European Union interest in ASEAN waning

Grace Sung, The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore

Since the Asian crisis of 1997, Southeast Asian countries have been battling to regain favor with Europe. Although many European investors stayed on, interest in the region is waning, particularly with the direct competition posed by China.

This explains why some European Union (EU) officials are now questioning the value of the EU-ASEAN partnership, a political dialogue which dates back to 1980.

The European Commission, the EU's executive body, is re- evaluating the relationship and assessing how it should progress.

Should ties be developed on a bilateral basis with individual countries? Should the EU-ASEAN dialog be maintained? Or should it be extended to include China, Japan and South Korea to make it an "EU-ASEAN plus three" dialog?

This search for the direction in which the EU should head presents serious challenges for ASEAN countries. If the three Northeast Asian countries were included in the equation, ASEAN and most of its member states would be overshadowed.

Already fighting to make their concerns heard, they would have to raise their voices in a more crowded room.

ASEAN countries emphasize that they should be looked at as a distinct and separate entity. They insist there are enough important issues of common interest for the EU to engage Southeast Asia as a region, and separate from the rest of Asia.

But how convincing is the argument? In its updated strategy paper for Asia last year, the European Commission said ASEAN and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) will remain the major focus of the EU's political and security dialogue with Southeast Asia.

But something had disappeared -- the enthusiasm it evoked for the region in its previous policy paper of 1994, which focused mostly on how the EU could tap into the rich potential and participate in the Southeast Asian economic miracle.

The 1997 crisis and subsequent events have changed the scenario radically. Today, ASEAN officials acknowledge that with continued lackluster economic performances and political instability plaguing the region, it is hard for them to be taken seriously by Europe.

This is particularly so as relations between the two sides have always been anchored on economics.

The competition from China cannot be met simply by presenting ASEAN as a resource-rich area with huge human potential. And the development of an ASEAN free trade area, a bigger market that would raise the attractiveness of the region, has not gone as planned.

All this makes it harder for ASEAN countries to sustain interest in themselves.

In addition, fundamental differences over human rights have been a major obstacle to the EU-ASEAN relationship and continue to be so. While in the past, it centered on East Timor, today it focuses on Myanmar.

The ASEAN-EU ministerial meeting was held up for three years when the country became an ASEAN member. When it was held finally in December 2000, Myanmar and human rights dominated the discussions.

There are no signs that the two sides will get past this road block any time soon.

There is also the question of how to advance the relationship. The EU has indicated that it wants to move beyond the donor- recipient dynamic to something more equal.

How realistic is that aim, given the state of economic development within ASEAN? Many of the joint projects identified at previous sessions are still based on the principle of the EU providing funds for assistance programs in some of its ASEAN partners.

In a wider context, the EU is involved in Southeast Asia also through the ARF. Can it play a bigger security role in the region?

Kay Moeller, a senior research associate at the Berlin think- tank, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, said the EU had always played a rather passive role in the forum, in which the union's 15 members have a collective seat.

The ARF itself has not made much progress in confidence building. The Europeans also have no military potential in the region. Their security role is limited to arms sales, in which they compete with one another, Dr Moeller noted.

The EU has no military means to make an impact. It is building up a rapid reaction force, but it is unlikely this unit will ever be used so far away from home. A stronger EU contribution in the forum would help balance American power.

But with the final decision-making power lying with the member states, the EU as an entity is destined to play only a minor role in enhancing security in Southeast Asia.

There is also a limit as to how much the EU can achieve because of its structure. The presidency is rotated every six months, with each country setting its own priorities and interests.

Because of this, there is often no follow-through. EU foreign- policy chief Javier Solana last month criticized the system, saying it harmed the coherence and quality of the union's work.

The policy-making councils of ministers, he said, were "dysfunctional". Under the current Spanish presidency, Latin America, not Asia, is on the priority list.

Despite the difficulties, some ASEAN officials believe progress is at hand. The European Commission has committed itself to opening representative offices in Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia and Laos. It would not have done that if it wanted to write off the region, say ASEAN diplomats.

There had been no news until recently on when and where the next ASEAN-EU ministerial meeting would be convened. Successive EU presidencies have been reluctant to commit themselves, with tight scheduling being blamed.

But though there has been no official confirmation, the word is that the next ASEAN-EU ministerial meeting could be held next year.

ASEAN officials see that as a positive sign. "I am optimistic about the dialog," an ASEAN ambassador concluded.