Time for ASEAN to stop dithering

Zaid Ibrahim, The Nation, Asia News Network/Bangkok

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has been dithering on how to deal with its perpetual problem child, Myanmar. Over the past eight years, ASEAN has tried to prod Myanmar towards democratization and national reconciliation with economic-led engagement, peer association by admitting it as a member and at times by simply ignoring the problem so Myanmar wouldn't feel pressured. ASEAN needs a new approach.

The time for accepting the bitter taste of Myanmar's empty promises and excuses has expired. It is now time for ASEAN to assert its self-respect and take a stand. Why should ASEAN passively wait for Myanmar to make up its mind on the issue of the ASEAN chair?

In recent months, there has been an unprecedented chorus of disapproval at the notion of the Myanmarese regime chairing ASEAN. From the memorable outburst of former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir warning of possible expulsion from ASEAN to the more carefully crafted messages of Singaporean foreign minister George Yeo, Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Marty Natalegawa and others, senior voices in ASEAN are delivering a message that they are not comfortable with a Myanmarese chair.

In the meantime, the Myanmarese authorities have done little to convince us that it is capable of bearing the responsibilities that go with the chair. The Myanmarese authorities, who have not only obstructed ASEAN's progress, but also lack the barest shred of credibility, are far from capable of living up to the burden of chairmanship.

ASEAN needs a chair that is capable of forging ahead with the complex agenda of this region. Many key issues that affect this region, ranging from transnational crime, drug trafficking, mass migration and sectarian conflicts to life-threatening epidemics, need to be addressed adequately.

We need to be more concerned about these pressing issues instead of worrying about how Senior-General Than Shwe feels about us or how he will react to what we say.

Even now, as the Myanmarese authorities attempt to allay regional concerns with this week's prisoner releases, we note that they have still failed to fulfill their promise to commence genuine political reform, including national reconciliation with ethnic groups and the release of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

ASEAN must have more self-respect than to accept leadership by a regime that rules not by the voice of the people, but by the barrel of a gun, by a regime that has consistently failed to honor its promises.

ASEAN should no longer be a buffer for Myanmar, which has come at the expense of ASEAN's reputation and productivity. No other member in the 38-year history of ASEAN has garnered such negative attention for the entire group, made its main "contribution" to the region in the form of drug trafficking, refugees and HIV/Aids or been the sole cause of multiple canceled meetings between the group and key dialogue partners.

This has created a sense of exasperation and frustration within ASEAN. However, this crisis also allows ASEAN to seize an opportunity that lies at the heart of the debate on the Myanmarese chairmanship and seize it.

The ASEAN Interparliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC) has brought together legislators across national and party lines from Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines and Cambodia. The uniting principle of the AIPMC is review of the methods for promoting democracy and reconciliation in Myanmar within the context of ASEAN. While the chair is a key opportunity, it is not the pinnacle of our common objective of democratization in Myanmar.

ASEAN has an opportunity to safeguard its dignity, enhance its relevance and make an unprecedented and meaningful contribution to supporting democracy in Myanmar. The AIPMC's "new deal" is to defer Myanmar's chairmanship for one year, to condition the chairmanship on Myanmar's transition to democracy and national reconciliation and to encourage this "home-grown" process within ASEAN.

While the details are to be left up to the people of Myanmar, ASEAN must safeguard such an overture by making it clear that it will not be swindled by clever diversions and verbose rhetoric. Nothing less than a detailed time frame that is fully inclusive of all stakeholders, including Aung San Suu Kyi, imprisoned Shan leader Hkun Htun Oo and other ethnic nationality leaders, will be acceptable.

The orchestration of elaborate conventions, convened under draconian principles and without the participation of key stakeholders, is not an indicator of democratic reform, nor will it be legitimate to serve as a prerequisite for so-called free elections.

A mere facade of political reform will not lead to stability and progress in Myanmar and will not alleviate the impact throughout the region. ASEAN stands ready to assist Myanmar, but ASEAN's goodwill must be met with the Myanmarese government's political will.

ASEAN must realize that the issue of Myanmar cannot be shelved again. Our new deal is essentially a plan of action; a form of diplomacy ASEAN has effectively utilized on other situations.

Suggestions that supporting Myanmar's chairmanship will maintain ASEAN's leverage with the Myanmarese government uses the same mistaken logic as in 1997, when Myanmar was admitted into ASEAN without any specific plan of action and timetable for reform. Using the same reasoning with the chairmanship will only deliver the same results: Nothing.

Allowing Myanmar to assume the chairmanship would essentially be a validation of their tradition of broken promises and thus reduce the leverage ASEAN has with Myanmar. ASEAN doesn't just need a spotlight on Myanmar, it needs a plan of action. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said that 2006 would be the year for democracy in Myanmar.

The AIPMC's new deal rises to the call of the honorable secretary-general.

Zaid Ibrahim is president of the ASEAN caucus on Myanmar.