The Association of Southeast Asian Nations – a Global Political Powerhouse

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was founded by Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, Indonesia, and Singapore in 1967 on the premise of promoting intergovernmental cooperation. Through this cooperation, it aims to facilitate security, political, educational, economic, and sociocultural assimilation amongst the participating countries. Since then, the membership of ASEAN has grown to accommodate ten members with the new inclusion of Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and the Philippines whilst allowing two nations to be observers, Papua New Guinea, and Timor Leste. ASEAN has grown to be a global political powerhouse by maintaining a global network of numerous alliances and has been involved in many international affairs. As many different ethnic and cultural groups make up the composition of ASEAN, it has also been regarded as a vital international role model for other international organizations to emulate in the areas of unity and seeking harmony. However, scholars are divided on their opinions as to whether ASEAN has carried out its’ role effectively as a Security Community. In his article, Enduring Mistrust and Conflict Management in Southeast Asia: An Assessment of ASEAN as a Security Community, Dr. Ralf Emmers argues that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has not lived up to the expectations of being an exemplary Security Community. Emmers pointed out that while ASEAN has done well in conflict avoidance, it has done little in carrying out effective conflict resolution despite the ASEAN Political-Security Community (APSC) act. He highlights that residual mistrust is an important factor in illustrating the slow progress ASEAN has made towards effective conflict resolution and as such, ASEAN has failed in being an effective Security Community. Yet, the premise of assessing ASEAN as a Security Community should not be solely based on how effective it has been in resolving conflicts. Other factors such as how ASEAN does conflict management, the progressive building of bilateral relations since the inception of ASEAN and ASEAN’s dealings with other international communities must be considered. Hence, this paper postulates that ASEAN has grown to become an effective Security Community by taking into consideration the aforementioned factors.

According to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) established in 1976, member states of ASEAN must abide by the principles of respecting each nation’s sovereignty and not interfering in other states’ internal affairs. Furthermore, the settlement of disputes and differences should be conducted in a peaceful manner, where the threat or use of force is strictly forbidden. As such, ASEAN has adopted a non-intrusive, consensus-based, and consultative method of tackling any issues. This has been coined as the “ASEAN Way”. In the earlier days of its inception, this method served as an important way of unifying the member states of ASEAN as well as providing a basis for establishing a community of peace and prosperity. In recent years, this traditional way of approaching conflicts and managing disputes have been criticized to be outdated and ineffective. As decisions made must be a common consensus amongst the members, it entails that if a single member were to oppose the course of actions proposed, nothing will materialize. This division was made most prominent during the 2012 ASEAN meeting in Cambodia, where China’s claims of islands in the South China Seas was at the center of attention and the member states were discussing on plans to resolve this issue. Yet, the meeting ended without a joint statement being issued as Cambodia did not give any agreement and it was the first time in 45 years that no consensus bill was passed. However, this should not serve as an indication of ASEAN’s failure as a Security Committee in resolving conflicts and disputes, but rather, should serve as a starting point where improvements to the policies must be made for ASEAN to remain a relevant organization. One such way of improvement could be to adopt the European Union’s (E.U.) Qualified Majority voting where no single state has veto power over important decisions that may affect the entire region and organization and actions taken will be based on what the majority votes for. This new voting system will enable ASEAN to work on tangible policies that would benefit both sides and address important issues instead of being stopped at the first junction of opposition. Furthermore, TAC allows states outside of Southeast Asia to participate and sit in during the meeting, but these states must sign and indicate that they will adhere to the principles set in placed. As of today, there are 35 countries that have entered the treaty with China and India being the first countries to sign the treaty in 2003. With more countries projected to enter the treaty in the future, it is then of paramount importance for ASEAN to tweak their voting system so that issues of a regional and global scale can be discussed. Therefore, TAC serves as an indispensable platform for countries outside of ASEAN to raise up issues of concerns and in the case of China and the South China Sea, more could be discussed during TAC meetings. Hence, ASEAN’s role of being an effective Security Community can be further enhanced, but changes to their voting system and policies must be tweaked to accommodate a world that is changing rapidly. Another challenge that ASEAN faces is maintaining bilateral ties with global superpowers such as China and the United States (U.S.) without compromising on their own principles and relationship with each superpower.

A ‘superpower country’ is one that has enough economic, political, and military might to deter other nations in the world from doing things which they otherwise would not. U.S. has been a superpower country since the end of World War II and has been at the heart of advocating peace on a global scale and has seen itself as a peace enforcer entity. China, on the other hand, has grown exponentially since the early 2000s with its’ economic booming to overtake the U.S in being the largest producer of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014. With a superpower country situated on both side of ASEAN, it is of utmost importance that ASEAN maintains good bilateral ties with each country as well as being a good mediator when managing policies that may impact another superpower. The U.S. relationship with ASEAN began in 1977 with the U.S participating as a dialogue partner. Since the early 1990s, economic policies which focused on investment, education, technology transfer and trade, were introduced and this brought about a drastic increase of development cooperation between the U.S. and ASEAN. Furthermore, the U.S. stance is to remain a reliable, active, and strong partner in the Southeast Asian region by providing resources, military presence, and diplomatic aid. In 2008, the U.S. named an Ambassador to ASEAN and in doing so, it became the first non-ASEAN country to have such a privilege. The following years saw many meetings between U.S.-ASEAN with the agenda focused on five crucial areas. These areas are expanding maritime cooperation, promoting opportunity for ASEAN women, supporting economic integration, cultivating ASEAN prominent and new leaders, and addressing transnational challenges. Recently in 2016, a new bill U.S.-ASEAN Connect was signed and it advocated economic engagement between the U.S. and ASEAN through four blocks – Policy Connect, Business Connect, Innovation Connect, and Energy Connect. This new initiative aims to use the expertise and resources of the U.S. private sector and government to bring about more U.S.-ASEAN trade and investment as well as helping the ASEAN Economic Community to reach greater success. To maintain a good diplomatic and progress-driven relationship with the U.S. is not something that should be taken lightly, but greater credit must be given to ASEAN of its’ ability to manage the expectations of the member states as well as external states. While the union between the U.S. and ASEAN has lasted for than 40 years, China’s relationship with ASEAN has been challenging at times, but ASEAN has shown that it has been able to maintain a good balance of relationship and progress when working with the U.S. and China.

As mentioned before, China was one of the first countries outside of ASEAN to have signed the TAC in 2003, six years before the U.S. acceded to the treaty. This showed that China recognized the impact that ASEAN had on the Southeast Asian region and with China being allowed to sit in and participate during the dialogues, it gives the Chinese a better understanding how and what policies were going to be implemented. With China and ASEAN being in such close proximity to one another, it is of paramount importance these two entities have a safe and common platform where matters of interests can be discussed at. There have been over 12 agreements between China and ASEAN which have covered trade and economic relations, transport, plans of action for peace and prosperity as well as cooperation in the South China Sea. While China and the members of ASEAN have formally signed these agreements, yet it has come under heavy scrutiny in recent years. The biggest issue that has surfaced is the dispute of island-claims in the South China Sea by China against several nations in ASEAN – Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia. ASEAN has faced tremendous pressure from both internal and external states to reach a decision on the course of action that should be taken to address this issue. However, conflict resolution through prohibiting China from taking any further actions in the South China Sea may not be the best method that ASEAN should undertake. Firstly, it could potentially have devastating effects on the relationship that ASEAN spend many years forging with China. Secondly, the fallout from such a decision could cause China from withdrawing its’ economic support from the nations within ASEAN. Yet, this should not deter ASEAN from seeking alternative and better solutions in ensuring that China’s does not overstep its’ boundaries and that relationship between ASEAN and China remains amicable and favorable towards both parties (Yeo, 2018).

In conclusion, ASEAN has shown through the years that it has become an international organization that is capable of being an effective Security Committee through diplomatic acts and inclusion of external states through policies such as TAC. While conflict resolution may not be ASEAN’s strongest asset, it does not have to resolve every conflict it encounters if the end result is disastrous for the parties involved. However, this does not mean that no improvements can be made to the existing ways in which decisions are reached by the ASEAN committee. To accommodate for a changing world where intra-nations disputes are becoming more frequent, ASEAN must look at changing the current consensus system. Adopting the E.U. Qualified Majority voting system can significantly change how ASEAN will deal with future disputes and bring about better conflict resolution decisions. The decisions discussed will be greatly enhanced and have a more comprehensive and integrated approach as it takes into consideration the concerns of both the majority and the minority. This will enable ASEAN to become a more effective Security Committee as well as international role model to other similar organizations.