ASIAN AFFAIRS ON ASEAN Eric Teo Chu Cheow - Business Development Director - Suez- Lyonnaise THE DYNAMICS OF ASEAN Created in Bangkok on 8 August 1967, ASEAN was in fact born as a purely socioeconomic and cultural regional organisation, comprising at that time five founding member countries, namely, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Today, ASEAN embraces nine countries and a total population of almost 300 millions after its expansion to include Brunei (1983), Vietnam (1994), Laos and Myanmar (1997). Only Cambodia, which is currently mired in internal political uncertainties, has yet to join the organisation. Unfortunately for this Cambodian "accident", ASEAN is at this moment (of its thirtieth anniversary) unable to achieve the dream of its founders in 1967, viz. to create an ASEAN-10 embracing all the ten countries of Southeast Asia after the fall of the "bamboo curtain", which divided Southeast Asia into two ideological camps during the Cold War period. Nevertheless, ASEAN has matured as a symbol and embodiment of regional dynamics in a region previously plagued by a history of conflicts and political instability. Today, ASEAN, as a regional concept and organisation, continues to play the important role of enhancing stability and reducing conflicts in Southeast Asia. But after thirty years of existence, ASEAN appears today to be all set to embrace all fields of consultations and co-operation on the threshold of the twenty-first century. A regional glue. The context of the birth of ASEAN and its long history of regional conflicts and infighting attest to the important contribution of this organisation to the geopolitics of this region and vice-versa, viz. the contribution of this organisation to the geopolitical factor in the strengthening of ASEAN as an institution. In fact, paradoxically, the greatest achievement of ASEAN has come in an area which was neither its stated raison d'être nor its declared objective at the founding Bangkok meeting in 1967, viz. regional political stabilization. However, even if until 1992 ASEAN had never "accepted" to officially discuss regional geopolitical issues, the Konfrontasi episode of 1964 to 1966 and the ravages of the Vietnam war (from the ideological angle) were grim reminders of ASEAN's ironical political foundation. The reaffirmation of fundamental political principles by ASEAN leaders at their first Summit meeting in Bali in 1976, via the Declaration of ASEAN Concord and the Treaty of Amity and Co-operation, can only be viewed as a concrete political act of solidarity in consolidating a non-communist ASEAN in the face of the communist tide which had swept through Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos in 1975 (1). Three years later, the "Cambodian problem" (2) helped further consolidate ASEAN's political clout as a regional grouping as well as strengthening considerably the political ties between ASEAN's anti-communist member countries in a stiff ideological stand-off against communist Vietnam and its allies. Ironically again, with the resolution of the Cambodian problem and the withdrawal of Vietnamese troops from Cambodia, politics topped ASEAN's agenda, with the admission of Vietnam into ASEAN after the UN- supervised general elections in Cambodia (3). Hence, although specifically and constantly downplayed throughout ASEAN's thirty year history, it is truly the geopolitical and not the socioeconomic or cultural factors that have shaped, moulded and consolidated this regional organisation. But the geopolitical factor was also clearly at work in shaping ASEAN in two other ways, internally and externally. In the internal arena, ASEAN was a subtle and useful means of preventing long-standing territorial and jurisdictional conflicts from flaring up between ASEAN member states. The conflicts over Sabah (between Malaysia and Philippines), Limbang (between Brunei and Malaysia) and the islands of Sipadan and Ligitan (between Indonesia and Malaysia) were "capped" and resolved (or being resolved) "in the spirit of ASEAN". Some overlapping claims in the gulf of Siam by Thailand and Vietnam, as well as potential border problems between Thailand and Myanmar would now have to be discreetly resolved in this same ASEAN spirit. It is therefore clear that ASEAN's moderating influence in confidence-building amongst its member countries and its "quiet" resolution of its multiple intra-regional disputes over sovereignty have vastly contributed to the stabilization of the whole region. Externally, ASEAN's political role on the world scene has clearly enhanced its status as a regional power and player, which in turn further stabilizes Southeast Asia. Through ASEAN's regional clout in holding its annual ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conferences (PMC) (4) the member-countries deal on an equal footing with world players like the United States, Japan, the European Union and more recently China, Russia and India. Since 1993, ASEAN gave considerable substance to the ASEAN Regional Forum or ARF as a regional geopolitical framework of considerable weight and clout; even countries like Britain and France are eagerly seeking a place and role in the ARF. And again at the initiative of Singapore, ASEAN floated and launched the concept of the Asia-Europe Meeting or ASEM in order to bridge the Asia-European side of the triangular relationship between the three major economic powers or centres in the world, namely, viz. the United States-Europe and Asia. (the two other sides of the triangular relationship, viz. the United States-Europe arm through the Atlantic Charter and its "traditional relationship", and the United States-Asia arm through APEC, are already well strengthened). The latest summit of ASEAN-plus-Three (China, Japan, Korea) in Kuala-Lumpur in December 1997 marks the consolidation of East and Southeast Asia as an entity in its own rights; it was earlier the cherished dream of Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir, as embodied in his earlier proposals for an East Asia Economic Grouping (EAEG), and then Caucus (EAEC) (5). On this external projection of ASEAN solidarity and strength onto the regional geopolitical arena, it is also worthwhile noting that ASEAN's common stance and declaration on the Spratlys in 1995 have considerably moderated China's attitude and position on these islands and especially in its bilateral dealings with Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei over this potentially explosive South China Sea issue. ASEAN has therefore undoubtedly proven its political mettle and prowess in the stabilization of the whole Asia-Pacific region and become a solid asset in regional geopolitical management. Economic, social, cultural and defense aspects of ASEAN. With its growing geopolitical clout and status, ASEAN has cleverly used its own economic well-being, standing and influence in the world. For example, ASEAN leaders made use of this clout to send messages reflecting a common regional stance either to the G7 at their annual Summit (via Japan) or the WTO during its inaugural ministerial conference held in Singapore. ASEAN also co-ordinates its position on economic and financial issues affecting them during APEC and ASEM meetings, as well as during the AMM/PMC meetings which it organizes annually. However, on a more disappointing note, ASEAN again tried to use its politico-economic clout during the recent financial and monetary crisis in Asia to press for a special common ASEAN rescue fund from the IMF, but to no avail following the strong reservations of the big powers like the United States and to a lesser extent, Japan (6). It also remains to be seen if the present crisis would diminish the clout and standing of ASEAN, as the little emerging tigers in this region have been largely "tamed" by the current turmoil. The ASEAN model of economic development may now be called into question by other Third World countries, which had earlier sought to emulate the emerging tigers of ASEAN. As a corollary, the present monetary and financial crisis in Asia has also "tamed" the passion of Asian and ASEAN countries in underscoring the virtues of Asian values, a rallying cry of great nationalistic pride and Confucian social cohesion for Asian and ASEAN countries. ASEAN countries have now got to put their house in order economically and financially and prove clearly that this Asian-Confucius social cohesion can tide over the bad times, the latter times being the real litmus test for the much exalted virtues of Asian values. Hence, if the ASEAN countries can truly overcome the numerous socioeconomic obstacles and rise to this challenge, then only in true and profound adversity can it be adequately proven that Asian values are valid and can eventually be considered a model value system for other societies to accept and follow. Therein lies this exceptional opportunity and chance for Asia, and ASEAN in particular. It is also perhaps crucial now that ASEAN consolidates its cultural binding during these hard times of economic upheaval and financial turmoil. ASEAN, through its exceptionally rich diversity of cultures, religions and traditions, has practiced cultural tolerance very well as an art of living together in a complex Southeast Asian community. In fact, given its past history of conflicts and geopolitical rivalries, ASEAN has already so far successfully created a deep sense of Southeast Asianness amongst its citizens. Although difficult to gauge and measure, this community spirit of ASEAN is certainly a precious achievement for a grouping after thirty years of living together. It is now up to the new members (Vietnam, Laos and Myanmar) to imbibe themselves with this Southeast Asian culture of "mushyawarah" and tolerance so as to ensure greater regional stabilization in the next century. In this spirit ASEAN must now co-operate more to fight the present scourges and the social ills of modern living, like the fight against drugs and its abuse, AIDS, urban alienation and ghettorisation, prostitution and terrorism. Finally, ASEAN members have yet to pull their resources together in the defence arena. Some Western analysts have pointed out that the arms race was clearly building up within ASEAN despite the confidence-building measures mooted regularly by ASEAN members as well as within the greater framework of the ARF. ASEAN countries have argued that being young nations (7), they needed to build their national defence in order to protect their new found-sovereignty and independence in parallel with the on-going confidence-building measures adopted within the regional and extra-regional frameworks. However, it must also be said that ASEAN nations, though ostensibly cool towards a common defence outfit or institutional structure, do effectively conduct bilateral military exercises and practice bilateral defence co-operation rather successfully. To conclude, the benefits of ASEAN as a regional framework and institution are wide-ranging. From the stated objectives of socioeconomic and cultural co-operation, as embodied in the Bangkok Declaration of 1967, ASEAN has in fact grown effectively through the more sensitive approach of political and geopolitical co-operation in the last thirty years. Now since the Cold War has subsided, the stated objectives from 1967 should pave the way to bind this organisation further, either through the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), a common approach to regional investments or through intensified co-operation in socio-cultural fields. The ASEAN vision 2020 (8), as unveiled in December 1997 in Kuala-Lumpur, should clearly be the guiding thrust of ASEAN; it should transform its present achievement of regional political stabilization into an even greater socioeconomic and cultural consolidation so as to become a credible regional player in Asia-Pacific in the next phase of its development. The present economic and financial crisis could therefore provide the ASEAN countries with the much-needed impetus to realize its vision 2020 together, within the framework of a much stronger and united regional entity. Winter 1997 Notes: 1.- In April 1975, the Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, captured Phnom Penh, the capital of Cambodia, toppling Lon Nol's pro-American regime which had ousted Sihanouk in a coup in 1970. The same year, in Laos, the coalition government of the American backed Royal Lao Government and the pro-communist Pathet Lao established in April 1974 after two decades of fighting, crumbled, giving way to the establishment of the People's Democratic Republic of Laos under a communist regime. In Vietnam, the communist troops captured Saigon on 30 April 1975. 2.- Dr Teo refers to the extension of Vietnam's influence in Cambodia when, after invading the country. Vietnam toppled the government and set up a government in Phnom Penh headed by Khmer Rouge defectors and pro-Vietnamese communists. For the next twelve years, a coalition, including the ousted Khmer Rouge and two non-communist resistance groups (one being led by Sihanouk) continued to wage a guerrilla war against the Vietnamese-backed regime in Phnom Penh. 3.- On 23 October 1991, the four warring factions signed a UN-sponsored peace agreement in Paris under which the UN sent a peace-keeping force to Cambodia to monitor a partial disarmament of the four armies and to monitor a transition period leading to free elections. The elections took place in May 1993 and a new constitution was promulgated in September 1993 with Sihanouk as head of state. His status was later elevated to that of a constitutional monarch with little power. 4.- Immediately following its annual ASEAN Post-Ministerial Meetings or AMMs each July, and rotated each year amongst the ASEAN capitals. 5.- In 1991, Dr. Mahathir proposed to form a new East Asian Economic Grouping (EAEG) to bring Japan into a more formal economic arrangement with its neighbours to the south and west. The proposal was ill-timed as it was inspired in part by anti-US sentiment in the wake of the Gulf War. See the comments made by Koji Watanabe. 6.- See interview of Koji Watanabe on the position of Japan which was not as negative as implied here. 7.- Amongst ASEAN members, only Thailand as a sovereign state has never been colonized. Indonesia was made an independent State (from the Netherlands) on 17 August 1945. Its constitution is from 1945. Malaysia gained independence (from the United Kingdom) on 31 August 1957 as a Federation which included Singapore. Philippines became independent from Spain on 12 June 1898, only to fall under the control of United States. After Japan's defeat in World War II, the Republic of the Philippines was proclaimed on 4 July 1946. It was followed by a communist-inspired rebellion in Central Luzon which lasted a decade. Its constitution was revised in 1987. Singapore declared its independence from the Malayan Federation on 9 August 1965. Brunei was made an independent State on 1 January 1984, with its unique constitution dating from 1959, giving full power to the Sultan. Vietnam was made independent (from France) on March 1949 but stays part of the Union française until the battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. The Geneva Agreement (21 July 1954) temporarily divided Vietnam into north and south. It was followed by nine years of war. The reunification under a communist rule came on 2 July 1976. The constitution of the country was changed in 1992. Laos became a nominal State on 19 July 1949 but remained under French control up to 1953. In-fighting lasted until a cease-fire was signed in April 1973. The Lao People's Democratic Republic was proclaimed on 2 December 1975. The constitution, drafted in 1975, was promulgated in 1991. Myanmar (ex-Burma) was annexed in stages by the British up to 1885 who made it a province of British India. After the war, the British never regained full control of the Burmans and the Union of Burma was declared an independent State on 4 January 1948. It immediately faced rebellions by communist groups and ethnic minorities. 8.- ASEAN 2020 is a vision to chart the future. The declaration published after the second ASEAN informal summit held in Kuala-Lumpur on 14-16 December 1997, is divided into four parts wherein the heads of State/Government of ASEAN resolve to undertake the following: - fully implement the ASEAN Free Trade Area and accelerate liberalization of trade in services; realize the ASEAN Investment Area by 2010 and free flow of investments by 2020, - enhance intra-ASEAN trade and investment in the mineral sector. On the socio-cultural side, ASEAN 2020 reemphasized the so-called Asian values defined as the vision of a socially cohesive and caring ASEAN where strong families as the basic units of society tend to their members particularly the children, youth, women, and elderly; and where the civil society is empowered and gives special attention to the disadvantaged, disabled and marginalized and where social justice and the rule of law reign, and where the nations are being governed with the consent and greater participation of the people with its focus on the welfare and dignity of the human person and the good of the community. It is noticeable that the wording carefully avoids the two pillars words of the Western politic rhetoric: the human rights of the people and democracy. Winter 1997
| |||
 | | | |