European Union interest in ASEAN waning

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.