The importance of APEC in the region

The importance of APEC in the region

By Hadi Soesastro

JAKARTA (JP): Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation is a major
experiment and it should be seen as such. A failure to appreciate
this could jeopardize the still fragile process of community
building in the Asia Pacific region.

This diverse region has no strong tradition of regionalism
and only has had a short experience in developing a sense of
regional identity. That is why, it still needs careful nurturing
and cannot be taken for granted. At this stage APEC should be
developed primarily to promote a sense of regional identity
through confidence building. It should not be used as an
instrument of economic diplomacy vis-a-vis other regions such as
Europe. It should also not be used for domestic political
purposes.

APEC has gone a long way in just five years. The view that
APEC is only a talk shop is certainly wrong. But even if it were
so, the very fact that this diverse group of countries comes
together regularly is a major achievement. APEC is not yet a
full-fledged organization in the traditional sense, but is
already an institution to promote economic cooperation in the
region.

The degree of APEC's institutionalization will continue to
grow in accordance with the need. The past five years have shown
that APEC members have been very pragmatic on this issue. And
yet, it is felt in some quarters that unless participants agree
on a blueprint or framework for APEC's institutional development,
this process will not progress. This has not been ASEAN's
experience.

There is the question of whether this process will be
sustainable. The answer is a definite yes, because of APEC's
importance and because there is no substitute for APEC. If APEC
did not exist it would be in the interest of regional countries
to form APEC. This has been the Pacific Economic Cooperation
Council's view since the mid 1980s, if not earlier. From a
regional perspective, APEC should be seen as an important --
perhaps the most important -- pillar of the regional architecture
for peace and prosperity. Here lies its strategic importance. It
is this pillar that is being built and strengthened.

Another pillar is the regional process in the political and
security field which has recently been created in the form of the
ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). In addition to these inter-
governmental processes there are other non-governmental efforts,
the so-called "second track", such as PECC, PBEC (Pacific Basin
Economic Council) and CSCAP (Council for Security Cooperation in
the Asia Pacific Region), which could contribute to the creation
of a meaningful regional architecture. Of these various efforts,
APEC is the first inter-governmental experiment. Therefore, its
success is crucial to community building in the region. In this
region, processes appear to be more important than structures.
The past five years have shown that the APEC process can produce
substance.

The likelihood that an APEC economic leaders meeting will
take place annually also adds to the sustainability and substance
of the process. These informal APEC leaders meetings are not yet
a part of the APEC process. The highest body in the APEC process
is the APEC Ministers Meeting. However, as the Seattle leaders
meeting has shown, the vision and ideas that emanate from the
leaders meetings are likely to have a significant influence on
APEC's development. Being outside the proper structure the
leaders can be bold. But perhaps, leaders should also be discreet
in airing and proposing initiatives during the leaders meeting
itself. It would not help the process if ideas and counter-ideas
are prematurely announced because leaders' statements will be
taken seriously.

The creation of a group of independent personalities, such
as the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) and the Pacific Business Forum
(PBF), serves an important function in APEC's process. Such
groups can produce even bolder ideas that can be openly and
squarely discussed among the wider public. Both the EPG and the
PBF have proposed the vision of free trade in the region to be
achieved over a certain period in the not too distant future. It
is likely that this vision will be endorsed by APEC Ministers and
Leaders in their meeting in Indonesia. This is clearly a
significant leap forward in APEC's development.

The next logical step is to begin to define what "free trade
in the region" means and the modality for its achievement. It
should be remembered, however, that APEC's strategic importance
lies in its contribution to regional peace and prosperity. Free
trade in the region is one means to that end and is not the end
in itself. The task of defining modalities for regional
cooperation, including the achievement of APEC's vision of free
and open trade and investment in the region, is in itself an
important part of the APEC process. This also should not be
overlooked. It is imperative that the public actively participate
in this effort because APEC is too important to be left to
governments alone.