ASEAN engagement the right step

Alexander C. Chandra, Jakarta

The recent Regional Conference on Civil Society Engagement in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was a step forward towards the process of democratization and openness in ASEAN. The conference that was held in Bangkok, on Oct. 3-5, 2005, raised fundamental questions for Southeast Asian civil society organizations (CSOs) and/or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on the relevance in engaging themselves with a regional grouping that was traditionally known for its undemocratic and exclusive nature.

Since its establishment in 1967, this was this first time that ASEAN had begun to show interest in allowing greater participation of CSOs in its decision-making processes. This was not, of course, the first time the Association had engaged itself with non-state actors. Since the early 1980s, ASEAN has allowed numerous Southeast Asian NGOs to be affiliated with its activities.

In addition, with the push from the ASEAN Institute for International and Strategic Studies (ASEAN-ISIS), an umbrella networking group amongst several influential academic think-tanks throughout the region, ASEAN had also allowed itself to interact with NGOs and CSOs through the initiation of the ASEAN's People Assembly (APA) that has been held four times since 2000.

However, the relation between NGOs and CSOs with ASEAN had failed to generate substantial changes on the way in which these groups were able to influence the modus-operandi of the Association.

The attendance of ASEAN's senior officials and even its secretary-general, Ong Keng Yong, at this year's conference was an indication of the Association's rising interest in allowing greater participation of civil society groups in its decision- making process.

There were three key questions raised during the Conference, all of which were relevant in addressing civil society's engagement with ASEAN.

The first was the way in which Southeast Asian civil society groups could size up ASEAN as a platform for their advocacy.

The second was the entry point in terms of policy issues and mechanisms for civil society groups' participation in ASEAN decision-making processes.

The third was the specific steps that can be taken by civil society groups to pursue viable engagements with ASEAN.

Amongst some of the issues brought forward into the discussion were the potential ability of ASEAN to set the pace of development in the Southeast Asian region, the possible expansion of ASEAN into ASEAN plus China, Japan and South Korea, the policy-making process in ASEAN, trade and economic issues, conflict prevention, human rights issues and media. And the hottest issue was Myanmar's political situation.

It was, of course, a difficult task for civil society groups to reach commonality amongst themselves within short period of interaction. The variety of civil society groups that attended the Conference was, particularly, responsible for such difficulty.

To start with, every single civil society has different concerns and interests in engaging itself with ASEAN. Apart from that, not all civil society groups attended this Conference were fully aware of the traditions, culture and mechanisms of ASEAN.

Initially, many of these groups expressed pessimism towards the way in which the Association could actually improve the well- being of Southeast Asian people. Some activists even openly questioned ASEAN's ability to accommodate their interests in light of its cardinal principle of non-interference. This last issue was often seen as an element that undermined ASEAN's role in advancing the interests of Southeast Asian people.

Civil society groups advocating human rights and Burma issues, for example, were convinced that the non-interference principle had been the key stumbling block for ASEAN in resolving many human rights abuses in the region.

Meanwhile, many groups advocating trade and economic related issues were also concerned about the way in which this principle had allowed each individual ASEAN member country to undertake a bilateral free trade agreement strategy with non-ASEAN member countries. It was seen as a move that might undermine the cohesion of the regional grouping.

Despite these concerns and pessimism towards ASEAN, there seemed to be a consensus amongst representatives of Southeast Asian civil society groups that it was, indeed, necessary for these groups to engage themselves with ASEAN. After all, ASEAN's failure to fulfill the aspirations of these civil society groups in the past was not only due to the lack of pressure by these groups towards ASEAN, but also due to the limited interactions between both sides.

Southeast Asian Civil society groups would certainly welcome further efforts by ASEAN to open itself up and to allow much greater participation of non-governmental actors in its decision- making processes. The next challenge for these groups is to identify the way in which they could assist ASEAN in resolving problems that confront the region.

The writer is the research coordinator at the Institute of Global Justice (IGJ) in Jakarta.