The story of the Tower of Babel can teach us a great deal about man's political life. It begins at a time before time when “the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.” Then men said to one another “Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make its a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” It is sad to report what happened to that first United Nations, at a time (if we are to believe the tale) far more auspicious for the union of mankind and for the ability of peoples to understand one another. The Lord (so the report reads) confounded their language, that they might not understand one another's speech—“and they left off to build the city” (Genesis ll;l-9).

Southeast Asia as a region of political importance is a new concept. It arose after World War II to designate the countries lying between India China and Japan. This “quiet backyard” of the world began to attract attention as a result of the freedom movements and the possible complications they might cause.

The reasons presumably why the several states in the area were lumped together without differentiation in the minds of the Westerners as one geographic concept are: first, very little was known about them, and from a distance they all looked alike; second with the exception of Thailand, the territory was colonial and the feeling was abroad that the metropolitan powers would handle the problems resulting from nationalism and independence movements; and third, nobody seemed to have any particular interests in the area, not even the colonial powers which appeared willing gradually to abandon ownership.

The highest task given to political ethics is the interpretation of the meaning of power. But to acknowledge that power is the fundamental category of political understanding is only to utter what has been the platitude of “realists” since Machiavelli. To define power is simple enough: it is the capacity to realize goals. But to grasp the configuration of components in any person's or organization's or nation's capacity to realize goals is a task of transcendent difficulty: it is to approach something like theological understanding itself. Moreover, to prescribe norms for the management of power is not simply a “political” assignment: it is ethics.