[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Asiaweek: DIVIDED WE FALL



                    DIVIDED WE FALL

     ASEAN must take a firm stand on regional matters 


IS THE ASSOCIATION OF Southeast Asian Nations becoming irrelevant? Just when it is
close to embracing all of Southeast Asia, with Cambodia expected to join some months after
conducting seemingly credible elections on July 26, most ASEAN citizens would be at a loss to
answer the question: What has ASEAN done for you lately? Consider its biggest problems in the
past year, from the Asian currency crisis and the haze to the Indonesian turmoil and the South Asian
nuclear arms race. How much has ASEAN said or done to address these concerns? Yes, it
continues to pursue important initiatives like the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and the
security-oriented ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). The U.S., the E.U., China, Russia and Japan still
deem the grouping's annual meeting of foreign ministers, this year in Manila, a must-show. But do
ASEAN inhabitants themselves see worth in the grouping's doings?

The Manila conference heated up over the issue of "flexible engagement," a Thai proposal - backed
by the Philippines but opposed by other members - to deviate from the hallowed policy of
non-intervention in internal affairs. Bangkok and Manila would like members to be allowed to
comment on domestic policies of fellow ASEAN countries. In fact, the bigger problem is
non-involvement: the grouping has simply not been in the thick of the most pressing issues,
particularly the Asian Crisis. After some admirable collaboration to help Thailand and Indonesia in
the first few months of the slump, including discussions toward the creation of a regional stabilization
fund, ASEAN has retreated into a subdued, if not paralyzed, silence.

Admittedly, the gravity of the crisis has focused official attention on domestic matters. U.S. and
International Monetary Fund opposition to the stabilization fund has also eroded ASEAN's
enthusiasm for other cooperative efforts. But the association could certainly have pushed harder on
the fund, especially after the U.S. set aside its objections as long as IMF economic adjustments
would still be adhered to. Nor has ASEAN taken further another Crisis-related idea to conduct a
portion of regional trade in local currencies. The grouping has yet to be heard in the international
debate over the IMF's austerity policies. And it could have said something about Indonesia's
rupiah-rupturing policies, China's decision to desist from devaluation, and Japan's yen-killing
inaction.

Plainly, if the group is unable to speak or act on such issues of paramount importance, whether for
fear of giving offense, for lack of consensus or for simple inertia, then many would wonder what
ASEAN is good for. This apparent irrelevance seems to have touched another key area: security.
After the triumph of 1995, when China was persuaded to sign a Spratlys communiqué, no other
major security issue has been much advanced at ARF. What about the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan
and now the Indo-Pakistani nuclear standoff? Though the recent ARF meeting "strongly deplored"
recent nuclear weapons tests, its statement fell short of outright condemnation, and didn't even
mention India and Pakistan by name.

More than carping about one another, ASEAN needs to muster a renewed collective will to speak
and act on matters regional. That has always been central to its influence and importance, from its
beginnings when the five founding members set aside mutual animosities in favor of regional
harmony, to the years of the Cambodian confict when the association's opposition to Vietnamese
aggression eventually prevailed, and until last year's coup in Phnom Penh where ASEAN foreign
ministers prodded Second PM Hun Sen toward last weekend's polls. 

Undoubtedly, the Suharto government's troubles and vested interests got in the way of ASEAN's
ability to act on major issues. Well, that excuse is gone. The grouping must now act or shrivel. For
starters, it can move ahead on some Crisis initiatives, including: a) revive plans to conduct at least
part of intra-regional trade in local currencies; b) support moves to establish an Asian debt market,
to raise funds for regional stabilization at market interest rates; c) launch an initiative toward better
standards for financial institutions and improved safeguards against future regional crises; d) make a
clear, unequivocal appeal for humanitarian aid for Indonesia, which is coming perilously close to
severe food shortages and more violent unrest; and e) weigh in on the IMF debate, particularly on
the importance of new funds for the agency.

As for democracy and human rights, after three decades, it is time the association asked itself what
kind of governance and political culture it wants to aspire to. Is it one of repression and abuse, or
one of openness, justice and freedom? Once such a standard is agreed upon, members should then
be called upon to set deadlines - which, like AFTA's, would vary for each nation - to implement
that collective goal.

ASEAN now stands at a crossroads. Will it rise to the challenge? Thirty years ago, no one thought
its five founding nations could set aside their nationalist urges in favor of regional oneness. Today,
history is again demanding that Southeast Asia - all 10 of its nations - come together and act in
concert for the collective good. Its response will determine whether ASEAN lasts another 30 years.