Thayer Consultancy Background Briefing

:
ABN # 65 648 097 123
ASEAN at 50: Still a Work in
Progress
Carlyle A. Thayer
August 17, 2017

Q1. What is your comment about the progress of ASEAN after 50 years?
ANSWER: The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was formed in August
1967 after Singapore separated from Malaysia and after konfrontasi (armed
confrontation) between Indonesia against the Federation of Malaysia. At that time,
analysts referred to Southeast Asia as the Balkans of the East, meaning it was a divided
region prone to conflict. Even after ASEAN was founded its foreign ministers could not
meet for over eighteen months because the Philippines laid a claim to Sabah after its
incorporation into Malaysia.
Yet ASEAN did not fail. It developed a set of norms and principles known as the ASEAN
Way that included respect for sovereignty, non-interference in each other’s internal
affairs, inclusiveness, consultation, decision-making by consensus, etc. As a result,
disputes between ASEAN members have not escalated to armed conflict despite
tensions and confrontations over the years.
What has ASEAN achieved over the past fifty years?
First, it expanded to include all independent Southeast Asian states. In 1967 its five
founding members included Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.
Brunei joined in 1984, Vietnam became a member in 1995, Laos and Myanmar were
added in 1997 and Cambodia became the last member in 1999.
The inclusion of Vietnam was an important turning point because ASEAN members
admitted a socialist country for the first time on the principle of respect for each
country’s domestic political system. ASEAN is currently considering Timor-Leste as its
eleventh member.
Second, ASEAN has been successful in developing a Free Trade Area among its
members. Taken as a group this represents the sixth largest economy in the world.
Third, ASEAN decision-making has evolved from annual meetings of foreign ministers
and occasional summit meetings of heads of state and government to biannual
meetings of foreign ministers and biannual summit meetings of heads of state and
government.
Fourth, by adopting the ASEAN Charter has ASEAN has acquired a legal personality
able to interact with the United Nations and other regional associations and
organisations.
2

Fifth, ASEAN has become a formal ASEAN Community based on three pillars, –
economic, political-security and socio-cultural.
Sixth, ASEAN has asserted its centrality in regional security affairs by creating ASEAN-
related multilateral organizations: ASEAN Regional Forum, ASEM (ASEAN-Europe
Meeting), ASEAN Defence Minsters’ Meeting Plus (ADMM Plus), Expanded ASEAN
Maritime Forum, and East Asia Summit. These organisations provide a neutral venue
for the major powers to meet annually.
Another way of evaluating ASEAN is to consider the counter-factual: What would
Southeast Asia be like today without ASEAN? It is quite clear, despite its faults and
shortcomings, ASEAN has been a positive development and Southeast Asia would be
much worse without it.
Q2. How about the unity of the block? What do you think about the internal ASEAN
differences? Has the division been alarming?
ANSWER: As ASEAN has expanded and become more diversified its consensus-based
decision-making process has come under stress. ASEAN has been successful on the
economic front by adopting the formula N- x. N represents the ASEAN members who
are agreement on expanding economic integration, while x represents those states
who are not willing to step up integration. The N countries are able to proceed leaving
it up to the others to join when it suits their national interests.
ASEAN has been less successful on political and security matters where one or more
countries can undermine agreement by the majority on the basis of the principle of
consensus. Since 2012 Cambodia has been a consistent surrogate of China in
preventing any statement critical of China from appearing in joint statements after
ministerial or summit meetings.
Cambodia, as ASEAN Chair, for the first time in ASEAN history, prevented the adoption
of a joint statement by ASEAN foreign ministers in 2012 from including references to
the South China Sea critical of China. Cambodia sabotaged ASEAN’s agreed position
on the South China Sea at the ASEAN-China Special Meeting of Foreign Ministers in
Kunming, China in 2016. Most recently, Cambodia (and the Philippines) refused to
allow any remarks critical of China from inclusion in the Joint Statement of foreign
ministers in Manila in August.
ASEAN unity has been severely challenged by China’s efforts to influence individual
members such as Cambodia, to undermine ASEAN consensus.
Cambodia’s obstructionism has led to calls within ASEAN to adopt a qualified majority
voting system n matters affecting regional security. In other words, the N – x formula
at all levels below summit level.
Q3. People said that ASEAN doesn’t have a country playing a leading-role and that’s
the reason ASEAN is divided and cannot speak loudly with one voice about major
issues such as South China Sea. What do you think about that? And how can ASEAN
be more united?
ANSWER: Initially, after ASEAN was formed Indonesia under President Suharto played
a leadership role in ASEAN by promoting the value of consultation and consensus. But
now Indonesia, like Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia, pays more attention to
3

domestic matters than regional affairs. The importance of domestic issues has served
to undermine any country’s ability to lead ASEAN.
If Indonesia once again played a leading role it would not solve ASEAN current
disarray. It is quite clear that Cambodia and the Philippines under Duterte are
undermining ASEAN unity hoping for financial rewards from China in the form of
concessional loans and investment.
ASEAN is not united on the South China Sea because seven members have no direct
interests in the maritime disputes. Of the four other claimant states, Malaysia and
Brunei have played a low-key role. The Philippines and Vietnam were front line states.
But since Duterte’s pivot to China Vietnam has been isolated.
ASEAN unity can only be restored if a qualified majority decision-making system was
adopted, where the majority would determine ASEAN policy. This would have to be
approved at Summit level, however.
Q4. In your opinion, which country can lead ASEAN?
ANSWER: No single country can lead ASEAN. ASEAN leadership will be determined in
part by which country is the ASEAN Chair. Singapore replaces the Philippines next year,
for example, and ASEAN may take a stronger stand on the South China Sea. The key is
not leadership by a single country but leadership by a coalition of countries on
particular issues. For example, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore could
form a leadership group and perhaps attract support from Myanmar and Thailand.
That would leave Brunei, Cambodia, Laos and the Philippines in the minority.
ASEAN has not yet reached the stage where its members believe “all for one, one for
all”. Countries like Cambodia only pursue policies in their interest and not the
collective interest. That is why consensus-based leadership in ASEAN is so ineffectual.
Q5. In recent time, Vietnam has showed a strong stance in South China Sea issue. Can
you comment about Vietnam’s role in the joint statement of AMM 50 and building
COC? Do you think Vietnam can lead ASEAN or at least now Vietnam is ready to escape
from China’s shadow? (I mean “thoát Trung” in Vietnamese)
ANSWER: Vietnam has always played a strong role in ASEAN in general and on the
South China Sea issue in particular. However, the election of Rodrigo Duterte as
President of the Philippines has change the dynamics. The Philippines is now pivoting
towards China for financial gain and this has left Vietnam exposed. Vietnam can no
longer rely on the Philippines to use international law to constrain China. Vietnam
played a constructive role in trying to get strong language written into the joint
statement in Manila. In the end Vietnam has to bow to the consensus. In future,
however, Vietnam could reverse roles and prevent an ASEAN consensus that harmed
Vietnam’s interests. For example, Vietnam could refuse to accept a Code of Conduct
that was not legally binding. Vietnam cannot lead ASEAN on the South China Sea issue,
however.
There have been calls in Vietnam to thoát Trung or exit China’s orbit (or come out
from under China’s shadow). But this is impossible because the two countries share a
common border and also because Vietnam has a huge trade deficit with China, over
$32 billion.
4

Vietnam has always balanced its relations with China with other major powers such as
Russia, Indian, Japan and the United States. But the Trump Administration’s
engagement with Southeast Asia in general and Vietnam in particular is uncertain and
cannot be taken for granted. In practical terms, only the U.S. can balance China.
Vietnam cannot burn its bridges until they are crossed, in other words, Vietnam
cannot escape from China’s orbit and pivot to the United States unless Washington is
willing to play a strong role in countering China.
Q6. What do you think about the future of the COC? Can it be achieved this year and
be legal binding? How will China act in the coming months?
ANSWER: China has set a condition on the commencement of formal discussions on
the Code of Conduct scheduled for November this year at the ASEAN Plus 1 (China)
leaders’ summit. Chin a’s condition is that the South China Sea situation remain stable.
China can use any pretext to delay discussions such as U.S. freedom of navigation
patrols. The discussions on the Code of Conduct will not be brought to fruition until
the Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) is fully
implemented. So far little progress has been made on the five areas of cooperation
outlined in the 2002 DOC.
China will not agree to a legally binding COC, that is, a COC that is ratified by national
legislatures and deposited with the United Nations. As China consults on the COC it
will further consolidate its presence in the South China Sea and try to limit the role of
the United States. China will work to isolate Vietnam.
The COC will be a useless document if China’s Coast Guard and Navy can enforce their
will against local states.
Vietnam must continue to modernize its military to deal with South China Sea
contingencies. At the same time, Vietnam must lobby maritime powers such as the
United States, Japan, India, Australia, South Korea and European states such as France
and the United Kingdom to counter-balance China in the South China Sea.

Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “ASEAN at 50: Still a Work in Progress,” Thayer
Consultancy Background Brief, August 17, 2017. All background briefs are posted on
Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the mailing list type,
UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.

Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.