The ASEAN Community and democratic evolution

The ASEAN Community and democratic evolution

Meidyatama Suryodiningrat, Vientiane

Behind the flurry of document signing by ASEAN leaders during
their two-day summit in Vientiane, democracy Southeast Asia
continued to quietly evolve. Quietly being the operative word.

With some member countries still wary of words like
"democracy" and "elections", there was nevertheless a clear
recognition that the internal dynamics in certain states
necessitated an ASEAN more in tune with the vogue ideology of the
early 21st century.

During their summit in Bali last year, the leaders agreed to
forge the establishment of a so-called ASEAN Community made of
three pillars; the Economic, Security and Socio-Cultural
communities.

On Monday, they adopted a blueprint towards achieving this
goal. The impetus for launching this initiative is twofold:

Firstly there is a desire to further accelerate trade
liberalization and to increase the attractiveness of a region
that has lost much of its economic pull during the past eight
years.

The second seems to be rooted in a desire for ASEAN's self-
preservation. Some of the more democratized nations in Southeast
Asia are seeking more from ASEAN members than the customary
declarations in favor of democracy and human rights. Failure to
respond to modern developments, they say, would slowly drive the
grouping toward irrelevance.

There is no question that ASEAN has become a revolutionary
force in economic liberalization, which is important in shaping
the prosperity of the region. But economic liberalization by
itself will never endear ASEAN to the millions that make up the
citizens of its member countries. Just look at the WTO or APEC.
Who identifies with these two giant organizations other than the
officials at the foreign and economic ministries?

The three facets of this community, if faithfully developed
could plant seeds of greater political accountability and
democracy.

Whether intentional or not, ASEAN leaders may have laid the
first cobblestone on the bumpy road to changes in the social
fabric and political culture of Southeast Asia. The natural
impact of the congruence of economic and political liberalization
is an expansion of individual freedoms. The economic arrangements
pursued by ASEAN are a process analogous to capitalism's
overthrow of feudalism more than century ago.

The growing connectedness of global economies also
interconnects the fate of individual governments and regimes in
ASEAN. Liberalization will put an increasingly higher price on
regimes by raising the cost of abuses of power. In other words,
dubious political decisions will become economically expensive,
as it drives away potential investment and deters the allocation
of foreign aid. The open economy eventually imposes its own
natural restrictions on the political system.

The introduction of a market system and free competition opens
up the economy for all to participate and diminishes the
monopolies traditionally held by a few elites.

Though ASEAN has thus far succeeded in evading its social and
political responsibilities, officials are acknowledging that the
grouping is being put in an increasingly difficult position over
its support for countries which do not adhere to democratic
values. Eventually, governments that do not conform will be left
outside, fighting in vain for the scraps in globalization's
economic deadzone -- pariahs of ASEAN.

The security arrangements within the ASEAN Community envision
not only the absence of war but a pledge to cease the use of non-
constitutional means to overthrow domestic governments. While
this can be viewed as a means to preserve the status quo of
the respective regimes, from a positive perspective it also,
albeit incrementally, instills respect for the rule of law and
democratic transfers of power.

Such customs are still not necessarily an innate part of the
political culture of many ASEAN states but most have witnessed
some form of power struggle in the last four decades.

No less important is the creation of a self-dependent security
environment, free of foreign intervention. The region's strategic
location and wealth of resources makes it subject to major power
competition. Only if Southeast Asians are in control of their
region will they cease to be pawns in the power game played by
first world nations that has historically often been the source
of tension in the region.

The greatest product of the ASEAN Community would be the
growth of a natural democratic system that dissolves power from
the elites into a civil society. Only one question remains: Will
the still-prostrated peoples in many ASEAN states be 'patient'
enough to wait for this slow and painstaking evolution, or will
the region see more instability as people rise to forcibly demand
their rights?

The author is a staff writer for The Jakarta Post.