ARF must move forward for security of region<\/p>\n
Bantarto Bandoro, Editor, 'The Indonesian Quarterly',
\nCentre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta<\/p>\n
The Association of Southeast Asian (ASEAN) foreign ministers
\nare holding their annual meeting in Brunei from July 26 until
\nAug. 2 to discuss regional political and security matters amid
\ncriticism that the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the only regional
\nsecurity mechanism, does not have the clout to deal with
\ndifficult security issues.<\/p>\n
Since its first inception in 1994, ARF has always been
\npotentially historic, but nobody seems to believe it can fulfill
\nits potential and make history in the foreseeable future.<\/p>\n
Will the Brunei meeting make history for ASEAN and ARF, as it
\ntakes place under the spirit of combating international
\nterrorism? The terrible events of Sept. 11 and the undeterred
\nUnited States-led responses have profoundly altered threat
\nperception and raised new security concerns.<\/p>\n
This year's meeting will certainly be shadowed by the urgent
\nneed for ARF to adopt a regional stand on fighting international
\nterrorism. Terrorism is indeed a security problem for the region
\nand other parts of the world. It has become something like a
\nmagnet, bringing together all of the countries in the region to
\nfight the perceived number one threat to humankind. The United
\nStates ASEAN members are reportedly set to sign a joint
\nantiterrorism declaration at Asia's biggest security meeting.<\/p>\n
It is perhaps much easier for ASEAN to adopt a joint stand on
\nfighting terrorism, as it has show with its declaration on
\nterrorism adopted last year. Three members of ASEAN -- Malaysia,
\nthe Philippine and Singapore -- have signed an antiterror treaty.
\nThere was a proposal that the treaty be expanded to include other
\nmembers of ASEAN. So far, however, there has been no sign that
\nother members of ASEAN are ready to join the treaty. But through
\nquiet diplomacy and awareness of the grave impact of terrorist
\nacts, it is hoped that others will join.<\/p>\n
The expectation has been placed on ARF to come up with some
\nsort of security initiative, because ARF is the region's only
\nsecurity grouping. But an examination of its track record shows
\nthat it has been unable to respond to security developments in a
\ntimely manner. ARF, which meets only once a year, is not endowed
\nwith the necessary institutional capacities for early warnings or
\nthe quick formulation of positions with respect to unfolding
\nsecurity situations, especially post-Sept. 11. Nor does
\nauthorization for ARF action come quickly. So, ASEAN has been
\nimpotent in the face of a host of post -Sept. 11 threats.<\/p>\n
Having said that, and because since 2000 the forum has
\nincluded North Korea, who the U.S. identified as part of an
\n\"axis of evil\", it would be difficult for ARF to collectively
\ngear itself to the point where all members agreed to initiate
\nconcrete policies on terrorism.<\/p>\n
All that can be expected, as has occurred after past meetings,
\nis an open ARF statement condemning all acts of terrorism and
\nappealing to all members of the forum to act in concert against
\nthe threat of terrorism. It would mostly be rhetoric. How ARF is
\nactually able to develop a policy on terrorism will depend on a
\nnumber of factors, including how the members see their interests
\nas being served or jeopardized by such policy measures.<\/p>\n
Terrorism and its related issues is indeed a security problem
\neither at the micro or macro-level of states and the region.
\nCollective, concrete and speedy action, provided that ARF has the
\nmechanisms to authorize action, to handle terrorist issues is
\nimperative if ARF wished to be seen as playing a strategic and
\nmore meaningful role with regard to international terrorism. But
\njudging from the way it currently moves, ARF is incapable of
\ndealing with the post-Sept. 11 security environment.<\/p>\n
Therefore, some additional diplomatic initiatives need to be
\ntaken in the region. Will the region see this occur in Brunei?<\/p>\n
International terrorism will continue to be a major concern
\nfor several countries in the region. It is, however, not the only
\nfactor causing security headaches in the region, meaning that ARF
\nwill still have to deal with some dangerous flash points. These
\nrange from the tense ties between China and Taiwan, North and
\nSouth Korea, the India-Pakistan row over Kashmir and the South
\nChina Sea conflict, to conventional issues such as territorial
\ndisputes, arms control and nuclear nonproliferation and
\nelimination.<\/p>\n
Besides, there is a need for ARF also to tackle
\nnonconventional security issues such as threats to human
\nsecurity, the illegal flow of people, arm trafficking and other
\nforms of transnational organized crime.<\/p>\n
So far, ARF has been unable to contribute meaningfully to the
\nmanagement of either conventional or nonconventional security
\nissues. Everyone agrees that security headaches are intensifying
\nin the region, but an agreement, even through the mechanisms of
\nARF, on how to deal with these flash points and prevent and
\nsettle future conflicts, coupled with the issue of terrorism, is
\nproving extremely difficult to come by.<\/p>\n
ARF seems to be stuck in first gear, still promoting
\nconfidence-building measures. ARF has failed to move on to stage
\ntwo and three of its founding protocols, of concrete preventive
\ndiplomacy and conflict resolution.<\/p>\n
In short, until now there is still no consensus in the forum
\non the pace of ARF. To get ARF to move into its second stage, it
\nis perhaps important that a special ARF task force on terrorism
\nbe established.<\/p>\n
Such an initiative would hopefully pave the way for a conflict
\nresolution framework, providing for joint peacekeeping missions,
\nas an example. ASEAN influence in this regard is indeed needed.<\/p>\n
The list of security issues as stated above is a continuous
\nworry across the region. And there is no other regional security
\nmechanism besides ARF that can manage the issues; it covers a
\nvast and volatile area, stretching from the Russian Far East
\nthrough Southeast Asia to the Indian subcontinent and the United
\nStates.<\/p>\n
No one can really be sure how much time ARF needs before it
\nreaches the final stage of its development. The Brunei meeting
\nwill hopefully be a historic moment in ARF's development. The
\neight-year-old forum must change, otherwise it will sink deeper
\ninto a long and winding road, without any certainty as to whether
\nit will emerge as a security guarantor for the region.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/arf-must-move-forward-for-security-of-region-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}