The Nation News (25-6-99)

[mandalay@xxxxxxxxxx]

<bold>Burma champions Asean values ?

</bold>

Burma is talking Asean by the horns and is incrementally becoming the
defender of Asean values. Two recent trends show how.


At the recent meeting of the Asean standing committee in Bali, Indonesia,
the Burmese delegation circulated a piece of paper containing the five
principles to guide Asean. They were taken verbatim from the speech of
Singapore Foreign Minister S Jayakumar of 1997, on the eve of the
welcoming ceremony of Burma as the ninth member of Asean in Kuala
Lumpur.


It quoted Jayakumar as saying Asean is guided by the principles of
equality and non-interference in domestic affairs. In addition,Asean
cannot condone the use of force to change an established government or an
internationally recognised political order and the need to have open
economies based on free markets. Finally, all Asean members have made
Asean the cornerstone of their foreign policy.


Asean officials were flabbergasted. It was the first time that a member
has done anything like that. No one knew the motive of Burma, but suffice
it to say that Burma wants to remind Asean of its state of being and its
principles that have governed Asean for the past three decades.


Burma has joined Asean for two years and its membership has become the
main source of friction among Asean members and the rest of its dialogue
partners. Canada, one of the biggest donors to Asean, has joined the
European Union in hardening its position against the Asean grouping. It
has recently informed Asean that it will not welcome Burma to attend the
upcoming joint Asean-Canada committee meeting. So far, Burma has not
contributed to the strengthening of the Asean fabric and polishing up of
its international image.


On the contrary, since Asean admitted Burma, the grouping's resputation
has plummeted to ground zero. It is now reaching the point where it can
affect the post ministerial meeting between Asean and its Western
dialogue partners next month.


Therefore, Burma's wise tactic of citing the words of Jayakumar has
helped because it has disarmed the rest of Asean even though it was
Singapore's interpretation of Asean, and not shared by all members.


Over the weekend in Geneva, at the conference of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO), by a vote of 333 in favour to 27 against, Asean,
including Thailand, voted against the resolution condemning Burma's

long-standing policy of practising forced labour. The resolution also
banned Burma from participating in any ILO activities and assistance
until Burma changes its labour policy. Both Thai representatives of trade
unions and employers' groups had the good sense and wisdom to join the
rest of the world to vote for the resolution.


Before the voting, Thailand was thinking of abstaining but somehow it
chose at the very end to support Burma's terrible suppression.Thailand
will have to pay a high prize for its decision. One immediate effect
would be the dwindling support for Dr Supachai Panichpakdi's bid for the
World Trade Organisation's top job.


Everybody knows that Thailand has a weakness on labour-related issues.
Even though the country has tried to improve its labour standards in the
past years, foreign trade unions and non-governmental organisations have
continued to urge Thailand to do more. The voting in Geneva has also
confirmed one facet of Thailand- the inconsistency of the Chuan
government's foreign policy. It wavers under pressure and those declared
principles of human rights, democracy and civil societies remain mere
slogans. When need be, Thailand fails to show leadership.


Burma's assertiveness and Asean's collective defence of the new member's
illrecord were unprecedented and came at the time when plenty of
questions have been asked about the future of the organisation. It also
comes at the end of Singapore's Asean chairmanship. Next month, Thailand
will serve as the new chairman. Bangkok will prepare Asean's year-long
activities and programmes. It is not difficult to see the linkage between
Burma's game plans and Thailand's upcoming chairmanship.


Apparently, Rangoon is pre-empting Asean from undertaking any new steps
that are outside of Singapore's five principles.


The Asean foreign ministers will have a retreat on Sentoza Island ahead
of their annual meeting next month in Singapore on two important topics:
future of Asean and the future of Asean Regional Forum. Indonesian
Foreign Minister Ali Alatas and Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan have been
tasked to present their views on these two issues respectively.


As the most senior Asean foreign minister, Alatas will outline the
crucial developments that have taken place in the region, including the
democratisation process in his own country. It is anybody's guess what
would be his assessment of the future and direction of Asean now that the
grouping's largest member has already become more open and freer.


Will the latest development in Indonesia have any impact on Jakarta's
Asean policy and the future of Asean as a whole? Alatas probably has the
answer.


When Surin presents the future of the ARF at the ministerial retreat, at
the top of his mind will be steps to ensure Asean's leading role in the
region-wide security forum. But mere words probably would not help much;
concrete measures have to be taken by Asean members to move the ARF
process forward. But then again, can Asean do that given its current
widening gaps of perceptions and developments in terms of political and
security areas?



The newly-formed Asean Eminent Persons Group, which met early this month,
has been tasked to prepare a report on the Asean's future for the
grouping's leaders at the summit in Singapore next year. The group will
discuss the Asean Vision 2020, post-Asean crisis economic scenarios, food
security, civil societies and Asean Monetary Fund.


Many questions linger. Can the Asean wise men ignore the democratisation
in Indonesia and focus only on ways to promote economic cooperation even
if the current economic problems are rooted in political dictatorship and
cronyism? Is it possible for Asean to promote its international role by
remaining a political dinosaur and working only through economic
integration? Can Asean compete with a more liberal Mercusor-grouping
Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay-or other outward-looking
organisations?


It is ironic that Burma has quickly become the standard bearer of Asean
in the absence of real leadership in the grouping. If positive
developments in the region, highlighted through democratisation and
openness, have been ignored, one wonders how long Asean members have to
speak and use the rhetoric coming from Rangoon before real changes can
take place.


These are challenges confronting Asean when it prepares for the
transition into the 21st century. Thailand has a special responsibility
to usher Asean along. If Thailand has to pretend and act while the
democratisation of the Thai political system and economic recovery cannot
help Asean transform itself into a better organisation, then why should
Thailand stick around.