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.