ASEAN faces 'critical period' in a changing world

The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Wed, 01/17/2007 4:16 PM A | A | A | - Klipping the Jakarta Post

During their summit over the weekend, leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) approved a blueprint for the landmark ASEAN Charter. Former Indonesian foreign minister Ali Alatas, who represents Indonesia in the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) that drafted the charter, shared his view of the charter with The Jakarta Post's Abdul Khalik at the summit in Cebu, the Philippines.

Question: What is the importance of the charter?

Answer: After 40 years of existence, we finally have a legal basis or constitution to direct the course of our relations. This is very significant because besides providing legally-binding principles, the charter will give a very clear organizational structure to ASEAN.

At 40, ASEAN is facing a critical period in the changing world. It must reposition itself to be able to face this new situation and the challenges from greater interdependence, competition and the rise of new forces, such as China and India. One of the things that will make ASEAN different than before is the proposed principles and objectives. The old principles that we have agreed on, like non-interference and others, are still there. But we added new ones to show that ASEAN is adapting itself to the new challenges. We included democracy, good government, human rights and humanitarian laws.

Many said sanction mechanisms were the key thing to include in the charter. Is the EPG recommending their inclusion?

We can't let members just do what they like. If there is non-compliance with certain commitments or even certain basic principles and objectives, then there are measures to address this non-compliance.

Previously, we used the term sanction for this. But measures to address non-compliance means the same thing; it is simply softer. There will be an implementation monitoring mechanism. We will ask the (ASEAN) secretariat to be the monitoring body.

We discussed various measures. It can go as far as suspension of certain rights: for instance, suspension from participating in ASEAN meetings, of certain rights to chair meetings, etc. We also asked ourselves: should we go as far as expulsion?

The majority of ASEAN member countries thought we were a special group and like a family. We should not think of expelling any one of us, nor should we allow any one of us to withdraw from ASEAN as we know that the other side of expulsion is withdrawal. Several members, however, want expulsion to be included.

At the last minute of a long discussion and compromise, we said expulsion would only be decided on by heads of state and government in very extraordinary cases. So, the door is open for expulsion but it is not the rule. The rule is only suspension.

What about the decision-making process? Will there be votes?

So far, we have used consensus to reach decisions. But, while consensus is good to develop a sense of equality among big and small members, as well as mutual solidarity, it is a negative when it impedes agreement.

Sometimes, only one or two members prevent consensus because they disagree, so no decision is made. So we are subject to the lowest common denominator if we stick to consensus all the time. That's why we now open the door to voting.

So we are saying consensus remains the primary method for very important issues -- for instance, political issues or decisions on suspension so that one or two countries don't feel they are left out of the process. On less sensitive issues, like economic issues, if no consensus can be reached then we can go on to a vote.

As to when there will be a vote and on what issues as well as what kind of voting criteria, whether it should be a majority, simple majority or two-thirds majority vote, we leave it to the leaders and to the rules of procedure to be decided on by the task force.

Many people complain that ASEAN is no more than officials talking, that it doesn't touch on the needs of the people. Does EPG recommend something for the charter on this?

As per the request of the heads of state and government, we tried to draw up a charter which would change ASEAN into a more people-centered organization, not just a place for government officials and diplomats. During our work, we asked civil society to come and tell us what they want and how they see ASEAN and so on.

We talked to AIPO (ASEAN Inter-Parliament Organization), think-tanks such as the ISEAS (Institute of Southeast Asian Studies) and various other groups.

We decided that one way to make sure that their views are constantly being heard is to have a regular channel of communication at all levels of ASEAN.

You talk about giving ASEAN a clear organizational structure. Can you elaborate?

We also made a proposal on the organizational structure -- for instance, the summit of heads of state and government we call the ASEAN Council. We recommend that they meet more than once a year or twice a year. We suggest this because during their current once-a-year meeting, they talk a lot because of limited time.

The secretariat and the secretary general must also be strengthened.

The organizational structure must owe its origin to the fact that we are now moving from an association to a community. So, we propose the ASEAN Council remain at the top, comprising heads of state and government. Below it, there are three ministerial councils for each of the three pillars of the community -- one political and security, one economic, and one socio-cultural council.

Then, we should also establish a new body, called the ASEAN Institution, because we found that the secretariat lacks the capacity for thorough research and analysis and so on. They are taken up too much by day-to-day tasks.

How does the charter contribute to development within ASEAN, especially in the less-developed areas?

We talk a lot about how to close the development gap between certain new members and older members of ASEAN. Up until now, we have only tried to narrow the gap through projects, such as the Mekong Delta Project. But now, we are proposing special funds for it. The funds consist of voluntary contributions and innovative arrangements. We have asked our financial experts to study whether we can, for instance, raise the funds from sales taxes and airport taxes from all countries.