[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

the nation: about the asean




Editorial & Opinion 

REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE: 

Asean's wise men face difficult task

When the 10-member Asean Eminent Persons' Group met in Singapore early last
week, it was the first time the private sectors from member countries really
got involved in the broad scheme of things related to the future of Asean. 

In the past, Asean utilised experienced bureaucrats and businessmen in
Asean to
undertake studies to seek independent views and recommendations to improve its
overall organisational structure or accelerate economic cooperation under its
auspices. Issues past groups considered included the increased power and
mandate of the secretary-general of Asean, the Asean Free Trade Area,
expansion
of ties with dialogue partners and improved Asean functional cooperation. 
Two years ago, a wise-men group was set up and tasked with finding ways and
means to promote Asean-EU relations. But they failed to anticipate the
far-reaching consequence of the admission of Burma for the grouping's ties
with
the European Union. But this time around the newly-appointed eminent persons'
group has a new job -- to provide insights and ideas to guide the Asean
leaders
in planning for their grouping's future. 
At the Hanoi summit last December, Singapore Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong
recommended that private sectors be brought into the Asean circuit at the
planning stage to shape the future of Asean. Although Asean has already
come up
with two key documents, Asean Vision 2020 and the Hanoi Action Plan, they have
nothing to do with the private sectors. 
Scholars from Asean, mainly through various security and strategic
think-tanks,
known as Asean-Isis, contributed to the earlier drafts of Asean Vision 2020
but
at the end of the day the bureaucrats prevailed. 
The new wise-men group comprises persons chosen by member countries. The Thai
Foreign Ministry has picked Mechai Viravaidya, who heads the Telephone
Organisation of Thailand and has hordes of other responsibilities. Other
countries' choices are culled from academic and government circles. For
instance, Indonesia is represented by Cornelius Luhulima, an independent
strategic analyst, and Vietnam by its former permanent representative to the
United Nations, Trinh Xuan Lang. 
The group plans to meet three times over the next 12 to 18 months. Bangkok
will

host the next meeting in August. Their report will be ready by the next Asean
summit in Singapore in December 2000. 
The first meeting was a bit awkward because each of them knew Asean in
different ways and under different capacities. Most importantly, they also had
different expectations, reflecting the state of affairs of the countries they
represented. The group was asked to make recommendations to the Asean leaders
on how to promote peace and stability, develop Southeast Asia into an economic
region with free flow of goods, services, investments and capital, and examine
Asean's role in regional and international affairs. 
As to be expected, members from both Thailand and the Philippines were talking
about civil societies and how Asean can achieve that objective. Others were
more interested in improving the role of private sectors in promoting trade
and
investment. A member suggested that it was about time that richer Asean
members
assisted less developed or poor members. 
These ideas were not new. They had been discussed before by Asean officials.
But the outcome of their deliberations failed to reach the highest level. Back
in 1995, there was talk within Asean about a mini-Marshall Plan to help the
new
members joining Asean. The idea did not fly because the Asean senior officials
did not want to create a precedence that would divide Asean into haves and
have-nots. 
It will be interesting to see what will eventually be the recommendations made
by the wise men given the radical changes that have taken place within the
region. One thing is obvious. There will be a great disparity of views among
the group members. With Indonesia moving towards democracy, after last week's
smooth and trouble-free election, the 10 wise men have to think seriously
about
its ramifications. 
Judging from the statements from the host, Singapore, it is clear the Asean
wise men's main purview is to focus on two themes: economic cooperation and
the
group's role in the region and the world at large. But it is not easy to
discuss all these without venturing into sensitive topics related to political
development. 
Since Asean never considered political preference as a criterion in admitting
new members, that very issue is coming back to haunt Asean. Essentially, it
will all boil down to each member's political structure. There is only so much
Asean members can talk on economic cooperation. In the European Union,
aspiring
members have to go through transitional stages to prepare for their eventual
membership. Certain political standards have to be achieved before they join
the EU. Among the four newest members, Burma spent the shortest time to gain
admission to Asean and it came while the whole world was condemning the
junta's
human rights record. 
Bluntly put, it would be difficult to improve on the Vision 2020 and the Hanoi
Action Plan if the wise men are reluctant to touch on sensitive issues related
to socio-political development. The economic crisis is a blessing is disguise
for Asean as it has helped to expose the inherent weaknesses of the grouping
and its members. Only one or two members have faced future challenges through

domestic reforms. 
For Thailand, the stakes are very high. As incoming chairman of Asean at the
end of next month, Bangkok can play an important role in ushering Asean into
21st century. It must ensure that the wise men really do the wise things,
especially to restore the credibility of Asean in the international community.
Admittedly, it is a fiendishly difficult task to pull together views from
different extremes and turn them into practical ideas. But one never knows.
After all, Asean is known as the organisation that tolerates political
expediency if it serves the group's purposes. 
BY KAVI CHONGKITTAVORN 
The Nation