Asia not ready for security pact

Asia not ready for security pact

Simon S.C. Tay, The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore

There has been recent talk of an Asian military alliance,
equivalent to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
There are also suggestions for an ASEAN security community.
Beyond the particulars of these trial balloons, one common theme
emerges: Even as many Asian economies post their strongest growth
figures since the 1997 crisis, questions remain whether they are
indeed secure and politically resilient.

Flash points abound. Some are longstanding, like North Korea
and relations between Beijing and Taipei. Others are more recent,
arising from post Sept. 11 concerns about terrorism. Still
others, like Myanmar, stem from internal instabilities.

These issues test the ability of states to maintain stability,
cooperate closely and resolve differences by dialogue rather than
the use of force.

Asia has known conflict even during its periods of high
growth, most notably the Vietnam War. But the non-communist
states of the region benefited during that Cold War era from the
guarantees provided by an American security umbrella. In the
absence of an Asian NATO, bilateral arrangements between the U.S.
and Asian allies ensured the presence of American troops in the
region.

The U.S. has been the essential actor in Asia, the center of a
hub and spoke arrangement which saw Asian countries enjoying
closer relationships to the American center than to each other.

The United Nations was, by contrast, far away, or mostly a
convenient flag to rally a multilateral coalition during the
Korean conflict or in rebuilding peace in Cambodia.

Following the end of the Cold War and fears of American
disengagement from this region, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)
emerged as the leading multilateral security dialogue forum in
Asia. This is led, not by the U.S. or the other major powers, but
by the mid-sized and smaller countries of Southeast Asia.

The ARF is no military alliance; it instead emphasizes
cooperation in security, developing confidence and understanding
among potential rivals. It aims to prevent and settle differences
by peaceful and diplomatic means.

But while the ARF has shown some progress along this path, it
has been unable to respond to regional crises, like East Timor,
or to play a significant part in handling problems like North
Korea.

What is clear is that political will, military capability and
American attention remain essential to the equation of peace in
the region.

For these reasons, most Asian governments have welcomed
renewed U.S. interest and engagement in the region after the
tragic events of Sept. 11. American unilateralism and policies on
Iraq and other issues may have rankled, but some like the
Philippines have closely aligned their interests with America's
and others have at least sought to limit their differences and to
manage ties with Washington.

But there are some security issues in the region on which
America is not engaged, like Myanmar. There, a road map to
democracy announced by the ruling regime is being facilitated by
Thailand, on behalf of ASEAN and with representation by Japan and
other countries. Mixed reports are still emerging from different
observers, but the broader challenge is whether there can be
substantial progress without American engagement, or at least
acceptance.

What then of the talk of an Asian security mechanism?

Proponents of an Asian NATO suggest that India, Japan and
China take the lead as a concert of major regional powers. Yet,
while ties between these Asian giants are improving, each of
these still has differences with one another. The many historical
and on going rivalries between Japan and China are especially
notable. Each of these Asian giants remains closer to the U.S.
than they are to each other.

Further, smaller nations and ASEAN may not be sufficiently
comfortable with these Asian powers to be confident they will not
seek to dominate them. Currently, there is little reason for them
to accept these new and still uncertain arrangements, in contrast
to an American influence that has been seen as relatively
benevolent in these past decades.

Suggestions for an ASEAN security community do not go so far
as to seek to displace America. Rather, proposals for the ASEAN
security community can be seen as a progression from the habits
of dialogue and conciliation that ASEAN has developed in these
decades to keep peace among themselves.

Differences remain to be debated over the pace and direction
of these efforts, including whether an ASEAN peacekeeping force
should be established.

But the general idea that the regional issues should be
addressed, where possible, through regional cooperation is
gaining acceptance.

Are Asians ready and able to provide for their own security?
The present answer is clearly, no. Very different processes exist
today in addressing issues like North Korea, Myanmar and
terrorism, and in the ARF and ASEAN. These do not point to any
single security organization or mechanism emerging to meet all
challenges. But they may point to emerging changes in the ways
Asians act in future on security, both among themselves, and with
the U.S.

The writer is chairman of the Singapore Institute of
International Affairs.