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.