What is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and what is it purpose? Has it been successful?
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a multilateral organization which was created to give Southeast Asian states a forum to communicate with each other. Since the region had a long colonial past and a history of endemic warfare, there has never been much peaceful and constructive interaction between kings, presidents and other officials. In the 1950s, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia were fighting for independence from the French and, later, the USA. This put those countries at enmity with western-leaning countries such as Thailand, Philippines and Singapore. Malaysia and Indonesia, meanwhile, had their own ‘konfrontasi’ and prickly relations (at best) existed, while Singapore and Malaysia have a lengthy history of diplomatic squabbles. A neutral forum was, therefore, a very useful development for all of those countries.
ASEAN was formed as a result of the Bangkok Declaration of 1967 and initially had five members: Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Singapore. Brunei subsequently joined in 1984 after it had won independence from Britain. Vietnam became the seventh member of the group, officially joining in 1995. After several years of negotiation, Burma (Myanmar) and Laos joined in 1997 and the final member of the ten, Cambodia, became a member in 1999. The only independent state in Southeast Asia which is not a member of ASEAN is now East Timor, which is still at too vulnerable and fragile a state to be able to participate for the foreseeable future.
ASEAN was established on the basis of non-intervention: that is, interaction within the group would focus entirely on economic matters, or else on matters of technical co-operation and integration, for example creating an ‘open skies agreement,’ measures to tackle the spread of avian influenza (‘bird flu’) or else transboundary environmental issues. By tradition and constitution, no member state would comment openly on political conditions within another member state and there would be no attempt at intervention or interference beyond borders. This was an essential condition since, otherwise, most states would have refused to join ASEAN. Of course, it is clear that a lot of discussion and politicking goes on behind the scenes but the main value of ASEAN is, in addition to the functional agreements and co-operation achieved, to provide the scenes behind which confidential discussions should take place. Given the enormous problems with mistrust and lack of capacity in Southeast Asia, it is not sensible to criticize ASEAN for not achieving more but to be grateful that it has been able to achieve what it has done. The limitations of the approach are evident in respect of the current political situation in Burma but the benefits of it are harder to discern, although they are certainly there.
