Fri, 23 Sep 1994

The first ARF meeting: An evolution

By Jusuf Wanandi

JAKARTA (JP): The first ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), held in Bangkok in July 1994, was very encouraging. Its success was in fact a stark contrast to the results of the earlier preparatory meeting of senior officials in May 1994 which was considered inadequate and too timid by some member countries because of its preoccupation over the agenda setting for the Ministerial Meeting.

The ARF is unquestionably a major effort and break-through in confidence building measures (CBMs) and preventive diplomacy for the Asia- Pacific region. In addition to ASEAN's six members, it has successfully engaged the constructive participation of all other principal players in the region, namely: ASEAN dialog partners (USA, Japan, Canada, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and the European Union); ASEAN observers (Vietnam, PNG and Laos); plus guests to the ASEAN Ministers Meeting (China and Russia). Such initiative to bring all these key players together to comfortably confer with each other is indeed vital in this contemporary post-Cold War era where no real efforts towards developing a truly region-wide multilateral regional security dialog and cooperation have ever been made before.

ASEAN itself was established in an effort to facilitate the process of confidence building in Southeast Asia, namely to overcome the then serious animosity between Indonesia and Malaysia, Singapore-Malaysia and with the Vietnam War in mind.

As ASEAN's success in being Southeast Asia's major regional entity gains prominence, it is only timely and appropriate that ASEAN now takes up the lead in formulating and implementing fresh initiatives proportional to the region's increasingly demanding and complex requirements.

At the very least, ASEAN's standing and performance should make these much needed initiatives less susceptible to suspicions, as is often the case with those introduced by the greater powers in the region.

At the same time, ASEAN's long-standing experience and proven successes in these delicate areas should provide extra assurances of its total commitment toward the betterment of the region as a whole. From here, we can expect ARF to be the key to and main pillar of the region's evolving security arrangements and frame- work.

In line with the above expectation, the first ARF has already produced some significant achievements as follows:

1. Institutionalization of the Forum: ARF has been institutionalized with an agreement to hold it annually, with Brunei Darussalam as its venue in 1995;

2. ARF to cover whole Asia Pacific: The ARF is considered a useful regional institution for security dialog and cooperation for the whole of the Asia-Pacific, and not limited to Southeast Asia alone. That is why the case of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in the Korean Peninsula has been taken up by the ARF, and both the U.S.- North Korea negotiations and the resumption of inter-Korean dialog have been endorsed;

3. Establishment of a Uniform Regional Code of Conduct: The principles of a regional order in the Asia-Pacific region also have been laid down through an endorsement of the purposes and principles embodied in ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and Cooperation of 1976. This acceptance still has to be worked out by ASEAN through further opening of the Treaty for accessions by non- ASEAN members in the near future. To date, PNG, Vietnam and Laos have already acceded to the Treaty.

4. ARF as Primary Instruments for CBMs & Preventive Diplomacy: It has been recognized that ARF can become an effective instrument to create CBMs and preventive diplomacy in the region. In this respect some concrete items of CBMs have been taken up for further studies. These items were agreed upon by consensus among all participants, and they will cover: a. issues such as confidence and security building; nuclear non proliferation; peacekeeping cooperation, including a peacekeeping training center; exchanges of non-classified information; maritime security issues; preventive diplomacy; b. comprehensive concept of security; including its economic and social aspects; c. relevant internationally recognized norms and principles pertaining to international and regional political and security cooperation.

The first ARF meeting also agreed to promote the eventual participation of all ARF countries in the UN Conventional Arms Register. In addition, the meeting agreed that informal meetings among officials can be held to make all these studies and efforts possible.

These achievements are commendable indeed. Yet, beyond these, the ARF will have to ensure that its success does contribute to enhancing existing stability and peace in the region. Toward that end, there are three major tasks and challenges that the ARF will have to seriously consider in its future endeavors:

First, the ARF should be able to balance the interests of ASEAN on the one hand, and the other participants on the other hand, especially those of the super powers. ASEAN's interests should be given attention to, because it is the anchor of the institution. But the interests of other participants are also important in order to promote ARF and to make it effective.

Second, the "ASEAN approach" to establish a certain regional solidarity and trust in the region has to be complemented with concrete cooperation. The spirit of trust and solidarity is the key to ARF's success, but concrete achievements are necessary to sustain other members' interests in the effort.

Third, the ARF should encourage "second-track" approach and involve academics and NGOs, and to cultivate their close- partnership in an effort to further improve understanding, dialog and cooperation which are occurring in various fields of activity.

The third point is of particular relevance to Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia- Pacific Region (CSCAP). The idea to embark on a full-multilateral political-security dialog is a new development. Hence, the efforts of academics and NGOs to initiate studies and networking in these areas could crucially contribute to achieving the stated objectives. Through their participation, greater flexibility and transparencies, i.e. frankness on the objectives, issues and modalities for CBMs, can be more easily achieved.

A similar process has been experienced in developing the idea of economic cooperation in the region, where the non-governmental Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC) has paved the way for the establishment of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC). PECC continues to be vital to the economic cooperation in the region because of its partite nature (involving officials in a private capacity, academics and the private sector).

CSCAP has been established to perform the role of a "second- track" in the area of multilateral security dialog and cooperation. Its efforts involve government officials in a private capacity, academics, editors, politicians and even businessmen. To date, CSCAP has established four working groups to deal with Confidence and Security Building Measures, including Comprehensive Security; Maritime Security; North Pacific Security Cooperation.

Results of these studies are expected to contribute to the efforts that ARF agreed to undertake in its recent meeting in Bangkok. Prior to this, CSCAP issued a memorandum on "The Security of the Asia- Pacific Region", which was also submitted at ARF's first meeting. Overall, it is expected that CSCAP can continue to be one of the main sources of input and studies for ARF in the future.

Against all the above background, it is therefore imperative that CSCAP gets its act together, moves on with its studies, enlarges its membership, strengthens its networking, consolidates its organization and renders maximal support to political security cooperation in the region through ARF. Only then can peace, stability and economic dynamism in the region be maintained.

The writer is chairman of supervisory board of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

Window A: PECC continues to be vital to the economic cooperation in the region because of its partite nature.

Window B: It is expected that CSCAP can continue to be one of the main sources of input and studies for ARF in the future.