ASEAN: The Association of Southeast Asian Nations

Introduction The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is an alliance promoting economic and political cooperation by fostering dialogue among its ten members: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Besides an important multilateral organization in Asia, ASEAN is also becoming a major economic powerhouse in the region having enacted free trade agreements (FTA) with China, Australia, New Zealand, India, Japan, and Korea. However, ASEAN still faces distinct challenges: Member nations continue to vie over maritime sovereignty, and ASEAN's policy of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of member states has attractASEAN has proved a vital and welcoming partner in Asia for the United States as it moves to secure economic interests in a shifting global framework. Anxiety over Chinese economic and military expansion has also motivated the United States to deepen engagement with multilateral institutions to secure U.S. influence in the region. In recent years, Washington has strengthened economic and security ties with ASEAN by joining the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, participating in ASEAN summits, and formally establishing a U.S.ASEAN annual summit.ed considerable international criticism in the wake of Myanmar's human rights crisis. ASEAN was formed in the midst of the Vietnam War in 1967, uniting Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand against the potential threat of communist-led insurgency. It was intended as a security community, promoting social and political stability during a turbulent time, says CFR Senior Fellow Sheila A. Smith. In addition to preventing intraregional flare-ups, ASEAN provided a way for the countries to create "a voice for themselves in the broader Cold War arena so the Southeast Asian area would speak as one on particular issues," she says. To that end, in 1971 ASEAN signed a declaration that Southeast Asia was a Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality. The resolution was intended as a statement that ASEAN countries refused to be included in Cold War dividing lines, says Sheldon Simon, a professor of political science at Arizona State University. The end of the Cold War left ASEAN "searching for a new organizing principle for security," Simon says, and ASEAN has since established various forums to address more contemporary challenges: ASEAN Regional Forum: Launched in1993, it aims to promote security in the broader Asia-Pacific region, but the body's contribution has involved more discussion than action, says Zachary Abuza, a professor of political science at Simmons College in Boston. Still, white papers, military exchanges, and the creation of a register of experts who can be called upon during conflicts have increased transparency and defense cooperation. ASEAN Plus Three (APT): Initiated in 1997, it aims to cultivate multidimensional collaboration between ASEAN, Japan, China, and South Korea, and was characterized as "the most coherent and substantive panAsian grouping" in a recent CFR Council Special Report. East Asia Summit: First held in 2005, it is an annual gathering of heads of state from ASEAN member countries, plus Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand to promote security and prosperity in the region.

Since 2009, China has adopted a more aggressive tack in regional disputes (Newsweek) over borderlands with India, maritime sovereignty, and the Mekong River, say analysts. CFR's Fellow for Southeast Asia Joshua Kurlantzick warns that countries like Vietnam and Malaysia are "arming up" to protect strategic interests and energy resources in areas like the South China Sea. Investment in arms purchases in Southeast Asia nearly doubled (WPR) between 2005 and 2009 alone, writes Richard Weitz, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. China's military buildup and an anticipated change in top-level leadership have motivated the United States and ASEAN nations to work together. Faced with China's assertiveness in the region, some ASEAN nations have also indicated a desire for a continued and active U.S. presence (Bloomberg) in the region to counterbalance China. At a CFR meeting in September,

Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa expressed that in the interest of building a "dynamic equilibrium" in Asia, Indonesia wants to ensure participation of the United States and Russia in the "evolving regional architecture." Philippines' President Benigno S. Aquino III echoed the necessity of an ongoing U.S. presence in the region.Despite the rising level of engagement in the area, experts have pointed out that considerable hurdles to multilateral cooperation still remain. Members' security priorities vary, and therefore military and counterterrorism issues tend to be handled bilaterally between countries with shared concerns and trusting relationships, like Singapore and Malaysia or Singapore and Thailand. For instance, the captures of several Jemaah Islamiyah operatives in the past have involved bilateral action. Also, certain ASEAN procedures cripple even the organization's most ambitious agreements, say some experts. Andrew Chau of the University of Queensland's School of Political Science and International Studies writes in Asian Survey that ASEAN's consensus-based decision-making and policy of noninterference in members' affairs have created a "state-centric approach to foreign policy behavior" that undermines regional integration initiatives. For example, the 2007 ASEAN Convention on Counterterrorism was intended to create a "framework for regional cooperation to counter, prevent, and suppress terrorism," but it contains clauses allowing parties to withdraw from the agreement at any time. The convention also states that it does not contradict "the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of states and that of non-interference in the internal affairs of other parties"--meaning the agreement, like other ASEAN statements, is only as useful as ASEAN members choose to make it. Growing Trade ASEAN's diverse membership has presented difficulties as leaders plow through the "very, very tedious" process of dismantling barriers to trade, Surin told a CFR meeting. He said the process of creating one economic community was complex in an organization whose members' average per capita incomes ranged from $209 to $50,000 per year, requiring catering to a wide range of economic needs in setting trade standards. Still, annual trade between ASEAN members grew from $79 billion in 1993 to $404 billion in 2007, though it slipped to $376 billion (PDF) in 2009. In 2010, ASEAN nations' total trade will surpass $1.5 trillion (PDF) according to preliminary statistics released by ASEAN.The United States and ASEAN have a trade and investment framework (TIFA), though talks are relatively ineffective, writes Ernest Bower of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. ASEAN's principal trading partner is Japan, which comprised over 12 percent of ASEAN's external trade, with the European Union and China following close behind at 11 percent in 2009.Catharin Dalpino, a visiting associate professor of Southeast Asian studies at Georgetown University, cautioned that the recent free trade agreements may not solve institutional hurdles to free trade. For example, ASEAN doesn't yet have the legal framework to support a fully implemented free-trade agreement. "They don't have a dispute resolution mechanism nor do they have a central authority to take disputes to," Dalpino says. Government corruption and unreliable judicial systems in the region also create roadblocks to trade because they make contracts hard to enforce. Relations with the United States The United States is a major trading partner: ASEAN countries together comprise the fourth largest market for U.S. exports, and U.S.-ASEAN trade totaled more than $200 billion in 2008. Experts say U.S. companies stand to benefit if ASEAN creates a more unified market because streamlined product standards and procedures across countries in the region could increase exports and improve the performance of U.S.-invested corporations within the region. While the United States appears unlikely to enter into a free trade agreement with ASEAN anytime soon, Washington has moved toward engaging with ASEAN on a more multilateral basis. Recently, U.S. and Chinese officials have been embroiled in currency disputes. A stronger China has given the United States an impetus to secure tighter diplomatic ties with ASEAN, given the importance of Southeast Asian sea-lanes for the flow of goods and oil, said former CSIS fellow Derek J. Mitchell, now the principal deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs.Though the United States ranks among the top five destinations for ASEAN exports outside the bloc, ASEAN has bristled in the past at a perceived lack of U.S. interest in other aspects of the group's affairs. There has been some truth in claims of U.S. indifference to the relationship, CFR's Smith says. "Many people in the American government find ASEAN frustrating to work with as a partner," she says. "The utility of ASEAN for America is questioned at times." CSIS's Bower points to President Barack Obama's three canceled trips to Indonesia and argues that a gap persists between the White House and ASEAN that represents "real challenges to extending U.S. influence in Asia."

Nonetheless, ASEAN remains the "go-to" organization for facilitating dialogue between major powers and Southeast Asia. "It's very low-key," Smith says, "but quite effective." Since taking office, the Obama administration has increased U.S. participation in ASEAN activities, naming an ambassador to ASEAN and establishing the U.S.ASEAN annual summit, providing a forum for the U.S. president to meet with the leaders of all ASEAN nations. Furthermore, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has attended all ASEAN regional forums during her time in office, a marked departure from former secretaries of States' sporadic attendance, say analysts. As this Council Special Report points out, increased engagement between the United States and ASEAN exemplifies the path of intensifying U.S. engagement in Asia, and the U.S.-ASEAN relationship will prove increasingly strategic as the United States jockeys for position in a dynamic region.he Association of Southeast Asian Nations[5] (ASEAN /si.n/ AH-see-ahn,[6] rarely /zi.n/ AH-zee-ahn)[7][8] is a geo-political and economic organization of ten countries located in Southeast Asia, which was formed on 8 August 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.[9] Since then, membership has expanded to include Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. Its aims include accelerating economic growth, social progress, cultural development among its members, protection of regional peace and stability, and opportunities for member countries to discuss differences peacefully.[10]ASEAN covers a land area of 4.46 million km, which is 3% of the total land area of Earth, and has a population of approximately 600 million people, which is 8.8% of the world's population. The sea area of ASEAN is about three times larger than its land counterpart. In 2010, its combined nominal GDP had grown to US$1.8 trillion.[11] If ASEAN were a single entity, it would rank as the ninth largest economy in the world, behind the United States, China, Japan, Germany, France, Brazil, the United Kingdom, and Italy. Policies Apart from consultations and consensus, ASEANs agenda-setting and decision-making processes can be usefully understood in terms of the so-called Track I and Track II. Track I refers to the practice of diplomacy among government channels. The participants stand as representatives of their respective states and reflect the official positions of their governments during negotiations and discussions. All official decisions are made in Track I. Therefore, "Track I refers to intergovernmental processes". [44] Track II differs slightly from Track I, involving civil society groups and other individuals with various links who work alongside governments.[45] This track enables governments to discuss controversial issues and test new ideas without making official statements or binding commitments, and, if necessary, backtrack on positions.Although Track II dialogues are sometimes cited as examples of the involvement of civil society in regional decision-making process by governments and other second track actors, NGOs have rarely got access to this track, meanwhile participants from the academic community are a dozen think-tanks. However, these think-tanks are, in most cases, very much linked to their respective governments, and dependent on government funding for their academic and policy-relevant activities, and many working in Track II have previous bureaucratic experience.[44] Their recommendations, especially in economic integration, are often closer to ASEANs decisions than the rest of civil societys positions.The track that acts as a forum for civil society in Southeast Asia is called Track III. Track III participants are generally civil society groups who represent a particular idea or brand.[46] Track III networks claim to represent communities and people who are largely marginalised from political power centres and unable to achieve positive change without outside assistance. This track tries to influence government policies indirectly by lobbying, generating pressure through the media. Thirdtrack actors also organise and/or attend meetings as well as conferences to get access to Track I officials.While Track II meetings and interactions with Track I actors have increased and intensified, rarely has the rest of civil society had the opportunity to interface with Track II. Those with Track I have been even rarer.Looking at the three tracks, it is clear that until now, ASEAN has been run by government officials who, as far as ASEAN matters are concerned, are accountable only to their governments and not the people. In a lecture on the occasion of ASEANs 38th anniversary, the incumbent Indonesian President Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono admitted:All the decisions about treaties and free trade areas, about declarations and plans of action, are made by Heads of Government, ministers and senior officials. And the fact that among the masses, there is little knowledge, let alone appreciation, of the large initiatives that ASEAN is taking on their behalf.[47]