Whither ASEAN?

The trouble with many international organisations is that they begin to lose track of their original purpose and aims as they expand. NATO, for instance, has been derided as "No Action, Talk Only".

ASEAN, too, ever since it expanded from its original five members to now 10, is often called a talkfest. How many ASEAN-linked meetings are there in a year? Some say about 400!

I don't know why Timor Leste is so eager to join ASEAN as its 11th member.

The first link below gives an idea of what some critics think about the plethora of ASEAN meetings, while the second link is ASEAN's own listing of its 2011 meetings schedule.

http://news.mylaunchpad.com.my/Home/Article?Key=cdbbe9a6-d63f-4130-b53a-ccd604dd3a2a 

http://www.aseansec.org/25680.htm

I have written a number of articles commenting on ASEAN. I now feel the grouping is indeed at risk of losing its relevance as a 10-member body. The original five -- Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore -- as well as sixth member Brunei are still the core members and will probably stick together even if ASEAN-10 becomes less dynamic.

But I wasn't always so pessimistic. I wrote a commentary for TODAY in 2005, when I was teaching political science at NUS:

"There is plenty of life in ASEAN yet"

TODAY, 12 August 2005

When the going gets tough, the 10-member Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) gets its act together. So it seemed last month when Myanmar, thanks no doubt to peer pressure, declared it would forgo its turn as chair next year.

Meanwhile, in what would seem an unusual move, an ASEAN foreign minister has declared that ASEAN defence ministers should hold their own meeting for the first time  next year.

 A third interesting development has been the chorus of calls for ASEAN to become more "people-centric".

Are we seeing the transformation of ASEAN?

After all, the group has often been caricatured as (a) a club that eschews interference by seeing no evil, hearing no evil and speaking no evil; (b) a bloc that meets mainly for diplomatic talk-fests (the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement, for instance, has been dubbed "Agree First, Talk Afterwards"); and (c) an intergovernmental organisation that the man in the street has little knowledge of, let alone affection for.

One key factor for ASEAN's continued relevance, going back as far as the Cold War years, was indeed the group's apparent ethos of non-interference.

Since ASEAN's founding in 1967, this prevailing culture has enabled its members to get on with tackling domestic issues ranging from internal security to economic development.

During the Cold War years, one of ASEAN's biggest successes was managing disputes among the five founding non-communist regional states (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand).

Friction among the founding members (Brunei joined ASEAN as its sixth member in 1984) has been, on balance, well managed.

A second important factor for ASEAN's relevance during the Cold War period was its convergence of interests with the major powers. Pro-West initially, ASEAN adapted to geopolitical changes when it worked with China to force Vietnam to eventually withdraw from Cambodia.

The Cold War record shows that ASEAN was not just a group that met for diplomatic talk-fests but were capable of effecting change through diplomatic solidarity.

The post-Cold War years have seen ASEAN's image take a battering, often unfairly.

 Just when ASEAN was finally getting serious about economic cooperation (Agree First, Talk Afterwards notwithstanding), the Asian financial crisis struck in 1997.

Just when ASEAN decided to make the mindset-changing plunge to welcome four new members (Laos, Vietnam, Myanmar and Cambodia), international norms began to change.

After the 1989 Tiananmen incident in China, domestic governance began to have more pressing international ramifications. Myanmar's rulers, for reasons of their own, failed to take into account the winds of change and proceeded to incarcerate opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

Today, if -- and there will be big "ifs" -- ASEAN gets it right, its handling of the so-called Myanmar problem may provide the blueprint for further institutionalisation of internationally acceptable norms. There will be less dependence on what some observers have called the nebulous "ASEAN Way", including the principle of non-interference.

The proposed ASEAN Charter is a welcome initiative in this direction.

The effort to make ASEAN more people-centric may enable ASEAN members, backed by their more involved citizens -- the much talked-about man in the street -- to persuade the leaders in Yangon to find a solution that sees Ms Suu Kyi freed without risking domestic turmoil.

As always, ASEAN must continue to seek convergence of interests with all the major powers with a stake in the region. Also, the time has indeed come for ASEAN defence ministers to adopt a higher profile. Today's threats are, after all, transnational (for example, terrorism and the security of the Malacca Strait).

Does ASEAN still have plenty of life? I'll bet on it.