Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Given its structure and its duties, a couple of criticisms come to mind: 1.) The
recommendations of each permanent representatives are likely to become “more nationalistic”
than “regionalized”; and 2.) permanent membership could likely arise to abuse.
The second criticism is rooted on the fact that there has been no “formal provision” in
terms of removing permanent members from the Committee. This “permanent” status could be
used as a leverage and/or justification to push for what I referred to above as “nationalistic”
interests. Absent any rules on disarming this possibility, each ASEAN member state are free to
be “stubborn” during negotiations.
On the other hand, Article 43 of the ASEAN Charter provides that the ASEAN Committee
in Third Countries and International Organizations or ACTCs are established to promote
ASEAN’s interests and identity in the respective host countries and/or international
organizations.
While a growing number of ACTCs are established all over the world, one criticism that
can be pointed out is that these various ACTCs must have stronger intra-ASEAN cooperation in
that the core ASEAN values that the CPR wishes to propagate must not be compromised for the
sake of “partnership” of non-ASEAN organizations.
Reference
https://asean.org/what-we-do/committee-of-permanent-representatives/
https://asean.org/our-communities/asean-political-security-community/outward-
looking-community/external-relations/asean-committee-in-third-countries-and-international-
organisations-actcs/#:~:text=ASEAN%20Committee%20in%20Third%20Countries,Sector
%20Efforts%20on%20COVID%2D19
https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/images/2015/March1/list_of_non_AMS-ACTC/
List%20of%20ACTC%20as%20of%20March%202015.pdf