The Mandala Culture of Anarchy

14 Pages·2017·0.97 MB·English

www.ssoar.info
The Mandala Culture of Anarchy: the Pre-Colonial
Southeast Asian International Society
Manggala, Pandu Utama
Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version
Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article
Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation:
Manggala, P. U. (2013). The Mandala Culture of Anarchy: the Pre-Colonial Southeast Asian International Society.
Journal of ASEAN Studies, 1(1), 1-13. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-441509
Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use:
Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC Lizenz (Namensnennung- This document is made available under a CC BY-NC Licence
Nicht-kommerziell) zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu (Attribution-NonCommercial). For more Information see:
den CC-Lizenzen finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.de
The Mandala Culture of Anarchy:
The Pre-Colonial Southeast Asian International
Society
Pandu Utama Manggala Australian National University,Australia
Abstract
Throughout the years, study on pre-colonial Southeast Asian international relations has not
garnered major attention because it had long been seen as an integral part of the China-
centred tribute system. There is a need to provide greater understanding of the uniqueness of
the international system as different regions have different ontologies to comprehend its
dynamics and structures. This paper contributes to the pre-colonial Southeast Asian
literature by examining the interplay that had existed between pre-colonial Southeast Asian
empires and the hierarchical East Asian international society, in particular during the 13th-
16th Century. The paper argues that Southeast Asian international relations in pre-colonial
time were characterized by complex political structures with the influence of Mandala values.
In that structural context, the Majapahit Empire, one of the biggest empires at that time had
its own constitutional structures of an international society, albeit still sought close relations
with China.
Keywords:Pre-Colonial History, Southeast Asia, Mandala, Tributary System
Introduction relations was seen as stable and regional
order had been achieved until the arrival of
Throughout the years, study on pre- the Western powers in the 19th Century
colonial Southeast Asian international (Kang 2007). However, pre-colonial
relations has not garnered major attention Southeast Asian countries were far from
because it had long been seen as an integral peaceful and stable under the tribute
part of the China-centred tribute system. system. Fierce competition for survival and
Moreover, Southeast Asia has often been domination had characterized the balance
regarded as a political “backwater” of power politics throughout the pre-
compared to East Asia because Southeast colonialera(Shu 2012b, p. 46).
Asia as a region is seen as relatively For that reason, there is a need to
“passive”, always subjected to the influence provide greater understanding of the
of great powers (Peng Er & Teo 2012, p.2). It uniqueness of the international system as
is often said that under the Chinese different regions have different ontologies
hierarchical order, Asian international to comprehend its dynamics and structures.
Journal of ASEAN Studies,Vol.1,No.1 (2013), pp.1–13
©2013by CBDS Bina Nusantara University and Indonesian AssociationforInternational Relations
ISSN 2338-1361 print / ISSN2338-1353 electronic
2 The Mandala Culture of Anarchy
This paper contributes to the pre-colonial themselves by a common set of rules and
Southeast Asian literature by examining the institutions for the conduct of their
interplay that had existed between pre- relations. Furthermore, detailed analysis of
colonial Southeast Asian empires and the pre-colonial Southeast Asian international
hierarchical East Asian international relations is elaborated using Reus Smit’s
society, in particular during the 13th-16th three normative beliefs of constitutional
Century. The paper draws a boundary from structures of an international society (1999).
Kang’s (2007) and Suzuki’s (2009) article These three normative beliefs are the ‘moral
that too much focus on the centrality of purpose of state’, the ‘organizing principle
China-dominated regional hierarchy. of sovereignty’, and the ‘norm of procedural
Nevertheless, both articles are used to justice’.
understand the nature of China’s The rest of the paper is organized in the
hegemonic presence in pre-colonial following way. The next part elaborates
Southeast Asia. some theoretical grounding to be used in
The paper argues that Southeast Asian the analysis. The comparative investigation
international relations in pre-colonial time of Kang’s and Suzuki’s article is the starting
were characterized by complex political point to analyse the complex political
structures with the influence of Mandala structure that existed in the East Asian
values. In that structural context, the international society and further added
Majapahit Empire, one of the biggest with Wendt’s conception of anarchy. The
empires at that time had its own second part discusses some essential
constitutional structures of an international characteristics and the constitutional
society, albeit still sought close relations structure of the Majapahit Empire. The third
with China. Therefore, the paper debates part explores the interaction between the
the nature of hierarchical China’s tributary Majapahit Empire and hierarchical East
system in pre-colonial Southeast Asia. In Asian international society. The focus is to
policy terms, the findings of the article highlight the international structures that
indicate that the interactive dynamics existed and how those structures shape the
within the subsidiary system created norms relationship between the Majapahit Empire
that are rooted in the cultural memory of a and the China’s tributary system. Lastly, the
region. This helps to explain, for example paper concludes with a summary of the
the conduct of foreign policy in the main findings and discusses the implication
Southeast Asia. of the study.
The method of this paper is cross-
disciplinary studies which combine the
finding of area studies and international Anarchy, Hierarchy andtheEast Asian
relations theory to provide a deeper International Society
understanding of the process of
socialization and mutual adaptation Anarchy is a crucial yet highly
between the Southeast Asian and the East contentious concept in international
Asia international society. The term relations. In its formal sense, Anarchy
international society used in the article means that there is no supreme authority
refers to Bull & Watson (1984) above states. In the classical texts of
understanding of international system international relations theory, anarchy is
which is a society of state that is built upon often became the central theoretical debate.
inter-subjectivity through common interests On the one hand are proponents of the
and common values. This society bound realist theory who accept the condition of
Journal of ASEAN Studies 3
anarchy but argue that this does not Kang’s (2007) article explains that Asian
necessarily preclude order, society, and international relations have historically
community beyond the nation state. The been hierarchical order under Chinese
other hand are liberalists who assert that domination prior to the intervention of
anarchy is incompatible with order and the Western powers (p. 164). Nevertheless, it
realization is only possible once anarchy is was the hierarchical order that had created
replaced by governance of one sort of stability in the region as there was no
another (Evans & Newnham 1998, p. 19). evidence of external balancing or other
In the development stage of the debate, coordinated efforts to constrain China.
Kenneth Waltz with his influential Theory Kang derives the hierarchic model from
of International Politics employed anarchy assumptions that states are the main unit of
and power as central analytical concepts to analysis and anarchy is the prevailing
the balance of power theory. Waltz (1979) condition for international system.
argued that the international system Although he draws on his argument from
functions like a market which is ‘interposed realist assumptions, Kang rejects the neo-
between the economic actors and the results realist notion that ‘hierarchy’ cannot coexist
they produce. It conditions their with anarchy in the international system,
calculations, their behaviour and their and instead uses ‘hierarchy’ as “shorthand
interactions’ (pp. 90-91). By this, Waltz for unequal relations amongst states, but
asserted that it is ‘structure’ that shapes and short of hegemony or empire” (Goh 2009, p.
constrains the political relationship of the 107). In short, Kang tries to combine the
component units. In an anarchical world, logic of anarchy and hierarchy in the sense
states need to rely only on self-help and of realist understanding.
balance of power is created through The main premise for Kang’s argument
balancing behaviour by weaker states is that the region more comfortable with a
towards the potential hegemon (Shu 2012a, strong China because of “the cultural
p. 4). Moreover, Waltz and other neorealist prominence of Confucianism, the disparity
proponents have sought to contrast the in economic and military strength, and the
concept of anarchy with the idea of long-standing influences of the tribute
hierarchy. According to neorealist, because system” (Kang 2010). In contrast with neo-
the system is anarchy it cannot be a realist that emphasizes balancing against
hierarchy (Evans & Newnham 1998, p. 224). the predominant power, Kang believes that
Several IR scholars have made lesser states will most likely bandwagon for
surpassing arguments to reject the profit (Kang 2007, p. 167). Some of the
exclusiveness of anarchy and hierarchy. For benefits are security protection, bigger
example, Lake (2009) uses the notion of opportunities for market and trade, and
‘degrees of hierarchy’ along a single- external arbitration. The hierarchical order
dimensional continuum between total itself is preserved through a combination of
anarchy and complete hierarchy to identify benefits and sanctions that the central
different forms of hierarchical relations. power provides to the lesser power.
However, not many scholars have Kang’s article provides a new analytical
specifically examined the relationship framework for Asian international relations.
between anarchy and hierarchy from an His elaboration shows that Eurocentric’s
Asian international relations’ perspective. international relations theories “do poor
David Kang (2007) and Shogo Suzuki (2009) jobs as they are applied to Asia” (Rother
are among those who have analysed from 2012, p. 53). Nonetheless, his conclusion
an Asian perspective. with the focus on bandwagoning and the
4 The Mandala Culture of Anarchy
absence of balancing in Asian international However, quite different from Kang’s
relations is not convincing and tends to be arguments, Suzuki uses Reus-Smit’s (1999)
reductionist realism. Kang’s claim neglected conceptualization of ‘the constitutional
the fact that Southeast Asia as part of the structure of international society’ to help
China’s tribute system was also dominated understand the dynamics of interaction in
by competition for survival and domination the East Asian international society. Reus
throughout the pre-colonial time Smit offers three primary normative
(Lieberman 1993). Furthermore, states are in elements that constitute the structure of
no position to choose black and white international society, which are:
between balancing and bandwagoning. In the 1) A hegemonic belief about the moral purpose
real world, states opt for other options such of centralized, autonomous political
as hedging, containment, neutrality, organization. Such purposes are “moral”
engagement, and non-alignment. Therefore, because they always entail a conception
Kang’s argument is not able to decode the of the individual or social “good” served
complexity of interaction between the pre- by autonomous political organization,
colonial Southeast Asian and the Chinese and are “hegemonic” because they
empires. constitute the prevailing, socially
Shogo Suzuki’s (2009) article tries to sanctioned justification for sovereign
elaborate more deeply in the East Asian rights.
international society. It helps to 2) An organizing principle of sovereignty that
comprehend the complexity of the deep differentiates political units on the basis
constitutive values that define the social of particularity and exclusivity, creating
identity of the state and brings discursive a system of territorially demarcated.
mechanism that link intersubjective ideas of 3) 3) A norm of procedural justice. These
legitimate statehood and rightful state norms specify the correct procedures
action to the constitution of fundamental that “legitimate” or “good” states
institution. employ, internally and externally, to
In elaborating his arguments, Suzuki formulate basic rules of internal and
adopts Hedley Bull’s view on international external conduct. (Reus Smit 1999, pp.
system. Bull asserted that international 30-33)
system is a society of states and this society Grounding on Reus Smit’s three
is built upon inter-subjectivity through normative belief, Suzuki explains that the
common interests and common values ‘moral purpose of the state’ within the East
which they bound themselves by a common Asian international society was derived
set of rules and institutions for the conduct from Confucianism that aimed “the support
of their relations (Bull & Watson 1984). Any and maintenance of the moral, social, and
given international system does not exist cultural order of social peace and harmony”
because of unchallengeable structures, but (Suzuki 2009, p. 34). As a consequence, the
rather “the very structures are dependent justificatory foundations for the principle of
for their reproduction on the practices of the sovereignty within the order were to
actors” (Koslowski & Kratochwil 1994, p. maintain the social hierarchy that would
216). Therefore, Suzuki recognizes that the promote cosmic harmony. Moreover,
identity of state is grounded in a larger drawing his analysis from the time of the
complex of values and these values provide Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911),
states with substantive reasons for action. Suzuki (2009) claims that the systemic norm
Suzuki accepts the notion of hierarchical of procedural justice were the Tribute
order in the East Asian international society.
Journal of ASEAN Studies 5
System that prescribed ‘rightful’ state action this understanding, Wendt creates the
(p. 37-38). concept of ‘culture of anarchy’ which is the
Both Kang’s and Suzuki’s article are bodies of norms and institutions that make
giving insights into an Asian international up an international social structure (Flawith
relations. Nevertheless, the position of other 2011, p.266).
non-Chinese states within the hierarchical Wendt argues that there are at least
order has not been really elaborated. In three configurations that the international
Suzuki’s (2009) article, he admits that the society may take, the ‘Hobbesian’, ‘Lockean’,
position of non-Chinese states depended on and, ‘Kantian’ anarchies. A Hobbesian
the degree to which the Chinese judged anarchy refers to the true ‘self-help’ system
them to have been assimilated into Chinese where there are constant existential threats
culture and their geographical proximity to of warfare between states (Wendt 1999, pp.
China (pp. 37-38). Hence, it is necessary to 259-260). Lockean anarchy is characterised
explores pre-colonial Southeast Asia as by a rivalry and as a consequence, states
there are evidences of interactive dynamics will form ‘status-quoism’ towards each
that constitute international structure other. Moreover, violence is recognised as a
within that region. legitimate way to settle disagreements and
Having been comparing and contrasting warfare is one way to form a balance of
Kang’s and Suzuki’s article, this paper tries power (Wendt 1999, pp. 279). Whereas
to synthesize their arguments to understand Kantian anarchy is the most cooperative
the dynamic of interaction between the pre- culture of anarchy in which states identify
colonial Southeast Asian Empires and the the other as friends and collective security is
hierarchical East Asian international society. the dominant norm (Wendt 1999, p. 297).
The paper explores the pre-colonial However, these three configurations are not
Southeast Asian empires using Reus Smit’s mutually exclusive. As Wendt further
three normative beliefs of constitutional explains, there are still rooms for different
structure and draws on Wendtian configurations based on different identities
constructivism to explain the logic of because states have the ability to transform
anarchy that shaping the interaction. the social structure within which they
Wendt (1992) makes his famous claim operate (Rother 2012, p. 57)
on the logic of anarchy that ‘anarchy is what Before elaborating the dynamics of
states make of it’. He asserts that the interaction between the two regions, there
absence of hierarchic authority in the has to be an understanding of what
international system does not inevitably constitute the pre-colonial Southeast Asian
equate to perpetual interstate conflict in a international structures in which is
self-help environment, as neo-realists discussed in the following section.
contend. Moreover, Wendt argues that
anarchy is only a permissive cause of
conflict and not an efficient cause. TheMajapahitEmpire and The Southeast
In relation to Kang’s article, Wendt is Asian International Society
taking different position as he argues that it
is the social and ideational, rather than In the course of Asian studies prior to
material aspect of international politics the European intrusion in the Indian
which determines how actors behave. archipelago in mid-19th Century, the
Furthermore, Wendt also asserts that states traditional international order is often
have the ability to transform the social considered consisted of civilized (China)
structure within which they operate. From and barbarians (Southeast Asian states). As
6 The Mandala Culture of Anarchy
Kang (2007) points out in his article, the Majapahit was situated in Trowulan, East
Chinese emperor required the barbarians to Java. It was one of the last major empires of
demonstrate formal obedience in the form the region and considered to be one of the
of kowtow in order not to be invaded (p. greatest and most powerful empires in the
169). In Kang’s view, Southeast Asia was a history of Southeast Asia due to its political,
peripheral region, a part of the “rim land”. economic, and social influences.
The minimal role of Southeast Asia Scholars who study the Majapahit
continued to play until well into the Empire are mostly interested in the course
twentieth century where both the US and of history, the matter of structure, foreign
the Soviet Union, superpowers at that time, relations, and how the Majapahit shape
were vitally interested in the politics and international relations in the region
the economic potential of the region. unfortunately have been neglected for many
Despite very few studies have decades. In this part, an attempt has been
specifically examined pre-colonial made to examine the structure of the
Southeast Asian region from an IR Majapahit, the type of order, and the sources
perspective, this region was in fact of legitimacy that bounded the empire.
interesting to examine due to its unique The constitutional structures of the
structures. The Southeast Asian region is Southeast Asian international society were
not a unit in the religious, historical, primarily derived from ancient Indian
geographical, or ethnic senses. There are at political discourse based on the book of
least four different religions in Southeast Arthasastra by Mauryan Chief Minister,
Asia, which are Islam, Hinduism, Kautilya in the 4th Century (Boesche 2003, p.
Buddhism, and Christianity. Historically, 9). Furthermore, Kautilya’s concept, the
the whole Southeast Asia never came under Mandala was then adopted by Wolters
the rule of a single state or empire. On the (1968) to denote pre-colonial Southeast
mainland, the Khmers created a large Asian political formations. The regional
empire, which at its height in the 9th to the system was built of larger political unit, in
13th Centuries embraced the region from which the dependencies preserved a great
Burma, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and deal of internal autonomy in exchange for
South Vietnam (SarDesai 2010, p. 2). There acknowledging the pole’s spiritual
were other large polities in pre-colonial authority (Gesick 1983, p. 3). Southeast
Southeast Asia, but they did not cover the Asian polities did not conform to the
entire region. However, during the golden Chinese view as the polity defined by its
era of the Majapahit Empire notably under centre rather than its boundaries, and it
the Prime Minister, Gajah Mada (1331- could be composed of numerous other
1364), large area of Southeast Asia was tributary polities without undergoing
under theMajapahitEmpire. administrative integration (Dellios 2003).
Therefore, in the pre-colonial Southeast The Mandala displayed the
Asia era, the greatness of the Majapahit cosmopological characteristics of Hindu-
Empire could not be neglected. The Buddhist persuasion prior to the expansion
Majapahit, literally means the bitter fruit, of European international society. Mandala
was an empire of 98 tributaries stretching is a Sanskrit word for ‘sacred circle’ in
from Sumatra to New Guinea which which humans become ‘centred’ and diffuse
consists of present day Indonesia, that state of being outwards into action
Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Southern (Grey 2001, p. 2). Therefore, the Mandala
Thailand, the Philippines, and East Timor highlights the importance of charismatic
(SarDesai 2010). Moreover, the capital of leadership in a political system that
Journal of ASEAN Studies 7
fluctuates. Moreover, whoever can claimthe cakravartin being able to deploy his friends
centre of this system, can claim the title of to contain his enemies. As such, the Mandala
universal emperor, ‘thecakravartin’. consists of circles of mitra (friends), ari
The Mandala in its sacred dimensions is (enemies), madhyama (medium power) and
a centring device for spiritual purposes. udasina (major powers) with the Vijigisu as
When this idea was applied to the political the centre.
field within religiously oriented society, it In relations to this concentric circle, the
permits a political leader to claim a degree Majapahit foreign relations also adopted the
of divinity. Such was the case in the geopolitical of Mandala. The Majapahit
Majapahit Empire, particularly when its created its concentric circle, defining its
Prime Minister Gajah Mada took his famous mitra, ari, madhyama, and, udasina.
oath ‘Sumpah Palapa’. Gajah Mada said Nagarakretagama book by the poet Prapanca
that he would not taste “palapa” (fruits / noted there were several neighbouring
spices) until he could unify external foreign polities that in friendly terms with
territories under the Majapahit (Purwadi the Majapahit, among those were Syangka,
2004, p. 157). It can be seen that Gajah Ayudhya (Siam), Rajapura, Champa,
Mada’s oath was based on the Mandala Kamboja and Yawana (Slametmuljana
philosophy that requires recognition of the 2006).
emptiness. The notion of centre consisted of Three important friendly polities of the
power that is personal and devotional Majapahit, Champa, Syangka, and Ayudhya
rather than institutional. It was the ability of are worth to be observed. The Majapahit
Gajah Mada to tap into ‘cosmic power’ attempted to build a friendly relations with
through virtuous behaviour that created the the Champa in particular because the
power of conquest. Thus, Gajah Mada Champa was perceived as rear-friend of the
represented the charismatic centre of a Majapahit as it had also refused to allow the
Mandala and is considered a person of Mongol to use its harbor for embarking
‘prowess’ (Wolters 1968, pp. 94-95). logistics during the great invasion of Kublai
With the Mandala being a significant Khan upon Java in the end of 13th Century.
tradition of knowledge in pre-colonial The similar case applied to the Syangka that
Southeast Asia, the fundamental interests of had been seen opposed the Chola’s
states, the Majapahit and other polities domination in Indian sub-continent, in
became those of enhancing and protecting which the Majapahit also refused to accept.
the society and its values. The Mandala The Majapahit maintained a good relations
became the moral purpose of the Majapahit with the Syangka because it adopted the
that spoke universality through moral doctrine “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”.
conquest (Dellios 2003). While for the Ayudhya, the Majapahit
The organizing principle of sovereignty maintained relations with the Ayudhya
within the Southeast Asian international because it had established over the
society was thus along the networks of populations of the Central Indo Chinese
loyalties. The Majapahit integrated vertically Peninsula where there was no record of the
with the divinity as well as horizontally influence of the Majapahit Empire
across a territory of people, land, and (Slametmuljana 1976, pp. 144-146). The
resources organised in the form of ‘vassal observation shows that in the first two
loyalties’ (Tucci 1961, p. 25). In regards to cases, the Majapahit tried to assure that his
this, the principle was applied in the ari (The Mongol and Chola) was
geopolitical term. Geopolitical Mandala, as accordingly counterbalanced by his mitra
mentioned by Kautilya was about how the (the Champa and Syangka). Whereas the
8 The Mandala Culture of Anarchy
latter case shows that the Majapahit foreign geopolitical Mandala being contextualize by
relations also tried to accommodate the theMajapahit:
interests of its empire as well as the
madhyama (the Ayudhya). The following
diagram tries to illustrate the way
Diagram 1. TheMajapahit’sGeopoliticalMandala
Other Mandalasin Greater
Mekong
Mitra (Friend)
Syangka
Udasina (Major Power) Ari (Enemy)
China(Ming Dynasty) The Mongol
Vijigisu (centre)
TheMajapahit
Madhyama (Middle Power) Ari (Enemy)
Ayudhya The Chola Dynasty
Mitra (Friend)
Champa
Other Mandalas in Malay
Peninsula
Adopted from Rosita Dellios’ (2003) description of the statal circle
The third normative belief, which is the dependencies were required to make
systemic norms of procedural justice, laid in substantive contribution to the wealth of
the conduct of diplomacy within the their suzerain (Shu 2012b, 50). To be more
structures. There were two distinguished specific, the highly regarded substantive
forms of diplomacy that the Majapahit contribution was to present valuable local
exercised, which were through small products as their tributes annually.
tributary system and marriage. The
tributary system, although it was a small The other form of diplomacy was
annual tribute, had a role as a ‘ritual justice’ forming alliance through marriage. One
within the Southeast Asian international prominent example of this was when
society. The Majapahit required only a small Hayam Wuruk, the Majapahit’s king during
amount of tribute from the ruler of any its golden era, decided to marry a princess
country to be recognized as the Majapahit’s of Sunda named Dyah Pitaloka as an effort
suzerainty and to be classified as a to obtain the Kingdom of Sunda in 1357.
‘dependency’ (Slametmuljana 1976, p. 136). Unfortunately, the effort failed because of
By giving a small tribute, dependencies theMaharajaofSundarejected Gajah Mada’s
were promised effective protection against request to delineate the marriage as a
potential threats. However, unlike the tribute to theMajapahit.
China’s tribute system, the Majapahit’s
Journal of ASEAN Studies 9
From the above exploration of the market access to the major Kingdoms in
constitutional structures of Southeast Asian East Asia, rather than acknowledgement of
international society with the Majapahit as a their superiority. It debates Kang’s (2010)
focus, one remaining question lies: “how argument that China for most of the time
did the structures shape the Majapahit’s had been culturally, economically, and
interaction with the East Asian international military dominated the region. Moreover,
society?” The next part discusses how the the paper also debates Shu’s (2012a)
Majapahit identities informed fundamental argument thatSoutheast Asian polities were
interest in its interaction with the China’s keen to be involved in the hierarchical East
tributary system and its implication to the Asian international society to seek imperial
anarchy-hierarchy understanding within recognition (Shu 2012a, p. 15-16). The
the region. Majapahit apparently did not seek
recognition when it “paid” tribute to the
Chinese emperor as many scholars have
TheMajapahitand the China’s Tributary suggested.
System: TheMandalaCulture of Anarchy From the interpretation of its
geopolitical Mandala, the Majapahit was
The previous part has informed that the always perceived its interaction with the
pre-colonial Southeast Asian international Chinese Empire as engaging with the
society had different constitutional udasina (major powers) in order to build a
structures to the East Asian. There was also favourable regional architecture. It is
a Southeast Asian Empire, the Majapahit without doubt that the Majapahit had
that ruled over large area of Southeast Asia. regularly dispatched its own envoys to the
The interaction between the Chinese empire Ming Dynasty, but it was carried out to
and pre-colonial Southeast Asian polities manage the constantly changing and
was relatively limited in the early imperial evolving regional challenges (Pramono
period. The historical interactions of China 2010). Moreover, the fundamental interest
and pre-colonial Southeast Asia were of the Majapahit was to benefit from the
started from 6th Century onwards, highly profitable trade, to open access to the
predominantly constructed by merchants, China’s market and products.
traders, and missionaries passing through Furthermore, unlike Suzuki’s (2009)
the region (Peng Er & Teo 2012, p. 4). claim that the lesser states never challenged
Trade in the form of tributary system theconstitutive normsof the order (p. 35), the
was therefore the dominant practices in the Majapahit had challenged the system several
interaction. The narrative of the Chinese times. For instance, when the Ming envoy
world order has been grand to examine the went to Brunei in 1370 to demand the polity
pattern of interaction. It has been said that to acknowledge the Chinese power for a
the vassal states had to pay tribute to the return of full protection (Laichen 2010, 46),
Chinese Emperor confirming the The Majapahit soon warned the Brunei not
superiority of the Chinese culture and to pay tribute to China. Had the Majapahit
civilization (Peng Er & Teo 2012, p. 5). was considered itself to be in the same
Having examined the different structure with the hierarchical East Asian
constitutional structures of Southeast Asian international society, the Majapahit would
international society, this section debates not have interfered to the Ming Envoy’s
the nature of the act of paying tribute to the request.
Chinese Emperor. The tribute was actually Furthermore, the immediate reaction
the practice of ‘trade strategy’ for a better from the Majapahit was because Brunei had