The great powers
- U.S.A, emerging China - and others regional powers and countries see and
assume the ASEAN – Association of Southeast Asian Nations - another emerging
security and economic community. To have more political and economic leverage
than each other in the region, both U.S.A and China try to have close relations
with ASEAN. Generally speaking, as a new regional player ASEAN is the emerging
power, but the intra-ASEAN problems and conflicts have significantly undermined
and affected the overall potential of the ASEAN.
After ASEAN
initiated ARF – ASEAN Regional Forum - dominant courtiers and union like,
U.S.A, China, E.U, India, Russia, and Japan joined it enthusiastically. Soon
after joining ARF, aforementioned players appointed their ambassadors to ASEAN,
which might show the importance of ASEAN. U.S.A. ambassador to ASEAN, Scot
Marcial explained the importance the association “Southeast Asia is an
indispensible partner for the United States in trying to deal with the global
financial crisis, climate change, and range of other issues in the world.” “We
are looking to the ASEAN to be a partner in a whole host of issues.”[1] Beside nominating
Ambassador to ASEAN, United State signed the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in
July 2009 and President Obama attended the first ASEAN-US summit in Singapore.
China changed
their foreign policy toward ASEAN after 1990s, because of the fear that some
other great powers, which China sees rival may have strong influence in the
region. China boosted their economic ties and cooperation with ASEAN members to
the extent that now ASEAN is the only trade member, where China has trade
deficit. Southeast Asia is vital for China through which she exports almost 75%
of goods to Middle East. ASEAN is equally important for Russia too. As Paradorn
Rangsimaporn argued, Russia attached greater importance to relation with Asia, “Moscow
sees ASEAN as ripe with opportunities for Russia to enhance its influence in
Southeast Asia and across East Asia”[2]. Besides that, E.U, Japan,
and India try to strengthen their relation and ties with ASEAN particularly in
the recent past. To conclude, each great/regional/emerging player for keeping
their influence tries to have better relations and strengthen ties with ASEAN.
In late 1990s
and 21st century, ASEAN has been expanded to 10 members and established
sub-communities; ASC, AEC, and ASCC and drew a charter. Tellingly, we can say
that they brought positive changes in their policy that in turns boost the
importance of ASEAN, “A key element of this ASEAN strategy is the co-engagement
of China, the U.S, Japan and India”[3]. ASEAN members do insist
to enhance the idea of regionalism within to play vital and constructive role
in solving and settling intra-ASEAN problems. “In the face of difficulty and
challenge, regionalism is the only way. There is no alternative. This has been
the insight and the decision of ASEAN leaders.”[4]
Though great
and emerging powers view ASEAN as an important partner both in politics and
economics, intra-ASEAN problems and conflicts may downplay the emerging
influence of ASEAN. Though it seems naïve to compare ASEAN to European
Community, but limited interactions – social, political, and cultural - among
ASEAN adversely affect overall status of them. People feel more isolated and
heterogeneous. Below figures of recent survey conducted in ASEAN countries show
how they view each other. [5]
|
1
|
Similarity in
|
Agree
|
Disagree
|
|
2
|
Culture
|
64.4
|
32.6
|
|
3
|
Economy
|
39.7
|
60.3
|
|
4
|
Politics
|
34.9
|
65.1
|
|
5
|
Being as a ASEAN
|
76.8
|
23.3
|
Current
problems among ASEAN members; a) Malaysia-Singapore: Land reclamation;
territorial disputes; and water supply, b) Thai-Cambodia: Preah Vihear Temple;
and Angkor Wat temple, c) Malaysia-Philippines: Territorial claims; insurgency;
and illegal migration, d) Malaysia-Indonesia: Territorial claims; and illegal
migrants in Malaysia, e) Malaysia-Thai: Separatist insurgency; illegal
immigrants; illegal fishing; and territorial claims, and f) Myanmar-Thai:
territorial disputes; and historical image of enemy make it difficult to
cooperate each other in great platform. Pointing finger and blaming other is a
part of Asian culture. Secretary general of ASEAN Rodolfo C. Severino argued
that problems exist as a heritage of colonialism, “the colonial powers left
unresolved, or had created, territorial, ethnic and economic issues that
engendered an environment of dispute and suspicion between the new nations that
emerged in Southeast Asia.”[6] But the question that what
ASEAN has done to tackle these problems remained unanswered.
One possible
reason might be the lack of a general consensus and concession or highly
prioritization of domestic or national interest as Shaun Narine said,
“countries cooperate in regional organization till the domestic priorities
unchallenged.”[7]
Secondly, adopting non-intervention policy or an unwillingness of ASEAN among
members’ countries, as Amitav Acharya mentioned “indeed, adherence to
non-intervention is said to have thwarted ASEAN’s ability to responds to the
East Timor crisis and apply genuine pressure on Burma.”[8]
For settling
and resolving intra-ASEAN conflicts, members’ countries have to develop policy
where they boost cooperation, harmony and interactions in various aspects.
Although ‘cooperation’ is being repeatedly mentioned in ASEAN summits till now
far from in practice. Rodolfo Severino insists on regional solution and
cooperation, “growing trans-national problems, notably those pertaining to the
marine and atmospheric environment and cross-border crimes, are susceptible
only of regional solutions, which means more intensive ASEAN cooperation in a
broader range of areas” is required. He further argues that, “ASEAN is emerging
as a true community or even family.”[9]
As an emerging
power and heterogeneous society, ASEAN has yet to reach a real security
community and dominate power. But arguably they are only a few steps away. As
Mely Caballero-Anthony says “security and democracy are ‘complementary’ to
changes being made in ASEAN.” The recent political and policy changes in
Southeast Asia particularly in Myanmar and Indonesia, we can argue they are
stepping toward democracy, which plays vital rule accordingly to Mely Caballero-Anthony “democratization in Southeast Asia allows new actors, both
public and private to become involved in forging a regional identity.”[10] However, political unrest
followed by military coup in Thailand may halt some aspects of democratization
in the region.
To conclude as
Shaun Narine mentioned, “Despite the [intra-ASEAN] problems, ASEAN has the
greatest prospect for evolving in the twenty first century.”[11]
Bibliography
1.
Marcial, Scot, US policy toward ASEAN, Feb.26.2009 [www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2009/02/119967.htm]
accessed date Feb.24.2012
2.
Myoe, Maung, SEA
International relation, class lecture, IUJ, Mar.2012
3.
Rangsimaporn, Paradorn, Russia’s Search for Influence Southeast Asia, Asian Survey, (Vol.
49, Issue 5, pp. 786-808, 2009)
4.
Acharya, Amitav, Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia, 2nd
edition, Routledge, New York, 2009
5.
Severino, C. Rodolfo, ASEAN faces the future, ASEAN Secretariat, 2001
6.
Thompson, C. Eric and Thianthai, Attitudes and Awareness toward ASEAN, ISEAS,
Singapore, 2008.
7.
Shaun Narine. "ASEAN in the twenty-first
century: a skeptical review", Cambridge Review of International Affairs
(Vol. 22, No. 3; September 2009)
8.
Mely Caballero-Anthony. "Challenging
Change: Nontraditional Security, Democracy, and Regionalism" in Donald K.
Emmerson (ed.) Hard Choice: Security, Democracy, and Regionalism in Southeast
Asia (Singapore: ISEAS, 2009)
[2]
Russia’s Search for Influence Southeast Asia
[3]
Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia P.224
[4]
ASEAN faces the future
[6]
ASEAN faces the future
[7]
ASEANin the twenty first century
[8]
Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia P.258
[9]
ASEAN faces the future
[10] Challenging
Change: Nontraditional Security, Democracy, and Regionalism
[11]
ASEAN in the twenty first century
No comments:
Post a Comment