ASEAN proves its crisis-management skill

ASEAN proves its crisis-management skill

ASEAN has demonstrated its growing ability to deal with a crisis in an appropriate way.

By Rizal Sukma

SINGAPORE: The outbreak of the Cambodian crisis has been unfortunate for both Cambodia and ASEAN. For the country, the crisis has once again brought conflict which can close the opportunity for the Cambodian people to enter the 21st century in a new era of political stability and economic development. For the regional grouping, the crisis has served as a constraint on the fulfillment of the dream of "One South-east Asia" under the umbrella of ASEAN regional co-operation.

Indeed, the outbreak of the crisis forced ASEAN to postpone Cambodian membership in the Association for a number of reasons:

* Firstly, ASEAN clearly does not want to be seen as supporting one of the conflicting parties. Admitting Cambodia under the present circumstances would inevitably convey the impression that ASEAN has recognized Hun Sen as the de facto government of the country.

The decision to postpone Cambodia's membership was, therefore, intended to demonstrate the neutral position of ASEAN in the conflict. ASEAN has made it clear that it continues to recognize both Hun Sen and Norodom Ranariddh as co-premiers of the country.

* Secondly, the decision had to be taken in order to avoid the possibility of ASEAN becoming a new element in the Cambodian conflict and vice versa. It is very likely that Hun Sen and Ranariddh would each have claimed the right to represent Cambodia in the association, making ASEAN one of the focal points in a contest for recognition between the two leaders.

ASEAN itself could not afford to bring the Cambodian conflict into its own house. For it would complicate not only ASEAN diplomatic efforts to help find a solution to the crisis but also its role in creating a more predictable and stable regional order in post-Cold War South-east Asia.

* Thirdly, ASEAN's decision indirectly indicates the association's reluctance to accept the use of force by any Cambodian party in imposing a political change.

Here, ASEAN insists that the two conflicting parties should abide by the 1991 Paris Peace Agreement as the main mechanism for settling the remaining political problems in that country.

This clearly indicates ASEAN's adherence to the need to respect an international agreement. The current crisis in Cambodia, regardless of the question of who provoked whom, constitutes a clear violation of that Agreement. In this context, ASEAN has clearly maintained that a sensible peaceful settlement should be based on the Paris Peace Agreement.

* Finally, it is also imperative for ASEAN to demonstrate that it is capable of deciding its own destiny.

The decision conveys two important messages to the outside world. Firstly, it suggests ASEAN's willingness and capability to reverse its previous decision to admit Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar simultaneously in July 1997 when the need to do so arose, without any pressure from outside. Secondly, it seems that through this decision ASEAN wants to make it clear that prospective members should conform to ASEAN's own "rules of the game" before joining the association.

Indeed, ASEAN's response to the Cambodian crisis has been unprecedented. ASEAN Foreign Ministers, in this regard, managed at short notice to convene a special meeting in Kuala Lumpur to address the problem and quickly reached a unanimous decision.

The decision demonstrates also the association's growing ability to deal with a crisis in an appropriate way. ASEAN's quick reaction constitutes an advance in the decision-making process which is often characterized by institutional constraints.

Even though ASEAN has been wise in postponing Cambodia's membership, the decision itself, however, raises certain important questions.

Firstly, it raises the question of criteria for ASEAN membership. ASEAN has for long maintained that the nature of a country's domestic situation is not a precondition for membership.

The acceptance of Myanmar as a member can be seen as the clearest manifestation of this principle. The move to postpone Cambodian membership can, in a way, be seen as contrary to ASEAN's claim that a country's domestic condition has never been a factor in admitting members.

The decision implies that adherence to an international agreement and certain minimal standards of domestic political stability as the foundation of ASEAN co-operation and regional stability have both become important conditions for membership.

It is apparently on this ground that some ASEAN NGOs criticize the association for having double standards towards the membership of Myanmar and Cambodia.

But the two situations are also different: there is an ongoing civil violence in Cambodia, not to mention the fact that an international agreement has been violated.

In this context, there is perhaps a need for ASEAN to reflect on the question of membership. Even though there is no civil violence in Myanmar today, it would be difficult for ASEAN to maintain that Cambodia's domestic problems threaten regional stability while those of Myanmar do not.

Indeed, ASEAN does not have more definitive criteria to be achieved by prospective members, except adherence to the principles outlined in the Bali Declaration.

Secondly, and related to the first point, the current crisis in Cambodia raises the question of the future role of ASEAN in dealing with domestic conflicts.

This question, while not yet urgent, will become more important in the future when Cambodia is admitted to ASEAN because what is happening in the country today can happen again.

So far, ASEAN's role as a "conflict defuser" can only be applied in the context of inter-state conflict in ASEAN or conflict at regional level, not conflict at the national level.

In a way, such a limited role reflects the nature of ASEAN co- operation which limits itself to efforts to create a regional community free from inter-state conflicts.

It is also a logical consequence of the implementation of the non-interference principle. In this regard, ASEAN's achievement certainly deserves to be regarded as a "success story".

However, it is not clear how ASEAN will react to a conflict which originates from a member's domestic politics in the future. It has not devised any mechanism to address such conflicts.

Dr. Rizal Sukma is a staff member at the Department of International Affairs, Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Jakarta