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.