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