The 38th and 39th ASEAN Summits have been concluded. This year’s Summits will be positively scrutinized for many years to come. For the first time in its history, ASEAN leaders excluded one of their own. Myanmar’s Military Chief, Min Aung Hlaing, was barred from attending the Summits.
His glaring absence was in stark contrast with the reception he received in Jakarta. Just a few months apart, he was welcomed in April by his peers, including and importantly by the host country Indonesia.
The lack of progress over the Five-Point Consensus (FPC) reversed all those hospitality and good faith. The Consensus, fostered in Chief Hlaing’s presence, was far from being met. It hence prompted the ASEAN Foreign Ministers to correct such defiance during their 15 October’s meeting. They decided to invite a non-political representative. Instead of showing accommodation upon that stern resolve, Myanmar’s Military launched a legal maneuver to delegitimate Ministers’ concern.
It did not end up well. ASEAN leaders, as shown in Paragraph 102 of the Chairman’s Statement of the 38th and 39th ASEAN Summits, reaffirmed the decisions made by ASEAN Foreign Ministers. The Summit, as the highest organ, effectively dismissed the Military’s legal attempt altogether and justifying its exclusionary approach and decision.
That decision also vindicates the interplay among ASEAN Charter’s principles of respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity, and national identity (Article 2 (2) (a)), non-interference in the internal affairs of ASEAN Member States (Article 2 (2) (e)), and enhanced consultations on matters seriously affecting the common interest of ASEAN (Article 2 (2) (g)).
If there are any lessons ever, the Summit has therefore established for themselves and ASEAN a precedent and recipefor any similar scenario in the future. Importantly, the ASEAN leadership shows that the Charter’s principles can be righteouslyput into action.
A changing ASEAN
The saga exhibited Myanmar’s Military failure to observe a changing ASEAN. The tenacity of ASEAN leaderships and senior officials is remarkably unremitting. They are a different breed, and they mean business. They see the organization as a serious enterprise, not just for photo ops or another routine catch-up among neighbors.
The advance of information and communication technology have made demands from the grassroot more visible. Criticisms about how ASEAN should act or behave can now be easily mainstreamed through social media within minutes since an issue is known. No officials can belittle this change and thepressure it can muster to influence ASEAN decision making processes.
A well-known political commentator cynically said that ASEAN is making rules as they go. Yes, he may probably right. The decision to exclude head of state or government may be unthinkable decades ago. But they are plausible due to the changing forte of global strategic narratives. And ASEAN is adapting just that. The Covid-19 Pandemic has made it unacceptable for any business-as-usual approach to critical and pressing issues that ASEAN is facing.
The audacity and breakthrough that ASEAN leaders is takingmust be appreciated. It is interesting to observe recent development in the European Union. Where some of its members are widely reported to challenge the Union’s Rule of Law fundamentals. Will the Union pursue similar course as ASEAN did? What correctional measures will it take to remedy the trespassing of its fundamental values?
The tenacity to progress
ASEAN personifies the conviction of its founding fathers. They envision a regional order capable of ensuring its members’ independence and autonomy of action. ASEAN leaders’ tenacity to address the Myanmar’s situation is therefore commendable.
Going ahead, the same grit is needed to preserve ASEAN’s autonomy and response upon two of the most pressing political-security issues. The South China Sea conundrum, and disarmament and non-proliferation agenda.
Next year will be the twentieth anniversary of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DoC). It is hence timely to review whether ASEAN and Chinahave met the DoC’s objectives. To date, a Code of Conduct as required by Paragraph 10 of the DoC is not yet adopted. Is ASEAN and China going on in a perennial cycle? Could ASEAN withstand another twenty years?
Meanwhile, the balance of configuration that made DoC possible in the first place are no longer there. Many changes have occurred ever since, both on economic and political reality, as well as physically in the South China Sea itself. A soul-searching rethinking to improve ASEAN strategy and efforts is imperative.
Southeast Asia has inevitably become a landscape of great powers contestation. However nicely framed, the armaments race is looming and increasingly prevalent. The creation of United States Space Force, AUKUS, and revelation of alleged successful Chinese orbital missile test adds more nuances into the boiling fray. China’s recent decision to modernize its nuclear warheads will trigger endless episodes of arms race.
History repeats itself
Southeast Asia hence found itself again in another increasingly hostile international environment. The last and closest comparable situation was perhaps the period up before the World War II. The only difference, it had no regional safety netthen. It did not have conscience about regional identity, autonomy, and collective resolve. The international order was also discriminative and colonial at best. Now Southeast Asia has them all.
But these political capitals are under threat from the dynamic competition between the rising and resident powers. Will ASEAN able to preserve its autonomy and aspirations without having to choose between the competing sides? The ASEAN Outlook on Indo-Pacific has indicated, “… it is in the interest of ASEAN to lead the shaping of their economic and security architecture and ensure that such dynamics will continue to bring about peace, security, stability and prosperity for the peoples in the Southeast Asia…”
In a setting where risk of miscalculation is at best, those who preach for more economic integration is apologetic to the dangerous nature of the world we live in. ASEAN needs all the tenacity at its disposal to progress, for security and prosperity.
Aloysius Selwas Taborat 