ASEAN: from defiance to accommodation

WHAT FORMER ASEAN heavyweight leaders Indonesian President Suharto, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed had in common was a passionate belief in the regional grouping and a readiness to defend the Asean identity and values. They did it with valour and stood firm against heavy criticism from non-Asean countries. In short: no kowtowing to external demands without a consensus.

During the first three decades, their unyielding leadership and attitude was the mantra guiding Asean from an obscure regional grouping to an international player. The 13-year Cambodian conflict, for instance, allowed Asean to show its mettle and patience. From 1979-1992, Asean diplomats and representatives roamed the world lobbying for votes at the annual UN deliberations and garnering support for their unwavering efforts to drive out foreign military occupation of Cambodia.

Their joint vision of a united Asean that could resist external pressure and meddling was well-known. At its inception, Asean was perceived as a pawn in the global power plays as part of the broader Cold War. The grouping has continued to show it has a mind of its own - sometimes much to the irritation of their Western allies and friends.

Burma's hard-headed approach throughout the 1990s was the bench mark of such resistance. Asean countered Western pressure not to admit the pariah state as an Asean member because of its horrible human rights violations and political oppression. Both Suharto and Mahathir strongly backed Burma's membership in Asean against growing international opposition. Burma subsequently joined Asean in 1997. They argued that as countries in the region, they were better placed to resolve their problems.

The days of Asean's defiance are gone. New body languages and rhetoric have quickly emerged within the region. Obviously, Asean has benefited by riding piggy-back on rising Asia. Several factors have contributed to these dramatic shifts both outside and inside Asean.

Last year's global economic and financial crisis caused by the West has pushed the role of Asian economies to the forefront in ameliorating the turmoil. The continued growing influence of China and India - both key dialogue partners of Asean - has further strengthened the grouping's international role and position.

Within the regional grouping, the transformation came last December when Asean adopted a charter and transformed itself into a rule-based organisation. Of course, the jury is still out on how effective the organisation can be in years to come as some Asean members have not yet complied with their new obligations and commitments. After 16 years of procrastination, the setting up of the Asean Intergovernment Commission for Human Rights in October indicates the grouping's willingness - in a slow and evolutionary manner - to accept international norms and standards.

At his meeting with Asean leaders two weeks ago in Singapore, US President Barack Obama even endorsed Asean centrality in future attempts to build a new regional architecture. Indeed, Washington's recognition of Asean as a driving force has an overall positive impact on the future US role in Asean and the Asian region as a whole. As a result, a new Asean is emerging that is no longer uptight and defensive.

Watching US-Asean leaders talking about cooperation and coexistence at regional and global levels, one could be optimistic that the grouping has taken a new mode - a willingness for closer cooperation with dialogue partners to resolve common challenges.

Such confidence and trust in Asean has taken more than three decades to evolve. When Asean initiated the dialogue partner system in 1977 it was purely for selfish reasons of augmenting its regional interest through increasing bargaining power, widening marketplace, as well as access to technological know-how and financial assistance.

In the previous two summits in Thailand, Asean as a whole responded and engaged much better with external players. It was more open to new ideas. The members were more willing to listen, as articulated by Prime Minister Abhist Vejjajiva, the Asean chair, to proposals made by Japan and Australia. Unlike past scepticism, Asean is welcoming new approaches that will strengthen its role. In the case of building a regional architecture, Asean is no longer adamantly insisting on the Asean+3 process.

But there is a worrying trend in intra-Asean relations. The Thai-Cambodian dispute, with personalised elements, has already rocked the cradle of Asean's cardinal principle of non-interference and good neighbourliness. Despite the appeal of "maximum restraint" to the conflicting parties and mediation efforts from Asean Secretary General, Dr Surin Pitsuwan, very few Asean members were ready to do so. As Surin put it, the appeal is part of what he described as "effective dynamics" inside Asean as a rule-based organisation.

Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo wrote to him expressing support while Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Gia Khiem has written to Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Namhong calling for restraint.

Asean has a weak spot when it comes to resolving disputes among members. Within the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, Asean has a High Council for such a purpose but none has used it. They prefer international arbitration. Fortunately, no Asean members have gone to war against each other in the past 42 years. For the time being, Thailand and Cambodia have yet to climb down. Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was briefed on the situation by Abhisit and Prime Minister Hun Sen in Singapore, has assigned Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to follow up on the development and determine if Indonesia, on behalf of Asean, can have a role. If the current Thai-Cambodian conflict and boiling nationalism continues unchecked and unresolved, it could lead to large-scale arms clashes that could tarnish Asean at the most pivotal time.

In the near future, Asean leaders must also show it is worthwhile for the dialogue partners to increase their engagements with their headquarters through their permanent offices. The US and China have already decided to open them by early next year. Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, New Zealand and the EU would probably follow suit soon. Other two dozen countries, who already have their ambassadors accredited to Asean, would have to do the same later.