New era for ASEAN security culture
By Bilveer Singh
SINGAPORE (JP): The Cold War and the security structure into which the ASEAN member countries were born greatly shaped and conditioned their political and economic behavior, as well as strategies.
In many ways, the Cold War was forced upon them, in turn imposing global bipolarity, East-West, Communist-non-Communist rivalries on the region. This political architecture shaped international relations from 1945 to 1990.
The end of the Cold War had a liberating effect on the ASEAN countries as far as their strategy outlook was concerned. Although many of the political, economic and security structures in the region are carryovers from the Cold War period, an opportunity was provided to break from past constraints and outlooks.
The Asia-Pacific region, including Southeast Asia abounds with bilateral and multilateral forums aimed at solving various problems, many of which existed prior to the end of Communism and the dissolution of the Cold War order. But these are increasingly felt to be insufficient in addressing the problems of the region. In these circumstances, a new security culture and strategy seem to be emerging in the region, which, if fully effected, will go a long way toward enhancing peace and security.
For a long time, the bulk of key meetings has been held at the official "track one" level. The political and security issues were largely addressed through Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the ASEAN-Post Ministerial Conference, as well as the newly inaugurated ASEAN Regional Forum, which held its first meeting in Bangkok in July 1994.
At the same time, in tandem with the growing importance of "track one" diplomacy has been the burgeoning of non-governmental groups, whose activities are referred to as the "track two" process. "Track two" can be distinguished from the strictly official and academic meetings because they are essentially a hybrid of non-governmental and governmental activities. Their moves are actually "mixed track" processes involving academics, journalists and officials, both civilians and military people, active in an unofficial and private capacity. Here, while the government involvement in agenda setting is clearly present and an important part of the process, the lead is usually taken by private academic or research institutes with an arms-length relationship with their respective governments. In Indonesia, for instance, the Jakarta-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, has served the nation well in this regard.
What is significant about the development of the "track two" process is that countries in the region have decided to invest in a new strategic culture with Confidence Building Security Measures or Confidence Building Measures becoming an important part of security management in the region. What these two kinds of measures involve are steps aimed at reducing or eliminating mutual misperceptions, suspicions and fears by making military intentions more explicit. This has been made evident by a number of new initiatives in the ASEAN region, including intensification of bilateral military exercises among the member states, the first-ever trilateral defense cooperation between Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia with regard to the piracy problem in the Philip Channel, the initiation of the Asia-Pacific Security Dialog by Malaysia, involving military personnel and civilian officials from all the participating countries, and the involvement of military personnel in ASEAN-Senior Official Meetings, especially since the 1992 ASEAN Summit in Singapore.
The best evidence that a new security culture is gradually emerging in the ASEAN region can be seen in the willingness of the various military establishments to undertake a policy of greater transparency. The issuance of various "white papers" on defense is the most explicit expression that these countries are increasingly convinced of the need for transparency. To date, three countries in ASEAN have produced some sort of "defense white papers" with Singapore publishing its Defense of Singapore first in 1990/1991. It released the third volume in August 1994. Malaysia also brought out a publication called Honor and Sacrifice; The Malaysian Armed Forces, in October 1994, outlining the history, organization and doctrine of the Malaysian Armed Forces. While both the Singaporean and Malaysian publications can be regarded as "white papers", neither government has called them so.
In view of this, it was Thailand which claimed credit for being the first in ASEAN to produce a "white paper on defense" with the publication of The Defense of Thailand by the Ministry of Defense in 1994. Although the Thai version came out in December 1993, the English version was not released until October 1994.
Whatever these publications may be called, what is clear is that new thinking has entered into the strategic calculus and grid of the region. This was made explicit by Dr. Lee Boon Yang, the Singapore Defense Minister, in the preface of Defense of Singapore, 1994-1995. He argued that in addition to highlighting the need for a strong national defense capability, the publication serves a wider purpose. "Despite the tensions that have erupted after the end of the Cold War, the world is gravitating towards a spirit of great consensus and cooperation. There is a growing awareness among nations that forging a New World Order calls for frank and open discussion of each country's security concerns," he said.
In this connection, "by making transparent its own defense posture, Singapore contributes to this atmosphere of openness, trust and mutual respect". This, more than anything else, reaffirmed the belief of the Singapore defense establishment, as is the thinking of similar establishments in ASEAN, that a new security culture is emerging in the region. The "transparency virus" has spread through the ASEAN region, thereby strengthening trust and confidence, marking another step in the growing maturity of the region.
The writer is a senior lecturer in political science at the National University of Singapore.