humancentury, however, the country has enjoyed arights of the victims of extrajudicial killings andbooming economy and generated an expanding

their family members, and investigating the

middle class. Even more noteworthy is thecircumstances of such killings, including how

nationʼs rapid population growth. With a 30

and by whom they are ordered and executed,

percent increase over the last fifteen years,

as well as the scale of these operations. There

the Philippine population has already hit 100

are times when witnesses holding the key tomillion and is on a solid trajectory to surpass

the truth come running to him and other priests

Japanʼs population in the near future. As aseeking shelter. Albert has received deathyoung and vibrant nation, the Philippines isthreats, but he is not backing down. “The truth

seen as an Asian rising star and is attracting

must be brought to light,” he vowed.

strong interest from investors.

Chito is one of the architects of the democratic

Under the bright Southern Hemisphere sun, I

system now in place in the Philippines. As a

was in the company of four ALFP fellows at theleader of the student movement, he took partAteneo de Manila University, sitting on a green

in the 1986 People Power Revolution thathill fanned by a pleasant breeze. Those present

ousted the dictator Ferdinand Marcos andwere Ateneo de Manila University professor

was the youngest member of the Constitution

24 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra mDrafting Committee that drew up a democraticis the founder of Anvil Publishing Inc., whichconstitution. From his own experience he knows

publishes, imports and exports, and translates

deep in his bones that democracy was earned

books.

with no small amount of sacrifice, and thatAmbeth, the historian, laments that the ideals

democracy is not something to be taken forespoused by the Philippine founding fathers

granted. Chito is now serving as chairperson ofare being handed down to younger generations

the Philippineʼs Commission on Human Rights,

merely on a superﬁcial level.

an independent watchdog monitoring thegovernment, established in accordance with theJose Rizal, widely revered as a national heroconstitution, and he declared that his mission

and the Philippinesʼ father of independence,

is to protect the Commission on Human Rights

authored two novels with the dream of seeing

and democracy to the end.

our country stand on its own feet and was

Jenniferʼs approach to democracy is a little

executed by the colonial government fordifferent from the other three. As a security

treason. Today our young people are required

expert, she is involved in the organizational

to read his works at school, but I wonder how

reform of the Armed Forces of the Philippines

seriously they read them. I intend to pass on(AFP). According to Jennifer, from the time ofto the next generation of Filipinos the ideals

the Gloria Arroyo administration, there haveexpressed by Rizal, that being the importancebeen growing reformist voices within the AFPof having a pure aspiration for independence

advocating for the value of democracy, greaterand open-minded nationalism.

organizational transparency, political neutrality,
and a focus on security duties. In 2014 the AFP

Ambeth went on to discuss his views on

formed the Multi-Sector Governance Council,

national identity. The Philippines was not acomposed of opinion leaders from various

unified nation before Spanish colonization,

sectors, to promote internal reform. Jenniferand education, media, and language played

was asked to join this initiative and agreed toa pivotal role in uniting the various ethnic

help the armed forces improve its governancegroups comprising the Philippines into a single

from within. As part of her work with thestate. Today, the sources of Filipino identity

council, she is developing a training module

are English and Filipino, and embedding thesefor middle-ranking officers designed to foster a

two languages throughout society throughbetter engagement of the military with civilians.

education and the media is the basis of national
integration. However, warned Ambeth, the

PHILIPPINES

prevalence of Filipino and English may lead

What Is a Nation State?
My last interviews on this tour made me thinkafresh about what a nation state is and whatmakes a state a state. The first interview waswith Dr. Ambeth R. Ocampo (ALFP 2014), who
has a particularly warm and welcoming smile.
He is one of Asiaʼs leading historians and arecipient of the Fukuoka Prize. My second
interviewee was Ms. Karina Africa Bolasco(ALFP 2004), who I think must have been athoroughgoing booklover even as a child. She

From the left: Director Uesugi of the Japan Foundation, Manila,
Fr. Alejo, Mr. Gascon, Dr. Oreta, Ms. Vitug and author

25

academic jargon understood only by those ofsimilar background. She wants to create books
that provide a common platform for social
dialogue on topics such as LGBT and gender.

ASIA

Asians Don t Know Asia
“Asians donʼt know much about their fellow
Dr. Ambeth R. Ocampo and Ms. Karina Bolasco

Asian neighbors,” said Ambeth during ourinterview, and his words really struck a chord

to the suppression, erosion, and extinction

with me. I told him that the Japanese writerof various ethnic and local languages. It is

Yoshie Hotta, who attended the first Asian

therefore important for the governmentʼs

Writersʼ Conference held in India in 1956,

cultural authorities to preserve the diversity

wrote these same words back then. Ambethof local cultures, of which ethnic languages

replied, “Despite the evolution of transportation

are the foundation. True to his status as aand communication technology, the situation in

public intellectual, Ambethʼs career includes

todayʼs Asia is not all that diﬀerent.” He added,

chairpersonship of the National Commission“And thatʼs why projects like the ALFP are

for Culture and the Arts, equivalent to Japanʼs

important.”

Agency for Cultural Affairs, a post in which

Many of the public intellectuals I talked

he worked to preserve cultural diversity in theto during this trip remarked on how their

Philippines.

time spent in Japan interacting and mixing

As a publisher, Karina is similarly wellwith people from other Asian countries wasaware of the important role book publishingan invaluable asset for them. Their ALFP

plays in shaping a nationʼs culture. She wants

experience has had no small impact on their

to contribute to the cultural development ofcareers today.

her country and promote exchange with its

When I first embarked on this ten-day

Asian neighbors in the field of publishing byinterview journey from February 8 to 17, 2020,

translating good English books into Filipino

the coronavirus outbreak was making global

and vice versa, regardless of proﬁtability. While

headlines. News of rising cases in Japan had

some people consider social media as the enemy

reached the countries I was visiting, and peopleof print media, Karina believes this is not always

were beginning to cancel their trips to Japan.

the case. Inspired by social media, Filipinos are

The myth that Japan is the safest nation in theincreasingly turning to print media and sales ofworld was crumbling. Nevertheless, Marites,

printed publications are not falling, she says.

the journalist who had plans to travel to Japan

Indeed, the combination of a growing

shortly, said her experience in Japan under the

population, a swelling middle class, and an

ALFP convinced her that the Japanese people

increasing emphasis on academic credentials

are capable of responding to a crisis with coolmeans a large new publishing market isheads. “I donʼt expect them to panic,” sheemerging in the Philippines. Living by the credosaid, “And itʼs a democracy, so there is noof walking alongside society, Karina told me

information control. I am not afraid of going toabout her continued commitment to publishing

Japan.” Clearly, the ALFP has been successful

books that speak to the general public using

also from the perspective of making goodeveryday language, not in some technicalfriends for Japan.

26 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Fellows
VoicesThe ALFP fellows, coming from diverse fields
and professions in Asia, had different motives
and reasons for participating in the ALFP atthat particular time in their life. What impact did
the ALFP̶and the various encounters fellows
had through the program̶have on their life andcareer?

Suwanna Satha-AnandProfessor Emeritus in Philosophy, Faculty of Arts,
Chulalongkorn University（1998 Fellow, Thailand)

The world is now facing many critical issues
such as the rise of religious extremism, global
risks arising from drastic climatic change andhealth hazards, and the rapid advancement andproliferation of information technology whichplays a key role in shaping societies and newforms of “human” avatars and relations. A newforum of “social cohesion in the 21th century”
needs to be established.
My staying at I-House in Tokyo for twomonths in 1998 with other ALFP fellows andengaging in numerous seminars and discussions
with scholars in Japan have left me with alasting impression of what it “feels” like to be“with” other Asian scholars, activists, artists,
and NGO members. In spite of our culturaldifferences, it helped me anchor the common
concer ns a nd a n x iet ies, a nd d rea ms a nd
anticipation of the future of the region. Without
the ALFP experience, this imagination of thebroader Asia would not come so readily and so
personally. With my research in the last twenty
years on Japanese Zen tradition, Confucian
ethics, and Buddhist manifestations in diﬀerent
cu lt u ra l worlds, my hor i zon of ac adem ic
interests has broadened to include the many
intertwining strands of thoughts, values, andpractices of Asia, linking the classical worldsof my academic background to contemporary
issues.

27

Kunda Dixit

Ahn Byungok

When I ﬁrst applied for the ALFP in early 2006,
I confess that it was mainly because I needed a
break from newspaper deadlines in Kathmandu.
I looked at the two-month fellowship as anoppor t u n it y to get to k now about Japa n,
and perhaps do some rela xed sightseeing.
How wrong I was. After the first few days oforientation and lectures, it was obvious that
the ALFP offered much more than a holiday
break. It was a great experience not just tolearn about Japan and its history, culture, andpolitical economy, but also to network with andlearn about other countries in the Asian region.
It strengthened my identity as an Asian, andchanged my perspective on world affairs. The
speakers were all first-class academics with abroad worldview and experience, and overall,
we got an immersion course in what it means tobe an Asian.
One of the major attractions of the ALFP is
the venue. The International House of Japanis an oasis in the middle of an urban setting.
The librar y provided me with an excellent
opportunity to complete work on my ﬁrst bookon the Nepal conflict, and I spent most of myfree time there. Our group trip to the Himeyuri
Peace Museum, in Okinawa, was very emotionaland moving. It inspired me to work towards
setting up a similar peace museum in Nepal.

One of the most valuable experiences that I had
as an ALFP fellow was the opportunity to visit
various regions and institutions in Japan with
my Asian colleagues and to exchange our viewson shared prosperity and peace in Asia.
Emissions of greenhouse gases, a main
contributor to climate change, are observed inmany countries in the Asian region, some ofwhich are categorized as highly vulnerable toclimate change. I believe that strengthening
a joint response system against air pollution
and climate change is a prerequisite for thesustainable development of the region. Energy
transition, currently gaining global momentum,
is also a task for Asia to tackle urgently, consider i ng t hat ma ny cou nt r ies a re heav ily
populated and have high energy consumption
levels.
As environmental issues share a close linkw it h var ious aspects of societ y including
human rights, justice, industry, technology,
and culture, I can say with confidence thatt he ex per ience a nd ex per t ise t hat I haveacquired as an ALFP fellow continues to play asubstantial role in my current work. The diverse
cultures and languages of Asia sometimes makeit diﬀicult for us to pursue swift joint-responses
to fresh issues that emerge on a continuingbasis. Therefore, it is also important to promote“social conversation” through the daily andregular exchange of people, information, andtechnology.

Editor and Publisher, N e pali Tim es(20 0 6 Fellow, Nepal)

28 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Chairman of the Executive Management Committee of the
National Council on Climate and Air Quality (2010 Fellow,
Korea)

Nguyen Viet Khoi

Sun Dong

As an ALFP fellow, I gained new perspectives
for seeing and understanding long-standing
issues. It was also a valuable experience for me
to connect with many inﬂuencers and opinion
leaders in Asia. They have aﬀected my thinking
and behavior, and support my current work as
an educator. I have developed what I learned
from the ALFP in the context of my country
and tried to return the fruits of my experience
to my local community and students.
I think the most important and critical issue
in Asia now is consolidation in solving various
regional issues. Due to a lack of trust among
countries caused by misunderstanding andcultural differences, we often have to depend
on a third party to solve our own problems. We
need to work harder to enhance trust buildingin the region. For that, I strongly believe thata program like the ALFP will continue to be
relevant to strengthen the ties of civil society in
Asia.

The ALFP gave me the chance to establish
bonds with my Japanese colleagues and other
ALFP fellows. It was also a great opportunity
to learn many aspects of Japanese society andother Asian countries. Now in my literatureclasses, whenever possible, I try to share myﬁrsthand experience at the ALFP̶what I saw
and heard during my stay in Japan. A program
like the ALFP is a rare chance to go deep into
Japanese society and communities, and at
the same time, share with other fellows ourcommon experiences and different concepts
in Asia. To increase mutual understanding
in the region, more communication among
counterparts is needed in addition to professional and academic collaboration. I think it isessential to promote both aspects as they aremuch like the wheels of a vehicle for solving
various issues in Asia.

Professor, University of Economics and Business, Vietnam
National University, Hanoi (2014 Fellow, Vietnam)

Poet / Professor and Deputy Director, Oﬃce of International
Cooperation and Exchanges, Nanjing University of Financeand Economics (2018 Fellow, China)

29

ALFP Fellows, 1996 - 2018

1996

2002

Ignas Kleden (Indonesia)

Hu Tao (China)

Wan A. Manan (Malaysia)

Vinod Raina (India)

Arnold M. Azurin (Philippines)

Kinoshita Reiko (Japan)

Kwok Kian-Woon (Singapore)

Maznah Binti Mohamad (Malaysia)

Kasian Tejapira (Thailand)

Nguyen Thi Hieu Thien (Vietnam)

1997
Goenawan Mohamad (Indonesia)
Ota Yoshinobu (Japan)
Ishak Bin Shari (Malaysia)
Kuo Pao Kun (Singapore)
Laddawan Tantivitayapitak (Thailand)

1998
Liu Xin (China)
Endo Suanda (Indonesia)

2003
Ham Samnang (Cambodia)
Yang Guang (China)
Palagummi Sainath (India)
Hamid Basyaib (Indonesia)
Nakano Yoshiko (Japan)
Chung Chin-Sung (Korea)
Marian Pastor Roces (Philippines)
Supara Janchitfah (Thailand)

Diana Wong (Malaysia)
Sylvia L. Mayuga (Philippines)

2004

Janadas Devan (Singapore)

Kinley Dorji (Bhutan)

Suwanna Satha-Anand (Thailand)

Faye Chunfang Fei (China)
Jamhari (Indonesia)

1999

Kusago Takayoshi (Japan)

Ayu Utami (Indonesia)

Karina Africa Bolasco (Philippines)

Ohashi Masaaki (Japan)

Chandrika Sepali Kottegoda (Sri Lanka)

Cho Hong-Sup (Korea)

Nguyen Van Chinh (Vietnam)

Marites Danguilan Vitug (Philippines)
Teo Soh Lung (Singapore)
Sanitsuda Ekachai (Thailand)

2000
Urvashi Butalia (India)
Faruk (Indonesia)
Kumaoka Michiya (Japan)
Park Won-Soon (Korea)
Saree Aongsomwang (Thailand)

2006
Mohiuddin Ahmad (Bangladesh)
Maria Hartiningsih (Indonesia)
Kamata Yoji (Japan)
Lee Seejae (Korea)
Janet Pillai (Malaysia)
Kunda Dixit (Nepal)
Albert E. Alejo (Philippines)
Nguyen Thanh Son (Vietnam)

2001
Huang Ping (China)

2007

Mahendra P. Lama (India)

Huang Jiansheng (China)

Shimada Kazuyuki (Japan)

Petula Sik-Ying Ho (China [Hong Kong])

Ryu Jeong Soon (Korea)

Bina Sarkar Ellias (India)

Ann Lee (Malaysia)

Aoyama Kaoru (Japan)

David M. Celdran (Philippines)

Hishamuddin Rais (Malaysia)

Anek Nakabutara (Thailand)

Sriprapha Petcharamesree (Thailand)

30 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

2008

2014

Gu Yian (China)

Sikder Monoare Murshed (Bangladesh)Jyotirmaya Sharma (India)

Mera Akiko (Japan)

Lee Soo im (Japan)

Lee Wonjae (Korea)

Kim Haechang (Korea)

Vishalache Balakrishnan (Malaysia)

Chandra Kishor Lal (Nepal)

Mallika Shakya (Nepal)

Jose Luis Martin C. Gascon (Philippines)

Ambeth R. Ocampo (Philippines)

Atiya Achakulwisut (Thailand)

Nguyen Viet Khoi (Vietnam)

2009
Tanvir Mokammel (Bangladesh)
Ma Jifang (China)
Marco Kusumawijaya (Indonesia)
Kuroda Kaori (Japan)
Andrew K. L. Soh (Malaysia)
Iqbal Haider Butt (Pakistan)
Jennifer Santiago Oreta (Philippines)

2010
Guo Zhiyuan (China)
Seki Kaoruko (Japan)
Ahn Byungok (Korea)
Fouzia Saeed (Pakistan)
Sasanka Perera (Sri Lanka)
Kong Rithdee (Thailand)

2011

2015
Yin Shuxi (China)
Jaideep Hardikar (India)
Harry Surjadi (Indonesia)
Nomura Mai (Japan)
Karen Lai Yu Lee (Malaysia)
Dinah Roma (Philippines)
Arulanantham Sarveswaran (Sri Lanka)
Saranarat Kanjanavanit (Thailand)

2016
Amran Hossain (Bangladesh)
Kumar Sundaram (India)
Ayang Utriza Yakin (Indonesia)
Fujioka Emiko (Japan)
Lee Taeho (Korea)
Criselda Yabes (Philippines)
Phan Ngoc Diem Han (Vietnam)

2017

Zhang Yali (China)

Wang Xin (China)

Miryam Saravasti Nainggolan (Indonesia)

Smita M. Patil (India)

Imai Chihiro (Japan)

Sudirman Nasir (Indonesia)

Imtiaz Gul (Pakistan)

Hatano Ayako (Japan)

Elmer Sayre (Philippines)

Fazal Khaliq (Pakistan)

Jehan Perera (Sri Lanka)

Saroj Srisai (Thailand)

Vuong Thanh Huong (Vietnam)

Phan Thanh Duc (Vietnam)

2013

2018
Silot Uon (Cambodia)

He Runfeng (China [Hong Kong])

Sun Dong (China)

Saba Naqvi (India)

Samrat Choudhury (India)

Imata Katsuji (Japan)

Asmin Fransiska (Indonesia)

Chin Oy Sim (Malaysia)

Sawanishi Mikiko (Japan)

Lwin Lwin Mon (Myanmar)

Lydia Lubon (Malaysia)

Zubair Torwali (Pakistan)Aziz Ali Dad (Pakistan)

Nelia G. Balgoa (Philippines)

Alongkot Maiduang (Thailand)

31Number of Fellows by Country/Region

Nepal

3

Korea

Bhutan1

Pakistan

9

China

13

Japan

19

6

India

11

Myanmar

Hong
Kong

1

2

Vietnam

7

Sri Lanka

Philippines

14

Malaysia

4

12Indonesia

14

Bangladesh

4

Thailand

13

Cambodia

2

Singapore

4

Southeast Asia

China (including 2 from Hong Kong)

43
15

Cambodia

67
2

Japan

19

Indonesia

14

Korea

9

Malaysia

1229
4Myanmar1

Philippines

14

Bhutan1

Singapore

4

India

11

Thailand

13

Nepal

3

Vietnam

7

Pakistan

6

Sri Lanka

4

East Asia

South Asia

Bangladesh

32 A sia L e a d e r s hip F ellow P ro g ra m

Total Number of Fellows

139

Asia Leadership Fellow Program

Sharing Asia’s Experience
for the Future of the World
Published by
The Japan Foundation Asia Center
Yotsuya Cruce, 1-6-4 Yotsuya, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo,
160 -0004
T e l: +81- 3- 5369 - 6025
https:// jfac.jp/
Published in December, 2020
Edited by
Kazumi Yagi and Shiomi Ando (Japan Foundation Asia Center)
Kaoru Hoshino (International House of Japan)
Book design by
Masakazu Yamamoto, studio GIVE

ALFP Secretariat
c/o Program Department,International House of Japan
5 -11-16 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo,
106-0032
Tel: +81- 3 - 3470 - 3211
Email: alfp̲info@i-house.or.jp
http://alfpnetwork.net/en/

“Asia is a diverse reality.
In our diversity lies
a unique opportunity for unity.”