Asian countries are masters of their regional security

By Eiichi Furukawa

TOKYO (JP): In 1993, the World Bank published a report called "The East Asian Miracle", which predicted that East Asian countries would achieve spectacular economic growth in the next 20 years or so. Economic growth was achieved through a combination of open economic policies and appropriate public policies. Personal savings were high, primary education was promoted, and foreign investment was encouraged.

At the same time, economic growth was made possible due to another miracle which may be called the ASEAN miracle. ASEAN played a central role in maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia after the Vietnam War ended in 1975.

This year ASEAN is celebrating its 30th anniversary since its foundation in 1967. From the beginning, it was determined that any dispute among its members should be settled through quiet diplomacy or should be shelved until it could be settled amicably among the parties concerned.

There have been no military conflicts, nor serious diplomatic confrontations among member countries. While there have been several territorial issues among them, none have developed into confrontations.

The territorial right over Sabah, a northeast region of Borneo now controlled by Malaysia, has been in dispute between the Philippines and Malaysia. Philippines President Fidel Ramos agreed with Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad to solve the question after the two countries achieve economic development. He did not say when this would be.

ASEAN has also followed the policy of being free from the interference of outside powers, another reason why peace and stability has been maintained in the region. In 1972, ASEAN foreign ministers issued a declaration in Kuala Lumpur to make Southeast Asia a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality. The declaration meant that no foreign military bases should have been maintained in the region.

After the Vietnam War, U.S. forces withdrew from Thailand. At the time, there was a lot of concern that Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries might be overtaken by communist influences strengthened by victorious Vietnam.

But the strength of communist insurgents in Northeast Thailand and Malaysia declined and disappeared after several years. Rapid economic growth started in the two countries, which later became known as the East Asian Miracle. Among the ASEAN countries, only the Philippines was left behind the impetus of rapid economic growth of other ASEAN countries.

But when U.S. forces left the country in November 1992, rapid economic growth also started in the Philippines. While the growth rate was zero percent in 1992, it grew to 6.4 percent in 1996.

The strength of the communist insurgents of the New People's Army was reduced from 30,000 members to 5,000. The Islamic rebels in Mindanao, south Philippines and the Moro National Liberation Front agreed to peace with President Ramos and they are now being integrated into the government.

Army dissidents surrendered to the government. The Philippines gained new confidence, and for the first time since Magellan landed in the Philippines in 1521, 470 years ago, the country felt like it could stand on its own two feet again.

The country is now called an Asian tiger instead of an Asian "sickman", as it was called four years ago. They think that the withdrawal of U.S. forces brought good to the country and to the people.

As a result of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Subic, ASEAN countries are now free from foreign bases in the region and the promise of the declaration of 1971 neutrality has finally been fulfilled.

ASEAN countries believe that military cooperation with the United States is necessary to upgrade the proficiency of their military forces. Military training, joint exercises with the United States and other western countries are useful.

They also provide facilities to U.S. forces such as port calls of U.S warships for supply, repair and maintenance services and others. They also welcome goodwill visits of U.S. warships.

But ASEAN countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia do not believe that this military cooperation and exchange means they support or agree with the maintenance of U.S. military bases or U.S. presence in the region, including Japan. They believe that such U.S. bases are counterproductive to the security of the region.

There is a tendency for westerners to look at Asian countries as second class citizens or "mischievous boys" in the international community and consider them unable to govern the state themselves.

Western countries, therefore, should supervise or control these countries. On the other hand, ASEAN countries believe that through ASEAN and economic development, they have now matured and reached adulthood.

They have learnt how to handle relations themselves harmoniously through experience. They are no longer "mischievous boys". They now believe that the responsibility of regional security lies with them, not with outside powers. The ability of ASEAN to manage regional security is recognized beyond Southeast Asia.

The ASEAN Regional Forum believes regional security issues are not only for Southeast Asia but for Northeast Asia and the Asia Pacific region at large. At the same time, as the regional forum indicates, ASEAN occupies a special position in the management of the ARF which is free from the domination of non-ASEAN powers.

It shows that dialog between small countries is more effective than military powers of outside countries in maintaining regional security.

Some western observers argue that unless there is a superpower with teeth or an effective military power, the security of Asia will not be maintained.

Since a collective security system like NATO in Europe does not exist in Asia, the American military presence is indispensable.

The question is who will decide the use of such military forces? In the past three decades, U.S. forces have been used wrongly in many parts of the world, including Vietnam and the Philippines under Marcos.

U.S. intervention in the Middle East and Africa not only failed but had adverse effects. There is no collective security system like NATO in Asia. It is not because of their inability to set up one because it is not necessary, but rather because it is counterproductive in Asia.

Many western observers believe ASEAN is merely a place for dialog. But this has proven extremely successful in preventing military conflict and diplomatic confrontation among ASEAN countries. It may be difficult for westerners to understand, but it has been true among ASEAN countries in the past 30 years.

ASEAN's success indicates that dialog among neighbors and regional partners is a better way to maintain regional peace and security than bringing distant outside powers into regional affairs. The day of power balance and the zero-sum game has gone.

Relations among the East Asian countries have become mutually beneficial. The experiences of ASEAN are now extending to Northeast Asia, including China, Japan and Korea.

The East Asian countries are now about to launch an East Asia club following the concept of an East Asia Economic Caucus originally proposed by Mahathir six and half years ago. Sharing the experiences of the East Asian Miracle will support this direction.

The writer is director of the Japan Center for International Strategies.