1 / 40

HISTORY OF ASEAN HEDDY SHRI AHIMSA-PUTRA UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA YOGYAKARTA INDONESIA

HISTORY OF ASEAN HEDDY SHRI AHIMSA-PUTRA UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA YOGYAKARTA INDONESIA. HISTORY : - DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSES IN THE PAST - DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES IN THE PAST - DESCRIPTION OF PHASES (OF PHENOMENA) IN THE PAST - SEQUENTIAL DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS IN THE PAST

boettcherm
Download Presentation

HISTORY OF ASEAN HEDDY SHRI AHIMSA-PUTRA UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA YOGYAKARTA INDONESIA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HISTORY OF ASEAN HEDDY SHRI AHIMSA-PUTRA UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA YOGYAKARTA INDONESIA

  2. HISTORY : - DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSES IN THE PAST - DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES IN THE PAST - DESCRIPTION OF PHASES (OF PHENOMENA) IN THE PAST - SEQUENTIAL DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS IN THE PAST - CAUSAL DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS / PHENOMENA - CAUSAL EXPLANATION OF EVENTS / PHENOMENA ASSUMPTIONS : EVERYTHING CHANGES / IS CHANGING THE CHANGES ARE CAUSED BY SEVERAL FACTORS THE FACTORS ARE : INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL THE PROCESSES OF CHANGE ARE CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS THE PROCESSES OF CHANGE CAN BE DIVIDED INTO PHASES THE PHASES CAN BE ARRANGED SEQUENTIALLY

  3. SOUTHEAST ASIA : - A REGION WHERE VARIOUS SOCIETIES LIVE - THERE ARE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES - THE SOCIETIES WERE INTEGRATED INTO NATION STATES - THE NATION STATES WERE UNITED INTO “ASEAN” QUESTIONS : - WHAT FACTORS CONTRIBUTE TO THE FORMATION OF “ASEAN”? - HOW “ASEAN” HAVE SURVIVED AMIDST VARIOUS KINDS OF “TROUBLES” AND EXTENDED ITS MEMBERSHIP?

  4. SOUTHEAST ASIA : REGION AND TERM The Chinese have long recognized the maritime cohesion of the islands and coasts to their south - The whole region (Southeast Asia) is called “Nanyang” [the lands of the] Southern Ocean - From the Chinese perspective the region was seen as bound together by the sea - Southeast Asia is, “a maritime extension of the Asia heartland” - Southeast Asia may be defined as the area south of China and east of India. The region has only recently been called Southeast Asia by most people. During World War II, the term is used as a collective designation for the Japanese-occupied countries south of China. Historically, the region had been viewed as “divided between Sinicized Vietnam, the Hispanicized Philippines and “Farther India”, that is the other lands of the region, which share a common cultural indebtedness to India” (Williams, 1976: 3-5).

  5. PHYSICAL SETTING (Source: Lea E. Williams, 1976. Southeast Asia: A History. NY: Oxford University Press, p.6) 5

  6. HISTORY : Southeast Asia emerged from its Neolithic prehistory about the beginning of the Christian era. Its history may be divided into four periods: (1) the period of the Indianized states (up to about 1500 AD), before the arrival of Europeans; (2) the period (1500-1750) of early European trading ventures; (3) the period (1750-1909) of European territorial conquests, and (4) the overlapping period of nationalism (from 1896) (Wilson, 1973: 337-338) “The history of the region has been largely interpreted in terms of the importation and adaptation of ideas from India, China, the Islamic world and the West” - However, “It has been… the power of [the Southeast Asian cultures] to absorb without being absorbed that has bound the various peoples together histori-cally” (Williams, 1976: 24)

  7. In 16th century the Portuguese dominated the seas. They esta-blished control from bases at Malacca. However, in 17th century they lost in competition with the better financed and organized seamen: the Dutch, the British, and the French. For many years these nations competed with one another in trade in Southeast Asia The cultural effect of the early centuries of European intrusion was limited - but gradually, trading practices led ultimately to political intervention (Wilson, 1973: 339). THE EUROPEAN CONQUEST PERIOD : During this period the interest of the European powers in South-east Asia gradually was transformed from a largely commercial concern to a largely political one

  8. SOUTHEAST ASIA - 1920’S (Source: Steinberg, J.D. 1971. In Search of Southeast Asia: a Modern History. Kuala Lum-pur: Oxford Univesity Press, p.195) 8

  9. There was the disappearance of the principal instruments of Dutch and British activities in the region: The Dutch East India Company (dissolved in 1799), and the British East India Company (went under in 1858). The governments of these two companies took direct responsibility for overseeing the affairs of the areas they have dominated. The political map and many of the governmental institutions of modern Southeast Asia were from this period of European impe-rialism (Wilson, 1973: 340) THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONALISM : The first nationalist movement occurred in the Philippines, when in 1896-1897 the people here rebelled unsuccessfully against the Spanish (Wilson, 1973)

  10. World War II had strengthened Southeast Asian nationalism and made independence a reality. The effect of the Japanese conquest of the European dependen-cies in 1941-1942 and the subsequent collapse of the Japan in 1945 : - destroyed the image of invincible European masters; - brought about social disruption in Southeast Asia; - provided opportunities for political activities by national leaders. The course of events led to independence for Indonesia in 1945, the Philippines in 1946, Burma in 1948, Vietnam, Laos and Cam-bodia in 1954, Malaysia in 1957. In 1965 Singapore became a separate independent state (Wilson, 1973)

  11. SOUTHEAST ASIA – 1970’S (Source: Lea E. Williams, 1976. Southeast Asia: A History. NY: Oxford University Press, p.13) 11

  12. THE REGIONAL CONTEXT : The new nations in SEA suffered from political instability caused by social divisions, poverty, inadequate administration, and the difficulties of devising institutions to solve these problems The division of Vietnam and the struggle between the north and south involving the great powers and lesser states in the 1960’s increased the significance of Southeast Asia in world affairs (Wilson, 1973: 338-340) GLOBAL CONTEXT : In September 1954 SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) a regional defense organization was created by the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, signed by eight states: Pakistan (withdrew in 1972), the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, Britain, French, United States (Wilson, 1973)

  13. The formation of SEATO was motivated by : (a) the decline of colonial powers; (b) the weakness of the new states in Southeast Asia; (c) the rise of a powerful Communist China The objective : (a) to uphold principle of self-determination in Southeast Asia (b) to provide the states of the region with the opportunity to achieve stability; (c) economic and cultural growth, free from outside interference (Wilson, 1973: 341) SEATO was handicapped by the nonparticipation of important countries in the region, including India, Indonesia, Burma and Malaysia with non-alignment foreign policies - these states have been critical of SEATO. They said that it was dominated by the Western powers, and that represented non-Asian interference in Asian affairs (Wilson, 1973: 342)

  14. In 1960 nations of Southeast Asia entered a new era in which they tried to cooperate with one another - ASA (Association of Southeast Asia) and Maphilindo were formed, but failed - ASA failed because of the conflict between Malaysia and the Philippines over the territorial claim to Sabah - Maphilindo failed because of President Sukarno’s confrontation policy toward Malaysia (1963-1965) Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore faced certain difficult situations in common; Realizing each other’s limitations and vulnerabilities, they were motivated to pull their resources together to promote “economic growth, social progress, cultural development, [and] peace and stability in the region” (Poon-Kim, 1977: 753)

  15. THE FORMATION OF ‘ASEAN’ ASEAN was founded in 1967 by: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand The crucial factors in the formation of ASEAN : - The downfall of Sukarno after the PKI coup in 1965 - Suharto’s “New Order” in both domestic and foreign policy The failure of ASA and Maphilindo showed that such an associa-tion “could not succeed without Indonesia’s backing” (Poon-Kim, 1977: 754) The hope was : through regional cooperation ASEAN could minimize the manipulation and the domination of the great powers.

  16. THE PRIMARY GOALS OF ASEAN (1) To promote and facilitate intraregional economic development (2) To foster social and cultural progress (3) To ensure peace and stability in the region It turned out that the first goal can only be achieved only if the third goal had been achieved - The second goal can only be achieved after the first goal was achieved

  17. THE FIRST DECADE : Adam Malik [Indonesia’s Foreign Minister] stated: “ASEAN can be seen as reflecting the growing political will of the nations of this region to take charge of their own future, to work out problems of their development, stability and security together and to prevent their region from continuing to remain the arena and the subject of major power rivalry and their conflict” (Poon-Kim, 1977: 754) Thus, ASEAN was also formed with the political and security objective, that is to serve as a defense or protection against the expansion of Chinese communism in the region Regional security was important for ASEAN (Poon-Kim, 1977: 754)

  18. ASEAN Organizational Structure Formerly ASEAN has a decentralized structure: each country has its own National Secretariat, headed by a Secretary General who has the responsibility of acting on behalf of his government by coordinating activities related to ASEAN The Foreign Ministers comprising the highest degree decision-making authority The next highest authority is the Standing Committee, consists of : - the Foreign Minister of the host country as chairman, - the resident ambassadors of the four other countries as members - rotates on yearly basis. It is in charge of ASEAN activities between the Ministerial Meetings (Poon-Kim, 1977: 763)

  19. The reason for a decentralized structure in the 1960s was : - A sort of “fear of domination” by a centralized institution with greater power, over one’s national sovereignty The National Secretariats guaranteed equality among all mem-ber states. But, in 1970s ASEAN became more complex - Permanent Com-mittees increased (from four to eleven) in 1976. With the increasing number of recommendations and projects, and the extension of the Association’s activities in the 1970, decentralized organization could no longer handle such multiple activities (Poon-Kim, 1977: 764). Structural change was needed

  20. In the 1972 Ministerial Meeting proposals for structural changes were brought up for discussion There was a need for : - An overall review of the structure - The establishment of a Central Secretariat In 1973 the Foreign Ministers submitted recommendations - but the establishment of the Central Secretariat was not approved until the Bali Summit in February 1976 THE SECOND DECADE : Central Secretariat was established permanently in Jakarta There were some disagreements on its proper role The Central Secretariat assumed mainly administrative and coordinative functions (Poon-Kim, 1977: 764).

  21. During ASEAN first four years, it was observed that “nothing of substance was achieved, because much time and effort had to be directed at tearing down the “psychological barriers”, i.e. distrust among the member nations. Due to the diverse backgrounds, it took time for the countries’ leaders to develop confidence and trust in one another through personal contacts. The creation of mutual trust was necessary In his assessment of ASEAN’s performances in 1972 : Lee Kuan Yew considered the most valuable achievement of the Association to be “the understanding and goodwill created at the frequent meetings which helped to lubricate relationships which could otherwise have generated friction”. However, the importance and usefulness of ASEAN grew

  22. In 1984, after its independence, Brunei joined ASEAN In 1987, after two decades of its establishment, ASEAN was consi-dered a success as a Third World regional organization - ASEAN has actually developed in terms of its international status and the commitments of its member states (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Brunei) - ASEAN embodied a consensus among it members “as to the preservation of the territorial status quo” - ASEAN has provided the states of non-Communist Southeast Asia with a basis for regional stability (Buszynksi, 1987)

  23. The benefits of the ASEAN for its member states : - The international status of ASEAN as a regional organization has enhanced the position of its member states diplomatically and politically at both regional and state levels - Relations among the member states have been more peaceful and certain since ASEAN was created than before Without an organization such as ASEAN these benefits would not have been possible (Buszyinski, 1987:830) The benefits and advantages that ASEAN provides its member states beyond the confines of intra-ASEAN economic cooperation are technically the benefits of regionalism

  24. THE THIRD DECADE After three decades of existence, ASEAN had significant accomplishments : - Peace and cooperatio among its members - A sense of identity - Outstanding economic performance of its members (Denoon and Colbert, 1998) It is also argued that a key political contribution of ASEAN to its member states lies in “its values as a source of psychological comfort and support” (Kurus, 1993: 824) What are these psychological comforts? (1) ASEAN has prevented a feeling of isolation among the states that in turn could have encouraged competition among the great powers in Southeast Asia

  25. (2) ASEAN succeeded in “building the self-confidence of the states to assert their position as subjects, rather than objects of international politics and as full participants in regional and global affairs” This has been manifested through ASEAN’s “bloc politics” approach in dealing with bigger and more powerful actors and confronting common external challenges - This approach is vital to a diverse group of states in a strategic and volatile region (3) ASEAN has served as a forum for member states to coordi-nate their external outlook It has provided a multilateral foreign policy framework, with all its checks and balances - within this the ASEAN states can arrive at right positions, right actions, and right politics

  26. (4) ASEAN had succeeded in making its members more aware and sensitive to each other’s interests ASEAN has gradually fostered a family feeling of togetherness and shared interests among a group of states that had very little in common to begin with” - At a deeper level, “ASEAN has afforded the member states a vehicle to identify with the region” - ASEAN has become “an identity” (5) The ASEAN process has contributed “to the creation of a strong sense of mutual understanding, predictability, trust, confi-dence, and goodwill among the members” This atmosphere has been fostered by the growing interaction among officials of the states

  27. (6) ASEAN has helped to minimize, if not resolve, the existing intra-ASEAN conflicts ASEAN has helped to prevent misunderstanding and conflict (7) ASEAN helped to establish four fundamental ground rules for peaceful co-existence within the region: (a) strict non-interfe-rence in the internal affairs of fellow members; (b) pacific settle-ment of disputes; (c) respect for each other’s independence; (d) strict respect for the territorial integrity of fellow members The establishment of these basic ground rules has contributed to regional peace, security and prosperity In 1995 Vietnam was admitted as ASEAN member THE FOURTH DECADE : In 1997 Laos and Myanmar joined. Laos was admitted to observer status in 1992, while Myanmar in 1996

  28. Evaluating ASEAN in its fourth decade of existence (August, 1997), it is said that at that time ASEAN state members were con-fronted with a severe and unexpected economic crisis - these brought new challenges to (a) ASEAN’s prestige; (b) the strength of its members, (c) their ties with one another, (d) their capacity for joint action From the internal perspective ASEAN leaders credit ASEAN with “contributing to national economic success by maintaining peace among them and enabling them to concentrate their energy and resources on economic development” In December 1998 Cambodia was admitted as ASEAN member It was granted observer status in 1994 In 1999 ASEAN membership was “completed” - It has today ten Southeast Asian states as its members (what about Timor Leste?)

  29. More economic activities should be performed by ASEAN : (a) efforts to improve global market access (b) cooperative approaches to international commodity issues (c) cooperation in establishing region-wide industries (p.508) With the expansion of its membership -to include ten Southeast Asian states- ASEAN may face some new problems, such as: (a) the intimacy that leaders valued could become lesser (b) more difficult consensus, “arriving at a consensus among ten states would certainly become more difficult than among six” (c) inadequate human resource, “new members would be strained to field adequate numbers of English-speaking, technically qualified officials to participate in ASEAN’s many meetings”

  30. (d) ideological differences - “continued Communist party domina-tion could set the Indochinese states apart from their fellow members” (e) internal disputes, “a range of new disputes over borders, trade and migrants would be added to the existing differences among the old members”; (f) economic disparities, “sharp disparities in economic develop-ment would pose additional obstacles to achieve consensus on economic policy” (Denoon and Colbert, 1999:509) Nevertheless, as a regional organization ASEAN was a great success

  31. THANK YOU

  32. It is argued that narrow nationalism was the stumbling block to the growth of cooperation. The record showed that “no single state had been willing to sacrifice its national interests for the sake of regional cooperation”. - An illustration of this is the diversity in perceptions and interpretations of regional security - as an exam-ple was Malaysia’s perception of regional security, which was different from the Singapore’s, the Indonesia’s, Thailand’s as well as the Philippines. Nationalism is can also be seen in trade and economic develop-ment - nevertheless recent development was better Significant new steps in the economic sphere have been taken, but difficulties remain due to the important differences in the economic development of the ASEAN countries - Further implementation of regional cooperation depends upon the tangible advantages that can be discerned for each country (Poon-Kim, 1977: 757)

  33. The neutralization scheme was accepted as a common objective in 1971 - Since then ASEAN has seemed to pay more attention to economic than to political problems, although both have been on the agenda. Political concerns were mainly triggered by the changing of great power relationships in East Asia and the deteriorating situation in Indochina - “..the Indochina debacle had one positive result: it gave a feeling of urgency which triggered a determination to pull together and respond collectively to the threat posed by the Communists” It is said that The Bali Summit Meeting of February 1976, the signing of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, the Declaration of Concord, and the agreement on four ASEAN industrial projects, “could not have been accomplished so soon had it not been for the changes in Indochina” (Poon-Kim, 1977: 759)

  34. Buszynski observed that in diplomatic arena ASEAN has func-tioned ”as a vehicle to minimize the impact upon the region of Vietnamese reunification”. ASEAN has also “provided a basis for the management of relations with Vietnam”; “ASEAN has acted to deny sanction to the Vietnamese occupation of Kampuchea..”. Over the Kampuchea issue “ASEAN has acquired a sense of diplomatic unity that has elevated its status internationally..” (1987: 765) Nevertheless, as ASEAN entering its third decade in 1988, its leader needed to “reasses the organization’s role in the context of a changing international environment”.

  35. Buszynski argues that ASEAN needs to give greater attention to regional economic problems and solve them, so as to elevate its status among its members. “An economic role could strengthen existing commitments to the organization depending on its ability to meet perceived economic needs” - For ASEAN an economic role could also have the politi-cal function of boosting ASEAN’s institutional evolution (1987: 784-785) A point to be considered: “the diplomatic and political benefits as well as the economic-related benefits beyond the confines of intra-ASEAN economic cooperation would not have been possible without ASEAN To understand ASEAN and its development and its success, the focus does not have to be on ASEAN per se, but on regionalism, which is what ASEAN represents and has engendered (Buszynski, 1987)

  36. Examining ASEAN’s performance until 1990, Kurus concludes in 1993 that : ASEAN is seen by its six member states as (a) a means to obtain benefits (tangible or otherwise) and (b) a source of benefits and advantages. The mutual and dependent nature of these benefits and advan-tages - they are contingent upon both the existence of ASEAN and membership in it. These benefits are relatively “cost free” - they entail little or no demand in terms of scarce resources, market sharing, and more importantly, sacrifice national sovereignty. (p.820)

  37. It is argued that : understanding the benefits and advantages that ASEAN provides its member states beyond the confines of economic cooperation and how these have contributed to the maintenance of ASEAN will provide some insights into the past, current, and possible future directions of the regional organization (Kurus, 1993: 820) It is said that “the internal political contributions of ASEAN to its members are considered as the most important, surpassing any benefit that the organization has provided on the diplomatic and economic fronts” (p.824) - “.. a key political contribution of ASEAN lies in its values as a source of psychological comfort and support for the member states”. What are these psychological comforts?

  38. (2) ASEAN succeeded in “building the self-confidence of the states to assert their position as subjects, rather than objects of international politics and as full participants in regional and global affairs” This has been manifested through ASEAN’s “bloc politics” approach in dealing with bigger and more powerful actors and confronting common external challenges - This approach is vital to a diverse group of states in a strategic and volatile region (3) ASEAN has served as a forum for member states to coordi-nate their external outlook - It has provided a multilateral foreign policy framework, with all its checks and balances - within this the ASEAN states can arrive at mature positions, choose mature actions, and establish mature politics.

  39. That can be seen, for instance, in : - The results of its dealings with industrialized countries and extraregional groupings such as EEC (which preferred to deal with ASEAN on a group basis) - The member states’ growing confidence in the Associations’ strength as a bargaining bloc (Poon-Kim, 1977: 763) ASEAN was maintained for its utility as a diplomatic and political tool - There is a strong indication that these states see the continued existence of ASEAN as in their national self-interest (Kurus, 1993: 819-820)

  40. ASEAN was a “manifestation of the member states’ recognition of their inability to solve their conflicts on a bilateral basis” - The leaders tried to find solutions beyond their national boundaries - The Association could “provide the indigenous machinery whereby intraregional conflicts could be minimized if not settled” - The Association could become a “convenient institution that could minimize the feelings of insecurity and increase economic bargaining power by providing strength through unity, especially for the smaller ASEAN states” (Poon-Kim:, 1977: 754-755) Old Malay adage : “Bersatu KitaTeguh, Bercerai Kita Runtuh” (United We Stand, Divided We Fall) ASEAN was thus a product of a combination of common fears and weaknesses, not of common strength (Poon-Kim, 1977: 755)

More Related