ASEAN is one type of regionalism in Southeast Asia. The emergence of recent actors in global politics has created recent priorities, one among which is regional integration. The existence of this regional organization will in turn advance the national interests of every member state. It is anticipated that diverse cooperation inside this organization will have the opportunity to keep up the soundness of the regionalism process.
In its formation, ASEAN’s presence can’t be separated from Cold War rivalry. It is due to this fact not surprising that many regional organizations that were established throughout the Cold War weren’t removed from politics and security issues. The development of regionalism on this era was based on several aspects. First, there are similarities in history and customary problems between regional countries. Second, regional countries are more interconnected than those of non-regional countries. Finally, the existence of international organizations provides a platform for establishing common rules of the sport.
As a regional organization, there are still many parties that imagine that ASEAN stays stagnant. With the unique goal of stopping communist entry into Southeast Asia, ASEAN has yet to make significant contributions to regional integration. One of the largest obstacles is the principle of non-interference in ASEAN.
Regional integration that should be created
In general, the existence of regional organizations is capable of increase regional integration due to the cooperation carried out in these organizations. Additionally, regional organizations should provide exclusivity to their members on certain issues, akin to providing their members with the convenience of removing trade barriers, but not for third countries. In this case, ASEAN already has a visa-free policy between ASEAN countries for a period of 30 days, but such integration policy continues to be very limited and never yet fragmented.
In fact, cooperation between ASEAN countries is more in the shape of bilateral cooperation. ASEAN is just seen as a 3rd party or mediator on this inter-state cooperation. The lack of interdependence between Member States makes the combination process even harder. The ASEAN regional organization doesn’t play a serious role in increasing trade activity in its member countries. Cooperation in ASEAN tends to be not only bilateral, but only between states and never between non-state actors.
Moreover, the degree of involvement of members in ASEAN is just not that great. For example, within the European Union organization, there are agreements that bind its members and penalties for members who violate the agreements. In fact, this binding agreement can create a robust degree of attachment. If the degree of attachment is powerful, then the regional organization is more robust.
A better have a look at ASEAN’s principle of non-intervention
Although ASEAN has often organized international forums akin to the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), it has unfortunately shown its ineffectiveness in negotiations. The lack of formal crisis management institutions in ASEAN and the shortcoming to talk in unison is a weakness affecting ASEAN integration. Not to say the principle of non-interference between ASEAN member states, enshrined within the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation. Unfortunately, the existence of this principle has meant that ASEAN has at all times had very contradictory political attitudes, despite the fact that they’re members of the identical regional cooperation forum.
Historically, the intensity of war in Southeast Asia has been less devastating than the First and Second World Wars in continental Europe. This might be used as a reason why the spirit of integration is far stronger in Europe than in Southeast Asia. However, historically speaking, most Southeast Asian countries even have something in common: they were each colonized. Undoubtedly, the principle of non-interference in ASEAN was created because the problem of sovereignty is sensitive for ASEAN countries. Ultimately, nonetheless, this historical aspect also became a challenge within the ASEAN integration process.
The existence of regional organizations should have the opportunity to unravel regional problems, but unfortunately ASEAN is unable to achieve this. For example, the 2011 territorial dispute between Thailand and Cambodia over the ownership of the Preah Vihear Temple. ASEAN, as a regional authority, was unable to mediate the conflict and had at hand it over to the United Nations. ASEAN’s intervention in response to Cambodia’s request for assistance was rejected by Thailand on the idea of the prohibition on interference in the inner affairs of member states. The variety of conflicts amongst ASEAN countries and the shortcoming of ASEAN to intervene in these conflicts clearly constitute an obstacle to ASEAN integration.
The way forward for ASEAN
As a regional organization, ASEAN has an enormous gap between the people and the ASEAN institution itself. ASEAN is more synonymous with cooperation between countries, governments and officials than between residents. In other words, the mere existence of ASEAN is less effective because existing cooperation only takes place at the federal government level. Not to say that ASEAN’s inefficiency is obvious within the economic disparities amongst its members. In fact, ASEAN continues to be unable to scale back the economic gap between its members.
As a regional organization, ASEAN’s level of cooperation continues to be on the intergovernmental stage and has no formal authority to control organizational policy. Thanks to this, the organization becomes horizontal. Unfortunately, this has an impact on ASEAN’s difficulty in controlling the state of the region, one among which is the issue in limiting regional conflicts. Bureaucracy in ASEAN continues to be not as high as within the European Union, politics in ASEAN is just not as mass, and the concept of regional integration continues to be not equally accepted by the Southeast Asian community, each when it comes to political elites, non-governmental organizations, formal and informal transnational groups.
When it involves law and policy enforcement, the principle of non-intervention needs to be re-evaluated and altered to a principle of responsible care. Rule change must even be based on the principle of deliberation and consensus, while prioritizing the interests of residents of the ASEAN region. Furthermore, openness and transparency needs to be promoted in every decision-making process to extend trust between countries. ASEAN must even have clear formal powers, an emergency policy-making mechanism, and a control mechanism that may bind member states inside a regional organization, especially to handle regional issues.
Nevertheless, ASEAN still hopes for higher integration. One of them is the introduction of visa-free travel between ASEAN countries. This is just not easy. For one country, opening borders may increase the opportunity of threats to that country. On the opposite hand, cooperation initiatives on cross-border payments have also been launched amongst several ASEAN countries. While not all ASEAN countries are involved, this may occasionally provide hope for the longer term where ASEAN can turn out to be higher integrated. Achieving optimal regional integration will take an extended time. It due to this fact requires continuous efforts across sectors and the commitment of all Member States to realize it.
Reference:
-
Peimani, H. (2020). The collapse of the EU and consequences for ASEAN. ADBI Working Paper 1140. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute.
-
Martin, Ali, Sugiarto Pramono. (2011). Factors driving regional integration. Spectrum: Journal of Political Science of International Relations, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 27-38
-
Mahendra, Yustika Citra. (2016). Regionalism responds to human security: A case study of ASEAN on human security issues. Transformation Journal, volume. 3) No. 1, pp. 66-69
