NVDB005_-_CH_3.007._Myanmar’s_political_decay_and_its_spillover_effect_on_ASEAN_-_Kavi-2

43 — DP Vol. 05

Regional Security Dilemma: Trends, Directions, and Illusion

On February 1, 2021, the Myanmar coup took ASEAN by surprise, as none of them could ever have imagined that the internal disputes within the country would upend its successful engagement over the past three decades. ASEAN has previously been credited for its perseverance and persistence in resolving the conflict in the resource-rich country.

The most frequently asked question now is: Does ASEAN have the capacity to help end the recent conflict and bring about normalcy to this war-torn country? To answer this question, it is important to understand the current context that Myanmar and ASEAN as a whole are faced with.

First, Myanmar is no longer the same country as in the past when it was governed largely by military rulers following its independence in 1946. For the past decade, at the very least, the people of Myanmar, especially the millennial generation, have enjoyed a free, open, and democratic society as never before experienced. It has been repeatedly stated that the ASEAN way, based on non-intervention and consensus, has been a panacea for its internal crisis .

Given the current geopolitical landscape, ASEAN is encountering new challenges posed by heightened superpower rivalry. In the past, the bipolar world was less difficult to navigate because there were no clear red lines. However, as the Russian-Ukraine war has manifested, the room for such maneuvering is getting smaller by the day. Some of the ASEAN members have already chosen a side. The grouping’s split positions should not be interpreted as a liability, as it serves the grouping’s overall interest, to maintain dialogue and cooperation with all external partners. Diversity in ASEAN is therefore an asset demonstrating the group’s pragmatism .

Second, the need for speed should be a key priority in the years to come. At the moment, the decision-making process is very structured and time-consuming. For the past five decades, such procedural steps have served the ASEAN members well. However, in the age of social media and fake news, ASEAN must streamline some of the procedures to ascertain timely decisions.

One new trend occurring during Cambodia’s current chairmanship of ASEAN has been increased dialogue among the ASEAN leaders. Prime Minister Hun Sen took the initiative to consult with other ASEAN leaders, including Indonesian President Widodo Joko, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and Malaysian Prime Minister Sabri Jacob on the Myanmar crisis. This kind of informal consultation should be encouraged due to the ever-changing strategic landscape of the region and world. Apart from the ASEAN-related summits that are held each year, more informal meetings must be organized to strengthen and increase mutual trust among the grouping’s leaders.

Finally, due to the Myanmar crisis and the currently evolving Russia-Ukraine war, the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) is becoming an important regional instrument to promote ASEAN’s fundamental principles as potentially binding principles for all the fifty signatories. The six principles outlined in the TAC are very useful for ASEAN in conducting its collective diplomacy. Two of these principles would continue to be highlighted. Firstly, the right of every state to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion, or coercion and secondly, non-inter- ference in the internal affairs of one another.

In the post-Covid-19 world, the TAC’s significance will continue to increase as international community seeks an exit strategy to a coming bipolar world.

Kavi Chongkittavorn is a senior fellow at the Institute of Security and International Studies (ISIS) Thailand. He has been a journalist for more than three decades covering Thai and regional politics. He began his career as a reporter in 1983 and became the paper’s foreign news editor in 1986. Then, he was asked to explore Indochina - first as Bureau Chief in Phnom Penh, Cambodia (1988-1990) and later on in Hanoi, Vietnam (1990-1992). After a year in Oxford University as Reuter Fellow in 1994, he went to Jakarta and served as Special Assistant to the Secretary-General of ASEAN in Jakarta in 1995 before returning to journalism. He was named the Human Rights Journalist of 1998 to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Amnesty International. From 1999-2000, he was the President of the Thai Journalists Association. From 2000-2001, he went to Harvard University as Nieman Fellow. He served as a member of the jury and from 2005-2008 as its chair of Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize organized by UNESCO.’