ASEAN was founded in 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and

Thailand. In 1984 Brunei Darussalam was admitted, followed by Vietnam in 1995, Laos
and Myanmar/Burma in 1997 and Cambodia in 1999. Combined, they have a population of
about 500 million, a total area of 4.5 million square kilometers, a combined gross
domestic product of US$737 billion, and a total trade of US$ 720 billion.
The ASEAN Declaration states that the aims and purposes of the Association are:
(i) to accelerate the economic growth, social progress and cultural development in
the region through joint endeavours in the spirit of equality and partnership in
order to strengthen the foundation for a prosperous and peaceful community of
Southeast Asian nations
and (ii) to promote regional peace and stability through abiding respect for
justice and the rule of law in the relationship among countries in the region and
adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter.
In 1995, the ASEAN Heads of States and Government re-affirmed that �Cooperative
peace and shared prosperity shall be the fundamental goals of ASEAN.�

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

Arguments

Pros

ASEAN is a total waste of time. It is expensive and it diverts attention from the
proper efforts of members� governments � pursuit of the national interest. It is
yet another unnecessary talking shop. Members frequently disagree with one another
(on important international relations issues like the war on Iraq, and on regional
economic issues like labour laws), so the idea that it helps present a �united
front� is incorrect. Its institutions involve surprisingly high costs (especially
high when they don�t achieve anything) but still complain of under-resourcing;
members are unwilling to commit any more funds, so nobody is happy. Best to scrap
it.

cons

These are generic oppositions to any international organisation. But in truth

ASEAN, by allowing its members to work together, makes possible achievements that
they cannot easily achieve alone. When ASEAN speaks it speaks for ten countries:
that offers a much greater voice on the international stage. Furthermore, the
regular high-level dialogue the organisation enables between representatives of
nations that have a history of antagonism and war with one another is highly
beneficial. It�s true that the institutions of the organisation involve some small
cost, but it�s worth it. Finally, a false choice is being offered by the
proposition: it�s often the case that members are advancing their national
interests by their membership.

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________
pros

Allowing Burma to join ASEAN seemed to signal approval of that regime�s record on
human rights. The forum often offers a shield for Myanmar�s regime from external
criticism. Other regimes conduct questionable (at best) policies, such as
Thailand�s treatment of the Karen or Indonesia�s approach in Aceh or East Timor,
but go uncriticised.

cons

Prospects for improving the specific human rights problems in Myanmar/Burma � and
for offending regimes in the region more generally � are better if the country is
included and given incentives to improve, than if it is excluded and left as a
pariah state. Much background diplomacy is done and pressure exerted through the
channels of ASEAN.

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

pros

Global free trade is or should be the aim of all countries. Unions such as ASEAN
encourage their members to turn inwards, replacing the traditional narrow-minded
nationalist vision with a regionalist closed-mind mentality. They may also offer a
false sense of participation in the international economic sphere when the great
leap to world trade is at last a possibility.

cons

Smaller unions � of which ASEAN is one, the EU and NAFTA are others � may be seen
as stepping stones to world trade, not stumbling blocks � they make the transition
easier by encouraging the move from state-based economic thinking to wider
horizons.

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

pros

Expansion has undermined the economic solidity of the Association. Members whose
economies are unsound have been admitted for political reasons.

cons

This is an investment. It is true that countries like Cambodia may be weak

economically right now, but investing in them allows other members to get in �on
the ground floor� as industry grows and the benefits to the new country are
obvious. It should be remembered that there is no common currency like the euro, so
members don�t run the same direct risk from having weaker economies on board
anyway.

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

pros

ASEAN�s main purpose is to provide economic stability for its members. It has been
demonstrated in 1997 that ASEAN cannot achieve this. When the Asian financial
crisis swept over all members, the much-vaunted Association did nothing to protect
them.

cons

Nobody took precautions against the Asian slump. Everyone suffered, inside and
outside of the Association. ASEAN�s members recovered more quickly than other, more
developed nations, like Japan. ASEAN offers its members financial benefits that
must not be ignored. The economies of the poorer countries gain enormously from
being able to use effectively their comparative advantage of lower worker cost
under low/no tariff regimes, whilst the more developed countries have new markets
opened up under low/no export/import restrictions.

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________

pros

The southeast Asian region is one of extraordinary diversity. Faiths, cultures,

traditions � its peoples vary wildly. ASEAN seeks to place over the top of all that
a Western-style, suits-and-ties forum that not only encourages the already
occurring, unfortunate process of westernisation; it also promotes homogeneity
amongst those who should be celebrating their differences.

cons

The tide of westernisation is precisely what ASEAN intends to protect its members
from, by offering a platform of regional activity that is distinctly different,
distinctly southeast Asian.
Furthermore, the �heterogeneity� of the region is an argument for both sides. Left
to their own devices, these cultures often fall back on age-old rivalries and
resentments. A forum that stresses the advantages and potential of the region
working together is vital to prevent recurrence of this.