Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Indonesia’s outreach to Latin America



A- A A+
Appraisals of Indonesian foreign policy have frequently highlighted the 1955 Asian-African Conference, when Indonesia was considered to be at the forefront of an emerging force in international politics.

Often claimed as a fine era in Indonesian diplomacy, this account has imprinted the need to continuously cultivate relations with Africa.

Of course, such traditional ties should be seen in a positive light. However, it is important that they do not condition Indonesia into overlooking ties with “less traditional” partners elsewhere, such as Latin America.

The distance between Indonesia and Latin America may be enough to dishearten even the keenest proponent for stronger ties. A distance of 12,000 kilometers separates Jakarta and Quito, Ecuador’s capital city, twice farther than between Jakarta and Cape Town at the southern tip of Africa.

Furthermore, the lack of direct flights means it takes Indonesians 24 hours or more to get to most Latin American cities. However, such trips may be well worth it.

For long the home of countries constantly in need of IMF sustenance, Latin America now hosts some of the most dynamic economies in the world. They offer an expanding market and purchasing power as well as a young and growing population.

And with poverty levels at their lowest in history, the region is demonstrating commendable resilience due to its stable macroeconomic policies and prudent fiscal measures.

From 2003, Latin America experienced an average annual gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate of almost 5 percent until the 2008 recession hit the region.

However, while many continue to suffer from the repercussions of the crisis, Latin American economies bounced back in 2010, and are predicted to expand by 3.7 percent in 2012.

Brazil and Mexico are members of the G20. And this year G20 Summit host Mexico has invited Colombia and Chile, thus further showcasing Latin America’s economic progress and its demand to be heard more in the global economy.

The Monroe Doctrine had reduced Latin America to being viewed only as the United States’ backyard for almost two centuries. Furthermore, emotional ties to “the Old Continent” have remained prevalent.

However, as these countries have adopted more independent approaches in diplomacy, many have recently gained a fondness for irritating the old establishments in the West.

In its place, outreach to the East has gained considerable popularity.

With this as a backdrop, surely there must be advantages ripe for Indonesia’s picking. As more traditional economic partners in Europe and North America remain troubled by financial crises, Indonesia must develop alternatives, exploring and capitalizing on new markets. There seems no better time to take Indonesia’s cooperation with Latin America to a higher level.

Although Indonesia’s ties with Latin America have existed since the start of the Republic, such ties have not been maximized, for example in trade and investment. In 2010, Indonesia-Latin America trade amounted to US$6.7 billion, or just around 2.9 percent of Indonesia’s total.

Indonesia’s trade with Japan alone that same year was $47.7 billion. But if we compare these statistics to those related to Africa ($4.2 billion in 2010), then the prospect of Indonesia’s cooperation with Latin America seems promising.

Undeniably, there is continuous progress, as in 2011, Indonesia-Latin American trade went up to
$8.3 billion — a staggering 24 percent increase. Indonesia’s relations with Latin America have evolved predominantly at the government-to-government level.

However, in order to step up such cooperation, efforts must also be targeted at enhancing people-to-people contacts, especially cooperation among businesses.

Therefore, it comes as a breath of fresh air that Indonesia’s Trade Minister led a trade delegation in March 2012 to Brazil, Chile and Peru to expand markets for Indonesian products.

This becomes an urgent matter especially when observing that other Southeast Asian neighbors have already had a head start in building economic ties with Latin America.

In 2010, Thailand’s trade with South America (not including regional powerhouse Mexico and a handful of Central American countries) stood at $6.84 billion, which then jumped to $8.55 billion the following year. These all indicated numbers superior to those of Indonesia.

Not only that, this year Thailand launched a free trade agreement (FTA) with Peru, one of the world’s mining superpowers, with a banking sector considered as among the healthiest in Latin America.

This deal is expected to further boost Thailand’s trade numbers within the region. A free trade agreement with Chile, the only OECD country south of the Panama Canal, is also scheduled to be completed before the end of the year.

In the case of Malaysia, which also has an FTA with Chile, officials have lauded the benefits of dealing with Latin American economies that are growing faster than the US, Europe or Japan.

Turning to Latin America provides a means to diversify Malaysia’s export markets, thus lessening the dependence on economies presently suffering from crises.

Not only that, there is a growing belief that many Malaysian products — such as electronics, clothing, machinery and metal and rubber products — are suited to the demands and requirements of markets in Latin America.

Undoubtedly, Latin America’s interest in Asia has largely been dedicated to “the usual suspects”: China, Japan, and South Korea. While Japan remains Latin America’s leading investor, there aren’t too many that can resist China’s growing economic lure these days.

However, as Asia is poised to overtake the US and Europe as Latin America’s top trading partner over the next decade, the economic pie may be big enough for other Asian countries to enjoy as well. At the end of the day, the onus is on Indonesia to ensure that it is not left without a seat at the table.

Indonesia has attempted to push for greater cross-Pacific cooperation through dialogues between ASEAN and MERCOSUR, the most dominant economic sub-grouping in Latin America.

Indonesia also tries to take advantage of its involvement in the Forum for East Asia Latin America Cooperation (FEALAC). As well, other forums containing Latin American countries (such as APEC) have been used to generate greater interaction.

At the bilateral level, while the larger Latin American countries have long had representations in Indonesia, others are only recently following suit.

In 2009, Ecuador reopened its embassy in Jakarta; Paraguay has also revealed plans to do the same. The opening of these embassies not only symbolizes Latin America’s interest in Asia’s growing economy, but also as appreciation of Indonesia’s role in this positive trend. In 2010, Indonesia opened its embassies in Quito and Panama City.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s visit to Latin America on June 18-25 to, among other things, attend the G20 Summit in Mexico and the Rio+20 Summit in Brazil, respectively, will also provide an occasion to enhance Indonesia’s exposure in Latin America and its people. Meanwhile, in Ecuador, President Yudhoyono will dedicate his visit — one of the first by any ASEAN leader — toward enhancing bilateral ties with this oil-rich country.

Indeed, more significant than the barrier of distance, the strengthening of Indonesia-Latin America ties requires the overcoming of barriers of the mind. Most Indonesians know of Latin America’s footballing prowess; however, stronger economic ties with the region may be an idea too vague for many to imagine.

Then again, if it is possible to form a lasting brotherhood with Africa on the basis of a historical event 57 years ago, then current trends are pointing at how sensible it is to imagine a brotherhood with Latin America and maximize on it too.

The writer is an assistant to Presidential Special Staff for international affairs. The opinions expressed are his own.

Thursday, June 14, 2012

The euro crisis and its impact on Indonesia’s economy



At the beginning of 2012, economists expressed optimism regarding the future of the eurozone after a second bailout package for Greece of ¤130 billion plus ¤1 trillion of low-interest, long-term loans from the European Central Bank (ECB) were granted in December 2011. At that time, markets were convinced that Europe would recover from its prolonged crisis even though that recovery might take time.

This optimism was further underpinned by improved economic conditions in the US, after it published its latest economic data, which revealed lower unemployment and higher growth projection.

Nevertheless, this respite only lasted a few months as Europe now once again faces economic terrors. One of the causes is the dispute between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and new French President François Hollande. Merkel shares the same vision with Sarkozy, France’s former president, namely to squeeze the budget through the Fiscal Austerity Plan. On the other hand, Hollande has been given a mandate by the French voters to alter austerity into economic growth, even though it will mean more government debts. The dispute between the leaders of Europe’s two largest economies is undermined further by the upcoming vote in Greece.

Following Greece’s second vote since the crisis hit, political parties in the country have been struggling to form a government. If voters choose to reject the spending cuts and bailout from Europe, the crisis could deteriorate into something far worse. If this happens, Germany, as Europe’s largest debtor nation, would be trapped between two difficult choices: 1) follow the wishes of the Greek voters, which could contain moral hazards, or 2) remove Greece from the eurozone (also called Greexit).

Either of these two options would seriously impact on European economies and would not necessarily guarantee a resolution to the crisis.

If the Greek crisis remains unabated, Europe’s peripheral economies, such as Spain, Portugal and Ireland, may be exposed to the contagion. If this occurs, such an event would clearly provide a new wave of negative sentiment that could plunge the global economy into another recession.

Overall, Indonesia’s economy has not been too affected by the euro crisis, as Europe is not the country’s main export destination. Indonesian exports mostly go to Asian countries, such as China and Japan. The share of Indonesia’s exports in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) is also relatively small compared to other export-oriented countries like China or Singapore. In addition, Indonesia can rely on its domestic market, thanks to its huge population.

Indonesia proved its resilience when it survived the 2008 crisis, which was triggered by the Lehman Brothers’ shock.

So far, Indonesia’s economic indicators have shown remarkable results. According to Haver Analytics think tank, GDP growth during the first quarter (Q1) of 2012 was recorded at 6.3 percent, and growth for 2012 is predicted by the Economist Intelligence Unit to be around 5.9 percent due to the global economic slowdown.

Year-on-year inflation as of April 2012 was relatively low (4.5 percent) and still within Bank Indonesia’s inflation targeting range (4.5 percent to 1 percent). In addition, the interest benchmark is set at 5.75 percent. The unemployment rate during QI 2012 was recorded at 6.3 percent, better than India (9.8 percent), the UK (8.2 percent) and the US (8.1 percent).

At least, these statistics show that Indonesia has good economic fundamentals amid the global economic uncertainty. Nevertheless, the main issue might come from the financial sector, as reflected by the falling stock exchange (JSX) in May 2012. At the beginning of May, the JSX reached its highest level (4,226) but since then it has been on a progressive downturn, reaching its lowest level since March 2012, at 3,902.

Moreover, the bond market has also been affected since most government bonds showed sharp corrections last week. Further, the rupiah is also depreciating against the US dollar, which hit Rp 9,600 to the dollar on May 29, its weakest level in 30 months.

One of the causes of this financial turbulence is the immaturity of the domestic financial market, with foreign investors still playing a crucial role in the marketplace. It was evident, for instance, in the mass withdrawal of money by panicking foreign investors due to the worsening global economy. The JSX recorded net sales of stock worth Rp 968 billion with total transactions of Rp 4.87 trillion (Bisnis Indonesia, May 25).

In other words, foreign investors can have a positive impact during healthy market conditions, but can deal a significant blow to the Indonesian economy if there is negative sentiment toward global economic conditions.

Hence, it is necessary to increase our awareness regarding the importance of the domestic financial market. By utilizing more local investors, Indonesia’s financial market would be more resilient from external shocks.

Another possible cause of the fluctuations is the lack of government credibility. One example is the uncertain implementation of the subsidized-fuel reduction. The unclear decision-making process caused the JSX to move reluctantly in February and March. The ongoing uncertainty has also prevented businessmen from adjusting their costs in order to efficiently run their businesses.

Another adverse impact of this bad policy-making is the delay of Standard and Poor’s decision to upgrade Indonesia’s investment rating, despite, fortunately, still giving a positive outlook on Indonesia’s economy. In this regard, a paper by Canavan and Tommasi from Boston University concludes that a more credible government would be more capable of executing policies than one with an unclear policy-making strategy.

Hence, in order to increase the government’s credibility in times of crisis, it should implement unambiguous policies in order to prevent uncertainty, which can lead to negative perceptions. In other words, policy implementation should be based solely on objective considerations that provide positive welfare rather than merely political interests. By doing so, policy implementation would work efficiently.

In summary, Indonesia’s economy is resilient enough to prevent the contagious effect of the European crisis due to its positive outlook, which is supported by strong domestic purchasing power.

The impact of the euro crisis could be minimized further by enhancing the role of local investors. If this happens, the market will be able to withstand any shocks resulting from foreign-fund withdrawals.

Above all, clear decision-making is a must to prevent public confusion that could eventually put the national economy at risk.

The writer is credit analyst at The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ. The opinions expressed are his own.

Asia: ‘The Sunrise’ in a globalized centur


Klipping The Jakarta Post

A- A A+
There is a Japanese saying: “The name speaks for itself”. This appears to be true in reflecting the current global economic and geopolitical landscape. Asia, meaning “sunrise” in Greek and “East” in Assyrian, is clearly rising, and its time has come to be dubbed as the “Asian Century”.

At the other end of the spectrum, the word Europe comes from the Phoenician word EROB, which means “where the sun sets”, reflecting the now crumbling Europe due to its economic meltdown. America’s Germanic origin means “ever-powerful in battle”, which aptly reflects the US as the omnipresent military might.

What will the Asian Century be like against the backdrop of the crumbling Europe and the US’ military might? Will the sun keep rising in the East? Or will the Asian Century, like a comet, disappear all too soon, never to return for a very long time? There are at least two ways to look at how the Asian Century will turn out: How Asia strengthens itself as a region and how Asia interacts with other powers within the global system.

Although power is not equal to strength, Asia’s strength will only come if there is a balance of power in the region. However, there is still a great deal of misunderstanding, confusion and mistrust, as well as uncertainty, among individual countries and in regards to the state of the region, which leads to a rivalry of power with one country trying to dominate the others instead of trying to find a balance.

Most recently, the Obama administration referred to a “pivot toward Asia”, which was revised to a “rebalancing toward Asia” in deference to the unease of some Asian countries. Unfortunately, as Hugh White from the Australian National University pointed out, there are many people in Washington who still believe that the reason behind the US’ decision to stay in the region is to dominate, not to balance.

Asia will need to develop new norms in this new Asian Century. On the one hand, the US wants to preserve its values in the region. The fact that the Chinese Vice President’s (the coming Chinese President's) daughter, Xi Mingze (daughter of Xi Jinping), is currently being schooled at Harvard University is testimony to US soft power in continuing to influence the Asian Century’s new norms. On the other hand, China’s rise will certainly see new norms evolve, although these new norms will not, and should not, only be China’s. Despite the fact that during the recent National People’s Congress, which started on March 5, 2012, China’s outgoing prime minister Wen Jiabao said that democracy in China was inevitable, China may have its own interpretation of and way to implement democracy.

Middle-power countries should engineer new norms in Asia, especially in security practices. Middle-power countries do not want to be in a position where they have to make a choice: either China or the US. But most importantly, there has to be effective regional governance architecture in place to establish these new norms that would take into account all the countries in the region. The East Asia Summit (EAS) where economic, political and strategic issues are discussed, could be a potentially effective forum, or at least be preserved to be able to accommodate such discussions, to create a regional level playing field.

Economic integration within Asia is likely to become stronger, especially with the European banking and sovereign-debt crisis, which will impact the US sooner or later and is unlikely to end in the near future.

The global economy needs the region to gravitate. The Asian Century will also depend on how resilient Asia is to Europe’s economic woes. So far, at least, most Asian countries have been able to maneuver their fiscal and monetary policies to weather the crisis.

In spite of rosy economic predictions, domestic political evolution in the region will also prove to be a factor as to how the Asian Century economy will perform.

The next question is: How does Asia interact within the global system? This depends on which countries constitute Asia and who speaks for Asia. There are five Asian countries at the G20 table: China, Japan, South Korea, India and Indonesia. However, there is no single, unified Asian voice. Asia has so far failed to coordinate.

Moreover, there is no clear way of how Asia relates the G20 to Asia’s existing regional architecture. Indonesia, as the only Southeast Asian country at ASEAN’s head table, has not yet fully extended its hand to reach out to its neighboring ASEAN countries, which is why its neighbors are either indifferent, jealous or opposing the G20.

Asian G20 countries should use the convoluted regional architecture, including the EAS and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), to improve the legitimacy of the G20 and Asia’s interaction within the global system. Meanwhile, South Asian countries should not hold economic integration hostage because of political conflicts, and East Asian countries should leave behind their historical mutual bitterness.

Most Asian G20 countries see the G20 as the best way to relate to the rest of the world and China sees it as the best way to reform global governance, away from the current model of a US-owned family business, to a shareholding model. If Asia could act collectively in a coordinated way to interact with the global system in the economic sector and beyond, it could certainly strengthen its voice in the global system and bring the Asian Century under its leadership.

In keeping with its name, Asia must rise and shine.

The writer is a researcher at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and a lecturer at the University of Indonesia.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Indonesian diaspora and our true face of nationalism


Klipping The Jakarta Post

A- A A+
Ambassador Dino Pati Djalal’s initiative to hold a Congress of the Indonesian diaspora in Los Angeles, US, this July reminds me of what Bung Karno, our first president, said decades ago: “Ours is not a narrow nationalism.” This meant that Indonesia’s was not a fascist type of nationalism, but was a nationalism in the greater framework of internationalism and humanism.

I perceive Dino’s initiative as a firm step to realizing Bung Karno’s vision. History is a continuum. Books may separate one government from the other, label one as an “order” and the other as a “regime” – history, however, cannot be separated that way. History is continuity.

Bung Karno’s vision was not based on any particular political party agenda. His vision transcended the often-conflicting interests of political parties. He was a statesman and his vision was the vision of Indonesia and the world to come.

Dino is fulfilling that very vision of the late statesman. He is reaching out to Indonesians who are not only working and living abroad, but who may also have obtained foreign citizenship.

I am reminded of an old Bollywood song, “My shoes are made in Japan; my trousers are English; and my red hat is Russian; yet, my heart is all Indian.” Similarly, the Indonesian Diaspora Congress is a clear message to all our brothers and sisters living abroad that wherever they are, whatever be their citizenship, they are still Indonesians in spirit.

The congress from July 6 to 8 has a long list of topics to discuss, but much more than that I see it as a convention to bring together us, Indonesians, separated by seas and political boundaries.

This, then, I perceive as the realization of Sukarno’s nationalism in the larger framework of internationalism.

As I write these lines, the nation celebrates.

With the birth of Pancasila on June 1, 1945, in a historic speech that shall be remembered by generations to come, Sukarno introduced the five guiding principles of our national ideology — Pancasila. As he conceived it then, the sila of humanity was the very first principle. So above all, humanity.

The second principle was that of togetherness and national unity. The Indonesian Diaspora Congress, as I see it, is an attempt to stretch the meaning of this principle. The congress attempts to reinterpret it in the context of our modern world, with all its complexities. This is commendable.

So, you can be a citizen of any country and yet you can retain your identity as an Indonesian national. This is the true spirit of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, appearing as many, but being essentially one.

It is not lip service to unity, but is unity based upon a realization that we all are essentially one. We all are Indonesians, and a step further, we all are human beings and are the residents of the Earth.

The third principle is “democracy” that is not based upon majority-minority dichotomy, but upon the spirit of one for all, all for one, and above all “all for all”.

So, as the Dalai Lama often advises us, as we strive for happiness, we should also bear in mind that all other beings are equally striving for happiness. We cannot think of our own happiness alone. Think about others.

Indeed, we have our own brand and understanding of democracy that is uniquely Indonesian — dialogue-based democracy — dialogue that leads to a unanimous decision. We did not have to learn the win-win theory from modern day motivators. We have it in our blood.

The fourth principle is general well-being and social justice. Our ancients always prayed for all to be happy. Our ancestors never prayed for their own well being alone.

It is only then, having worked on those four principles of humanity, unity, democracy and social well being, that we can come to the principle of religiosity, the spirit of all religions.

So, O Lord God, help us. Help us realize these principles of life; help us live these principles.

The congress is timely, considering that our youth both at home and overseas are now in a much, much better position, not only to understand but also to appreciate our age-old values, the universal spiritual values, which are now being accepted by peoples of all faiths and all religions.

It is a gigantic task that Dino has taken up and yet, it is a long overdue one.

During my recent overseas travels, I had the chance of meeting some of our students studying abroad. Many of them, to my surprise, were already asking the question: “Tell us Pak. What is there for us in Indonesia?”

I hope and pray that this congress can answer this and many other similar questions. It is not enough to respond that we are the largest economy in Southeast Asia. It is not enough that we are nostalgic about our history.

It is also not recommended, at least not so in my humble opinion, that we lure our youth to come back by providing them with extra facilities.

Any material motivation, no matter how promising and lucrative, shall sooner or later wear off. It is urgent and imperative that we challenge our youth, we challenge their spirit: “Here is a house for you. OK, it is leaking here and there.

“OK, the flooring is old, and the drapes must be changed. OK, it needs some repainting, but this is your house.

“This is our house. Let us renovate this together. Let us refurnish and refurbish ourselves.”

I wish all the best to all those who shall participate in the congress.

The writer is a spiritualist and the author of more than 150 books.

Recent comments

  • made edy suparyasa / Sat, 09/06/2012 - 13:06pm
    Yes we must realize our house and try fix all the problems, instead of complaining even running away. We have highly standard principle of life match to any situation we face. We already have the solution but neglected and turn our head outside looking for another. It's pity. Thanks Pak Anand for the writing..makes me realize my true potency.
    Post comment
  • Joko Riyanto / Fri, 08/06/2012 - 04:06am
    Thank you, Sir.

    "It is only then, having worked on those four principles of humanity, unity, democracy and social well being, that we can come to the principle of religiosity, the spirit of all religions."

    This made me realize the importance and significance of the order of appearance of each Sila in Pancasila.
    Post comment
  • Triwidodo Djokorahardjo / Fri, 08/06/2012 - 02:06am
    Thanks Pak Anand Krishna. We all are Indonesians, and a step further, we all are human beings and are the residents of the Earth.
    Post comment
  • Raysuvana / Thu, 07/06/2012 - 21:06pm
    Now..finally understand the true Vision of our Founding Fathers..thanks for Your Enlightened article
    Post comment
  • Raysuvana / Thu, 07/06/2012 - 21:06pm
    Now..finally understand the true Vision of our Founding Fathers..thanks for Your Enlightened article
    Post comment
  • Raysuvana / Thu, 07/06/2012 - 21:06pm
    Now..finally understand the true Vision of our Founding Fathers..thanks for Your Enlightened article
    Post comment

Monday, June 4, 2012

Is America turning a new leaf in Southeast Asia?




Kevin H.R. Villanueva, Manila
Fri, 06/01/2012 9:22 AM

A- A A+ Klipping The Jakarta Post

Southeast Asia has tussled continually with the two faces of US foreign policy – from the time the US propped up authoritarian regimes in the 1970s, and until the 1990s when the Clinton administration came out loud and clear on human rights and democracy promotion. Last week, the first ASEAN-US Eminent Persons Group (EPG) Meeting came to a close in Manila, marking 25 years of formal dialogue between the partners.



This high-level gathering of top diplomats, intellectuals and business entrepreneurs picked up from where the ASEAN-US Leaders’ Meeting left of in November 2011 and laid the groundwork for the fourth ASEAN-US Leaders’ Meeting in Cambodia later this year. The ASEAN-US Dialogue and Leaders Meeting is a fresh opportunity for the two parties to take history onto their side.



For the US, the fact that their exports to ASEAN rose by 23.3 percent, totaling US$100.5 billion in 2010, and that they are each other’s fourth largest trading partner, to a sum total of $186.1 billion also in 2010, should be more than an incentive to keep their markets alive in the region.



ASEAN is not only a good neighbor to China, it is a neighborhood all unto itself and represents a vast repository of natural, cultural and intellectual wealth.



For the 10 member states of ASEAN and their array of emerging economies and democratic institutions, the US can prove to be the timely ally. It is the foil to Leninist-style capitalism and one albeit flawed model of liberal democracy to which countries at the very least can gauge themselves on the road to national development.



So if former US ambassador to Singapore, Stapleton Roy, who is a member of the EPG, claims that this US “comeback” in Southeast Asia is not about “containing” China, then it ought be, in my view, about building ASEAN. To understand how to draw the lines for the future of ASEAN-US relations, one has got to look at the mouseprint, which means following through some of the most strategic agreements that are on the table, and not just the hyped-about trade and commercial benefits.



First, ASEAN government entities ought to be forthright not only in imitating but owning technical know-how that can help them push for the freer flow of goods, people and capital by 2015.



The US-ASEAN Connectivity Cooperation Initiative that came out of the November 2011 meeting should now be supporting activities that allow ASEAN business enterprises to observe the manufacture and demonstration of US goods and services in the energy, transportation, and information and communication technology sectors. Indonesia, with its online social habits, and the Philippines, which pioneered the “text” revolution in 2001, are sterling examples of what we stand to gain if we narrow the digital divide.



Second, thousands of lives have been lost and numbers more have been threatened by floods, storms, earthquakes and landslides, especially in the last decade in Southeast Asia. The US has agreed to support the ASEAN implementation of an all hazard disaster monitoring and response system.



This will only go far if the proposed Rapid Disaster Response Agreement to create a legal and procedural framework for accelerating deployment and acceptance of assistance personnel, supplies and services proposed by President Obama in 2011 goes full swing. Both parties must then move fast in sharing best practices in areas such risk assessment; early warning; monitoring, prevention and mitigation; disaster preparedness and responses to ease regional setbacks in the wake of natural calamities.



Finally, ASEAN and the US can go even further by strengthening the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, which is the overarching human body for the regional organization.



The country representatives call the attention of the heads of states to pressing regional problems that endanger the peoples of ASEAN and are creating regional human rights instruments that will combat human trafficking, the inhuman work conditions of migrants and the abuse of women and children, to name just a few.



They will eventually need a secretariat and a steady stream of funding to undertake thematic studies and provide the framework for conventions on rights more specific to the region. The birth of this institution is a clear example of how influential the West has been in Southeast Asia.



The US can now do the wider world a bigger favor if it can help it grow because this institution safeguards the values and principles under which international cooperation can make profound and lasting changes.



The writer is a university research scholar at East Asian Studies and the School of Politics and International Studies in the University of Leeds, UK. He is the principal investigator of the LIAISON Project – Language and Power In Advocacy in Southeast Asian Networks.