JP/6/PURBA
JP/6/PURBA
ASEAN needs collective
leadership for existence
Kornelius Purba
Staff Writer
Jakarta
korpur@yahoo.com
For many people, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) is more like a remnant of its past glory, especially
after the regional financial crisis of 1997, as a result of which
its strongest advocate, Indonesian president Soeharto, fell from
power in 1998. Some richer countries have even started bullying
the group, and the international media often describes ASEAN as
past history.
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, the longest serving
elected government leader in the region, noted that many people
wrote off the group after the financial crisis.
However, "It is obvious today that far from being written off,
many countries want to have special relations with the ASEAN
group," AFP quoted him as saying after the ASEAN summit which
included leaders from China, Japan, South Korea, India and South
Africa.
Meanwhile, Singaporean Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said that
by boosting cooperation with its neighbors, the regional group
will be better able to confront future challenges.
The threat of communists and terrorists, and not economic
interests, will likely be the most effective unifying factor for
ASEAN members. With a common enemy, member nations will wake up
and stay alert to confront any imminent danger. A case in point
is the recent terror attacks on the Indonesian island of Bali,
after which ASEAN members drew together, willing to face the
regional threat.
The terrorists have now awakened ASEAN.
In their eighth summit in Cambodia last week, ASEAN leaders
demonstrated a strong sense of unity in their objective to
eradicate terrorism, because their failure would endanger the
lives of their citizens, and no less important, their own
political careers.
"We resolve to intensify our efforts, collectively and
individually, to prevent, counter and suppress the activities of
terrorist groups in the region," the 10 ASEAN leaders said in a
joint declaration on Monday.
The threat of communism and later, the Vietnamese occupation
of Cambodia in late 1979, effectively cemented the five original
members of ASEAN: Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and .
When the regional group succeeded in putting an end to the
Cambodian political unrest in 1991, doubts emerged as to the
future challenges of the organization, because the member nations
are direct economic competitors.
After the economic crisis of 1997, most ASEAN members became
more inward-looking, busy as they were with their own domestic
affairs. Singapore, the region's most advanced nation, became
impatient with ASEAN's slow progress, and so negotiated Free
Trade Agreements (FTA) with the U.S., Japan and Australia.
Brunei, which joined the group in 1984, rarely takes the
initiative, while Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos remain in the
sidelines, and Myanmar still cannot resolve its political
problems.
Indonesia itself has even hinted at its weariness with ASEAN,
and in September hosted the ministerial meeting of the Southwest
Pacific Forum in Yogyakarta, hoping to reduce international
support for the Free Papua Movement (OPM) in the rebellious
province.
Furthermore, younger leaders are emerging in Thailand,
Indonesia and the Philippines with little, if any, emotional
attachments to ASEAN. There also exists a generation gap with
older leaders, such as Mahathir and Goh.
The annual ASEAN summit with China, Japan and South Korea is
often perceived to be the platform of the three guest nations,
and ASEAN a poor host who must entertain its much more prosperous
guests, for a few benefits in return for its warm welcome. When
the three guests talk about the threat of North Korea, ASEAN
smiles politely on, although it has little interest in the Korean
Peninsula.
Similarly, the implementation of the ASEAN Free Trade Area
(AFTA) commenced this year, but the historic event came to pass
practically unnoticed.
In its relationship with Asian neighbors, however, ASEAN has
scored a few points, with an FTA proposed by China last year,
followed by Japan shortly afterwards. India and South Africa were
added to the guestlist for the summit this year to extend its
global outreach, but people need immediate economic improvement.
It was only after Sept. 11 that western countries like the
U.S. again became attentive to this region, especially with
regards to Indonesia as the world's post populous Muslim nation,
and they applauded Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, and
Thailand for their harsh actions against alleged terrorist
organizations operating in their territories.
Priding itself on its political evolution into a democratic
and a law-binding country, however, the Indonesian government
insisted it could not punish the alleged terrorists without
evidence. Instead, it ridiculed Malaysia and Singapore for using
the Internal Security Act (ISA) to arrest people indefinitely.
Indonesia was ready to cooperate with its neighbors and fight
terrorism only when terrorists bombed Bali and killed at least
190 people.
Indonesia must also face another bitter fact, that it will be
very difficult to regain its leadership in ASEAN. The last five
years show that no dominant state or leader now exists in the
region. ASEAN faces a new era, where collective leadership will
replace the dominant role of Indonesia under the Soeharto regime.
The Bali tragedy shows us that the region has no other choice but
to work together, and that ASEAN remains crucial for peace in the
Asia-Pacific. The regional group remains one of the most
important keys for world prosperity, although it may seem for the
time being that it looks very small compared to skyrocketing
China.
Was the Bali tragedy a blessing in disguise, in bringing
Southeast Asian nations together again?
In any case, the sacrifice of the innocent people in Bali must
become the cornerstone to rebuilding peace and prosperity for the
region.