MAY 23 was a watershed for the Philippines and international terrorism. But the times have changed considerably since.

Territorial claims on the South China Sea by China the regional behemoth may be overdone, but expectations of the ease of settling the various disputes are also overblown.

After much talk of changes in German politics amid undercurrents of ditching the current government, the status quo still holds considerable sway for now at least.

Look what Aung San Suu Kyi’s party victory in Myanmar’s election has made her now – ineffective and discredited, exactly what the military wanted.

As both tension and speculation mount on the Korean peninsula, emotions run high while sober minds and rational solutions are hard to find.

The South China Sea is experiencing what the Straits of Malacca did – overcrowding by big external powers, making the case yet again for stronger Asean representation.

The heated border area dispute between India and China is almost incomprehensible, leaving Bhutan a much more afflicted country than either of its giant neighbours.

There are summits, and then there are twosome summits, as the warm-up to a hotly anticipated meeting between Trump and Putin makes clear.

Containing terrorists and eliminating terrorism as their violence spreads in the region is challenging enough, without distractions that complicate the fight against them.

The Association of South-East Asian Nations almost has a language of its own, whose larger meanings lie in the intent, history and actions between the words themselves.

To understand the peninsula’s situation better in forming appropriate responses, clear away misconceptions, presumptions and prejudices – especially the familiar and established ones.

Despite many fiery statements against terrorism, governments have failed to stop the most notorious of terrorist groups, Islamic State; so what now?