WK 12 - ASEAN

Northeast Asian countries are building their own multilateral dialogues, which may reduce ASEAN's necessity as the focal point for East Asian regionalism.

Students may identify as:

1. Southeast Asian - emphasizing regional identity over national identity.
2. National Identity - identifying specifically as Malaysian, Thai, Indonesian, etc.

This reflects a sense of belonging to a broader ASEAN Community versus a more localized national identity.

• Rich countries are right next to poor countries
• Problematic levels of governance combined with dense trade, communications, transportation networks

• Much of the world's trade passes through the region (Malacca Straits)
• Some of the most dynamic economies in the world

• As a bloc, the basis for much of Asia's regionalism
• Outside powers also interested in the area → political, security reasons

Countries with extreme poverty include Timor Leste, Laos, Cambodia, and Myanmar. Countries with significant wealth inequality include Philippines and Indonesia.

The middle-income trap refers to a situation where countries lose their competitive edge in the export of manufactured goods due to rising wages but cannot transition to high-value-added markets. Affected countries include Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Challenges include:

1. Corruption
2. Relatively poor infrastructure
3. Human capital problems

These factors make it difficult for countries to advance in production capabilities.

Biopolis in Singapore focuses on biomedical science research and has shown positive results, while Batam in Indonesia has had mixed results in its development initiatives, reflecting the varying success of regional development strategies.

Unresolved territorial disputes in Southeast Asia include:

1. Malaysia-Indonesia
2. Thailand-Myanmar
3. Thailand-Cambodia
4. South China Sea (SCS)

Non-traditional security threats in Southeast Asia include:

• Environmental degradation (e.g., haze)
• Human trafficking and smuggling
• Drug trafficking
• Terrorism
• Corruption and low state capacity

The continuing lack of regional identity in Southeast Asia raises questions about its necessity. Some argue it may be a postcolonial issue, prompting discussions on whether a regional identity is essential for cooperation and unity.

There are discussions about whether Indonesia could become a regional leader in Southeast Asia. The nature of this leadership and its implications for regional dynamics are key points of consideration.

Southeast Asian countries are becoming more reliant on China for trade, particularly in commodities. This dependence raises concerns about economic vulnerability and the need for these countries to develop strategies to mitigate risks associated with China's military power and territorial expansion, especially in the South China Sea.

The US is reengaging with Southeast Asia through a strategy known as the 'pivot,' which includes:

1. In-and-out basing in countries like Australia, the Philippines, and Singapore.
2. Establishing bilateral and multilateral arrangements with several Southeast Asian countries to strengthen ties and enhance security cooperation.

Southeast Asia faces the challenge of navigating its relationships with both the US and China, balancing economic ties with China while seeking security partnerships with the US. This requires careful diplomatic strategies to avoid being caught in the middle of great power competition.

Emerging competitors to Southeast Asia include:

• Latin America, particularly Brazil
• Southern Africa
• India

These regions are becoming increasingly dynamic economically, posing challenges to Southeast Asia's growth and influence.

The question of whether Indonesia can join the BRI(I)CS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) reflects its aspirations to enhance its global economic standing. Joining such a group could provide Indonesia with greater influence and access to new markets, but it also raises questions about its alignment with existing geopolitical powers.

Southeast Asia is located south of China and east of India, encompassing both mainland and maritime regions. It includes countries such as Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines.

The name 'Southeast Asia' reflects a perception influenced by powerful European namers rather than the identities of the local populations.

No, the term 'Southeast Asia' is neutral and non-political, not derived from any one member's identity.

The SEAC was established to oversee Allied operations in the South-East Asia Theatre during World War II, primarily focusing on anti-Japanese efforts.

Included regions: Ceylon, Sumatra. Excluded regions: Malay Archipelago (until 1945), Indochina, and the Philippines.

World War II made Southeast Asia more visible by establishing the Division of Southeast Asian Affairs in the US Department of State in 1945, which highlighted the region's importance in global politics.

World War II solidified the regional concept of Southeast Asia, reducing its range from a vague geographical area to a more defined region, emphasizing its significance beyond just being 'South of China and East of India.'

During World War II, Southeast Asia gained a strong political connotation, as the region became significant in foreign policy discussions, despite a lack of comprehensive knowledge about it at the time.

The war created a need for research into Southeast Asia as it became a foreign policy priority, reflecting the region's emerging significance and the goodwill link to its 'awakening and emerging nations.'

The primary purpose of SEATO was collective defense against communism in Southeast Asia. The 'true' Southeast Asian members were Thailand and the Philippines, along with the US, UK, New Zealand, Australia, and others.

SEATO failed due to internal conflict and disputes among member countries, which hindered the ability to use military force as it required unanimity for action.

The Association of Southeast Asia (ASA) was an early form of regional organization that included Thailand, the Philippines, and Malaya. It was influenced by indigenous forces seeking regional cooperation.

Indonesia did not join ASA because it supported nonalignment and found the organization too politically strong, as it was not consulted in its formation.

MAPHILINDO was a nonpolitical confederation aimed at including Indonesia, based on a united concept of the Malay race, which had been artificially divided by colonizers. It ended with Konfrontasi around 1966, which was a conflict involving Indonesia and Malaysia.

ASEAN aims to:

1. Accelerate economic growth among member states.
2. Promote social progress and cultural development.
3. Protect regional peace and stability.
4. Provide opportunities for member countries to discuss differences peacefully.

ASEAN enjoyed closer relations with the US and its partners compared to the Soviet bloc, reflecting its capitalist and anti-communist stance, while also focusing on regional cooperation and development.

The founding members of ASEAN, known as ASEAN 5, are Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Singapore.

Brunei joined ASEAN in 1984 upon its independence.

The countries that joined ASEAN in the mid-1990s are Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Burma (Myanmar).

Timor Leste is expected to join ASEAN in 2025.

ASEAN countries exhibit an unusual combination of (semi-) authoritarian states and communist/dictatorship regimes, which is different from the political landscape in Europe.

ASEAN countries display different levels of economic development, which impacts their overall economic growth and stability.

ASEAN serves as a focal point for regional cooperation, integration, and problem-solving in Southeast Asia, functioning as the only longstanding regional security organization in East Asia.

ASEAN is recognized as one of the most successful regional organizations in the developing world, credited with maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia for over three decades (Kivimaki, 2001).

In the early 1960s, Southeast Asia faced several challenges:

1. Domestic communist insurgencies/unrest in countries like Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia.
2. Concerns about PRC and USSR infiltration of the region, leading to the Vietnam War.
3. Interstate conflicts such as Konfrontasi, where Indonesia challenged the legitimacy of Malaysia, and issues between the Philippines and Sabah.

States recognized that inter-state conflicts were unproductive and diverted attention from critical internal security and political governance issues.

ASEAN has evolved to embrace new areas of cooperation including:

1. Regional trade liberalisation
2. Non-traditional security problems (such as transnational crime, drug trafficking, maritime piracy)
3. Social development issues (including poverty and rural development)
4. Environmental concerns

The fundamental principles include:

1. Mutual respect for independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity, and national identity of all nations.
2. The right of every State to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion, or coercion.
3. Non-interference in the internal affairs of one another.
4. Settlement of differences or disputes by peaceful means.
5. Renunciation of the threat or use of force.
6. Effective cooperation among themselves.

Decision making is based on consensus, which means avoiding public disagreements and resolving conflicts behind closed doors.

The ASEAN Way emphasizes non-legalistic and non-binding commitments, allowing states autonomy in deciding the extent of implementation of agreements they have initially agreed to.

The ASEAN Way promotes non-interference in the domestic affairs of member states, allowing governments to exclude politically sensitive issues from regional discussions, even if they have cross-border effects.

The ASEAN Way advocates for the non-use of force in settling disputes, encouraging members to practice restraint in their relations with one another.

The principle of neutrality/non-aligned stance (ZOPFAN) suggests that the region should not be used as a zone for great power rivalry, promoting peace and stability.

While the ASEAN Way outlines specific principles, member states sometimes choose to deviate from these principles based on their national interests.

The ASEAN Secretariat is a small organization established in 1977, characterized by:

• Limited authority as member states refuse to delegate greater powers.
• Recent stationing of ASEAN national permanent representatives in Jakarta.
• An aversion to centralized bureaucracies and supranational identities, similar to European models.
• Weak institutions and decentralized governance, lacking enforcement powers and a dispute mechanism.
• Financially weak and primarily focused on non-security issues.
• The Secretary-General has limited influence, and cooperation relies on interpersonal relations among elites.

The ASEAN Charter 2007 aims to:

1. Turn ASEAN into a rules-based organization.
2. Set out ASEAN's purposes and basic principles.
3. Define institutional structures, membership criteria, and the rights and duties of member states.
4. Establish principles and procedures for decision-making, implementation, and dispute settlement.
5. Address budget and finances.

The ASEAN Charter 2007 formally articulates commitments to:

• Democracy
• Human Rights
• Good Governance
• Rule of Law

The ASEAN Charter 2007 is not expected to depart substantially from the ASEAN Way. It is likely to be more consultative than prescriptive, as seen in its approach to member states like Myanmar.

The weaknesses include:

• Focus on conflict management rather than conflict resolution, leading to unresolved regional tensions.
• Inability to effectively respond to crises, particularly non-traditional security threats like haze.
• Unwillingness of member states to delegate authority to ASEAN.

Elite-centred regionalism results in:

• Close inter-personal relations between elites, limiting broader engagement.
• Minimal input from civil society, with consultations restricted to state elites.
• A form of horizontal democracy, where incumbent elites are accountable to each other in closed settings, rather than to the public.

• Rules based, shared norms and values
• Cohesive, peaceful, stable, resilient with shared responsibility
• Dynamic and Outward looking

• Single Market and production base
• Competitive economic region
• Equitable Economic development
• Integration into global economy

• Human Development
• Social Welfare and Protection
• Social justice and rights
• Environmental Sustainability
• ASEAN Identity

One Vision, One Identity, One Caring and Sharing Community

ASEAN is addressing several non-traditional security issues, including:

• Refugees
• Illegal labor flows
• Environmental issues
• Terrorism
• Resource conflicts

In 2004, Indonesia proposed the establishment of an ASEAN peacekeeping force to enhance regional security cooperation.

The Southeast Asia Regional Centre for Counter-Terrorism (SEARCCT), established in Kuala Lumpur in 2003, aims to promote more transparent security policies and enhance regional cooperation in counter-terrorism efforts.

There is a gradual shift away from the non-intervention principle in ASEAN, although this change is occurring very slowly.

The key motivations included:

1. Diversion of outside investments away from ASEAN.
2. Recognition of the benefits of regionalism in an era of globalization.

The planned initiatives included:

1. Single market and integrated regional economy.
2. Regional financial surveillance.
3. Assistance to poorer states.
4. Free Trade Agreements with countries such as China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.

The primary goal of AFTA was to create a large market attractive to foreign investment, establishing a single domestic consumer market of over 500 million people and providing greater leverage in international economic and trade forums.

The target tariff reduction for intra-ASEAN trade under AFTA was to reduce tariffs to 0-5% by 2010, with an extension to 2015 for less industrialized member states.

AFTA aimed to compete with NAFTA and the single European market by creating a large, attractive market for foreign investment, thereby preventing the diversion of investment away from Southeast Asia.

The main failures of the AFTA experience included:

1. Lack of binding rules: This allowed for protectionist tendencies, leading to lengthy exclusion lists and non-tariff barriers.
2. Protection of key constituencies: Certain sectors, like rice farmers and domestic corporate players, were protected, hindering broader economic integration.
3. Perception of unequal benefits: There was a belief that some states benefited more than others, leading to backsliding on commitments.
4. Weak intra-ASEAN trade: Intra-ASEAN trade was only 25%, indicating a lack of complementarity among exports and competition among economies.
5. Lack of transparency: Economic data was submitted on a voluntary basis, resulting in a lack of transparency.

The rise in the number of regional NGOs such as ALTSEAN (Myanmar), ASEAN Peoples Assembly (APA), and Forum Asia has fueled the growth of socio-cultural communities.

Civil society demands include:

1. More democratic-oriented ASEAN states
2. Greater public discussion of security and foreign policy issues
3. Greater rule-based interactions
4. Regional solutions to regional issues, particularly addressing social justice, human rights, and environmental concerns.

The AICHR plays a role in moving towards the acceptance of universal Human Rights standards within ASEAN member states.

Criticisms include:

• Overwhelming focus on economic integration
• Failure to bridge the rich-poor gap
• Insufficient attention to social justice issues, human rights, environmental concerns, and humanitarian/political crises.

There is a noted weakness in the ASEAN identity, which affects the cohesion and effectiveness of the organization in addressing regional issues.

The ASEAN Way enables ASEAN to maintain internal unity, which has granted it 'competence power'. This internal cohesion allows ASEAN to act as a primary driver of wider regional multilateral diplomacy, known as ASEAN CENTRALITY.

ASEAN has positioned itself as a hub of multilateral diplomacy by engaging a variety of external states to discuss and address shared transnational problems, all while adhering to ASEAN's principles and practices. This has allowed ASEAN to exercise influence beyond its material power capabilities.

ASEAN has taken the lead in building broader regional institutions in the Asia Pacific, such as the ARF, ASEAN+3, and RCEP. This leadership role underscores ASEAN's commitment to regional cooperation and stability.

The accession of many countries to ASEAN's TAC through the ARF indicates the importance these states place on diplomatic engagement with ASEAN. It reflects a willingness to cooperate on ASEAN's terms, which helps preserve ASEAN's core interests of creating a stable regional environment while securing each member's domestic autonomy.

The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) serves as a platform for dialogue and cooperation between Asia and Europe, involving various member countries and regions. It enhances political, economic, and cultural ties between the two regions, which is crucial for ASEAN's engagement with Europe.

The Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) includes Norway, the U.K., and France among its participating countries, promoting peace and cooperation in the region.

The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) is a key platform for dialogue on security issues in the Asia-Pacific region, involving countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Mongolia, and aims to foster constructive dialogue and cooperation on security matters.

The ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting-Plus (ADMM Plus) aims to enhance regional security and defense cooperation among ASEAN member states and their dialogue partners, addressing common security challenges.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a significant trade agreement that enhances economic integration among ASEAN member states and their partners, promoting trade and investment in the region.

ASEAN's enlargement has led to:

1. Over-stretch: The addition of new members can dilute focus on deeper integration.
2. Exacerbation of disparities: Economic and developmental gaps between member states may widen.
3. Consensus challenges: Reaching agreements becomes more difficult with a larger and more diverse membership.
4. Financial burden: Poorer states may struggle to contribute effectively, impacting overall organizational functionality.

ASEAN is organized into three tiers based on economic and political development:

This tiered structure reflects diversity but complicates coordination among members.

ASEAN faces several political challenges:

• Authoritarian regimes: A majority of member states have authoritarian or semi-authoritarian governments, which complicates collective decision-making.
• Focus on economic and security issues: There is a tendency to prioritize economic and security matters over political issues, leading to a fragile collective identity.

The Chiang Mai Initiative was established to provide a framework for financial cooperation among ASEAN countries to prevent and mitigate the impact of financial crises, enhancing regional financial stability.

ASEAN responded to the Boxing Day Tsunami in 2004 by coordinating relief efforts and establishing mechanisms for disaster response, highlighting the importance of regional cooperation in humanitarian crises.

ASEAN's intervention in the Thailand-Cambodia border conflict was characterized by belated diplomatic efforts to mediate tensions and promote dialogue between the two nations, reflecting challenges in regional conflict resolution.

ASEAN is facing challenges in dealing with Myanmar's military junta, which has implications for regional stability, as it raises questions about ASEAN's effectiveness in promoting democracy and human rights within member states.

ASEAN has been addressing the issue of transboundary haze, which results from forest fires in the region, leading to air quality problems and health concerns across member states, necessitating cooperative environmental management.

Realist critics argue that ASEAN is unable to maintain regional security due to its reliance on external powers and bilateral security alliances. They also claim that cooperation among member states is shallow and often described as 'fair-weather cooperation.' Additionally, they believe ASEAN struggles to effectively address regional crises, such as financial and political issues, and that the 'ASEAN Way' principle of non-intervention is a liability.

Constructivist advocates argue that ASEAN possesses collective norms that promote peaceful inter-state relations. They view the 'ASEAN Way' as an alternative model for global governance, emphasizing informality and consensus building. Furthermore, they highlight ASEAN's competence power in fostering cooperation among member states.

ASEAN needs to focus on rethinking, retooling, and readjusting its strategies and frameworks.

Proposals included:

1. Constructive intervention
2. Flexible engagement (by Thailand and the Philippines)
3. Participatory regionalism (emphasizing civil society over elite-centered approaches) leading to the establishment of bodies like AICHR.

Myanmar's military coup raises questions about the effectiveness and relevance of ASEAN's principle of non-interference in member states' internal affairs.

Green recovery and growth initiatives are essential for ASEAN to promote sustainable development and address environmental challenges in the post-COVID era.

The expansion to include Timor Leste signifies ASEAN's commitment to regional integration and the inclusion of newer member states, enhancing its influence and representation.