A glimpse of the surreal regional Security Community arrangement

Ivy Susanti, Jakarta, ivy@thejakartapost.com

Recently, a high-ranking official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Jakarta met a few acquaintances and spoke about the progress on the preparation for the 37th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM), the 11th ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the Post- Ministerial Conferences (PMCs), all hosted by Indonesia next week.

When he was asked to present a copy of the draft of the Plan of Action of the ASEAN Security Community (ASC) -- which was proposed by Indonesia -- the official courteously apologized, and turned down the request, which may indicate that the discussion had not reached the final stage.

The official did mention, however, that the issue of "political development" was the main bone of contention among the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries in the draft. That section of the draft apparently includes the aspects of conflict management/resolution and peacekeeping operations. Instead of elaborating on the "political development" section in the draft, the official gave some insights on the closed-door deliberations on it.

One can only imagine how lively those discussions must have been, with some countries quite obviously against such a community within ASEAN, because they believe it would overlap with previous political instruments such as the TAC (Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia). Indonesia, meanwhile, maintains that ASEAN needs to reaffirm its united stance -- seen as crucial in the current times -- while ensuring each country's sovereignty.

The aforementioned official cited the situation in the Middle East, where a lack of complete unity meant they could not resolve conflicts, and created the conditions that made the Gulf States vulnerable to Western interference.

However, the official admitted that the Plan of Action has been watered down from its original draft by Indonesia, and what is left as "an exhaustive list, which is not a once-and-for-all document." The ASC was declared along with the economic and socio-cultural community during the ASEAN Summit in Bali last October. The plan of action will be approved in the next summit in Laos this November.

Much has been written that the main problem is not at all about a security community as an idea or the draft, but the remaining suspicions among Southeast Asian countries. To this end, is there any reason for us to remain optimistic that the ASC could be put into action, or is it just going to be another toothless document?

An ongoing concern among some Southeast Asian countries has been the issue of U.S. involvement in the region. Observers have noted that the Americans provide a security umbrella, and have become a "stabilizing" force since the Cold War era. Due to a number of geopolitical shifts, however, the U.S. has reduced its strategic focus from security to primarily economic issues.

The rise of non-traditional security threats like terrorism, human and arms trafficking has prompted some countries in this region to rethink the continuity of U.S. presence. On the other hand, each Southeast Asian country has developed its own concept of what constitutes a "threat" to their national security.

The rejection by Malaysia and Indonesia in particular of the U.S. Regional Maritime Security Initiative in the Strait of Malacca -- an initiative to work with Southeast Asian navies to intercept pirates and/or terrorist groups planning attacks on tankers or international ports like Singapore's -- highlights this different of perception, particularly of "threat" and "sovereignty" among Southeast Asian countries.

In a matter of days, Indonesia hastily proposed a meeting with other Southeast Asian countries on maritime security, scheduled to be held by the end of this year. Along with Malaysia and Singapore, Indonesia decided recently to step up "coordinated" patrols of the Strait, but it remains to be seen how much they can do as piracy has been a problem since at least the 15th century.

Despite all the mistrust and suspicions, ASEAN employs a unique mechanism to alleviate conflicts through informal channels. While some observers have pointed out that these are merely attempts to sweep the problems under the carpet, the confidence-building measures and preventive diplomacy have however reaped some successes in maintaining peaceful cooperation between ASEAN countries.

One such example of preventive diplomacy is in the TAC. The document, endorsed in 1976, spells out the principle that guides the relationships between the signatories, including sovereignty, inter-state cooperation, non-interference, peaceful dispute settlement and renunciation of threats or the use of force. In short, preventive diplomacy, coupled with peacekeeping operations, is -- in theory -- one way of averting conflict and maintaining peace.

However, the TAC does not mention peacekeeping as an option in conflict management. And to date, almost all regional conflicts or potential conflicts have been dealt with through semi-formal dialogs, instead of the ASEAN High Council as stated in TAC.

Whatever its name, the new ASC Plan of Action may be another legal document on preventive diplomacy, with an additional point on peacekeeping operations. This idea poses a challenge, though, as the Foreign Ministry official explained that some ASEAN counterparts still had no idea what a peacekeeping operation even was.

At the end of the day, with ASEAN's preference for the informal approach to achieve a consensus via "consultation" or musyawarah for conflict resolution, it is difficult to remain optimistic that an ASEAN Security Community would be effective in the next decade as envisioned.