The enthusiasm with which Indonesia picked up the torch of Asean leadership in the new year was both exciting and propitious. Debates within and beyond Asean have mostly revolved around whether member states would be able to handle the challenges of increasingly dynamic regional and international realities. Now, with a strong and steady-handed leader at the helm, Asean can move on from this debate and head bravely into the next decade.
The new debate has shifted to the direction Asean will choose in the coming year. Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa has already stated that he intends to focus on three major tasks during the coming year: making progress toward the fulfillment of the Asean Community, establishing a “dynamic equilibrium” between Asean and the world’s major powers and increasing Asean’s role in the global community of nations.
There is no denying that these are worthy goals for the organization. But simultaneously deepening ties within the organization and expanding its influence and interaction beyond is a tricky business, especially given that Indonesia has only a year to execute its plans.
Historically, reform and development in Asean has been extremely slow.
After it was created in 1967, it took a full nine years before it was able to convene its first summit-level meeting. And if Asean is going to make a stronger name for itself internationally, it will first have to fix some internal cankers.
So what should the priorities be?
Certainly greater international influence and “equalizing” with major powers are goals worth fighting for. Indeed, an increased Asean presence on the world stage would enable the organization to better negotiate while acting as a strong counterweight to the influence of other powerful entities like India, China, or the United States.
Second, international actors have found Asean to be a useful platform for engagement, a role that should continue. In the past a number of regional structures have emerged with Asean at the core: the Asean Regional Forum, Asean Plus Three, various Asean+1 dialogues and the East Asian Summit, to name a few.
Asean has also increased its involvement in various strategic issues that are affecting the region. For example, the EAS this year is expected to tackle issues as diverse as nuclear non-proliferation, maritime cooperation, human trafficking, climate change and the Korean peninsula.
Asean has also seen gains from widening their direct engagement with other Asian tigers.
China is making individual countries nervous with its increasingly confident interactions, and Asean has proven to be a stronger negotiating partner than each of the members individually.
This is even more relevant given China’s recent comment that it is a fact of life that there are large countries and there are small countries.
And while Asean countries are encouraged by US support for the group (given Asean’s ability to act as a hedge against China’s rising power), they recognize that the same cooperation can be a unified front to counter growing US influence in the region as well.
But passive blocking is not the only role for Asean. Active engagement will underline the grouping’s role as a regional bloc and a strong negotiating partner.
And with this higher level of engagement might come further opportunities for engagement, such as Asean mediation in international disputes.
To make any of this possible, there are various quandaries that must be addressed, and Asean’s track record in terms of its ability to integrate and coordinate is still mixed.
One obvious reason for this is the fact that Asean is an organization made up of diverse countries that have disparate histories and interests.
Vietnam, the previous chair in 2010, faced great difficulty in bringing together the often incongruent opinions of members to create a common position on global issues.
But there are also more practical roadblocks. For example, the dominant non-interference policy often prevents attempts to push members too strongly in a certain direction.
There is the problem that many member countries are poor and underdeveloped, making them more concerned with bringing growth to their people than solving international problems.
This may lead to what some see as an undercurrent of narrow economic nationalism and realpolitik. Asean countries also often compete internally as they have similar industrial sectors and lack complementary industries.
Still, there are methods by which Asean can work toward greater integration. Increased economic cooperation and the Asean Economic Community will be a key factor — creating a common market will enable members to increase economic interaction while also helping grow their economies and keeping the region competitive.
Expanding Asean influence to join in debates on competing demands for power, climate change and regional security will also be important. Further expansion will both help mitigate issues and familiarize the member countries with methods of negotiating.
Luckily, moves have been made in this direction. Since its adoption in 2007 the Asean Charter has been fundamental, giving Asean legal standing in international law and introducing a more integrated, rules-based organization with enhanced institutional capacities.
The Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights has also been significant in terms of creating a system which will force members to adhere to the “Association line,” and potentially providing a system for addressing the actions of member state excesses.
Expanding negotiations into new areas of international concern is also important.
On the terrorism front, the Asean Convention on Counterterrorism was signed in 2007, calling on members to share intelligence, training, curb terrorist financing and rehabilitate convicted terrorists. T
he 2009 Asean Political-Security Community Blueprint reinforces this.
Similarly, maritime cooperation has been an active area of engagement, with negotiations and agreements over the South China Sea being an important aspect of Asean’s work. Using these integration tools to their full will be well worthwhile.
The issues that Asean will be facing in the coming decades, ranging from environmental change, terrorism and increased stridency from China, India and the United States are inherently international issues that will be so much more difficult to tackle without a strong international bloc.
Furthermore, integration will make Asean more relevant and agile. And a strong regional bloc will allow states to focus on growth and development rather than on protecting their national interests.
Given these circumstances, how should Indonesia go about attaining its three goals in the coming year?
First, given the limited time-frame, Indonesia may wish to pick two or three key areas (such as human rights, maritime cooperation, or migrant rights) to focus on.
This would provide Asean with experience in working together on concrete issues relevant to all of them while developing channels of negotiation and making important steps towards becoming a more cohesive grouping.
At the same time, it would signal to the international community that the group is serious about becoming a more effective partner and is willing to do the tough work to help negotiations succeed.
Second, putting an emphasis on the increased unity of Asean at upcoming regional summits throughout the year would help lift its profile internationally.
And when broaching important international issues, such as those emerging in the South China Sea, a unified stance would make Asean a more solid and valued entity on the international stage.
Such gravitas, brought about by a thoughtful, shared stance on a variety of key issues, will not only bring Asean together and reinforce the importance of the organization in the eyes of the world, but will also allow Asean to widen its influence — and to benefit in ways that perhaps are not yet clear even to its member states .
By Laura Jepson program officer on policy development at Strategic Asia Indonesia, a Jakarta-based consultancy providing advisory and facilitation services throughout Asia. Jakarta Globe
No comments:
Post a Comment