| Yawning
Bread. 20 February 2009
Sec-gen issues open invitation to participate in Asean community building
|
|
|||
|
He cited the example of Europe, where today, people have adopted two identities -– a national one and a pan-European one. Why is this important? Yawning Bread thinks it is because the Asean Charter is vague. To give substance to it, much work has to be done, and no work will be accomplished unless people are impassioned enough and identify enough with Asean, to push forward.
Pitsuwan put it more inspiringly when he said, "Don't underestimate the power of the Word." The Charter's text may still be vague, but they can be leveraged. He recalled a recent conversation with Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, wherein he pointed out that at the time the US constitution was promulgated, it was not intended to encompass women and black men, but look where it is today. Likewise, Asean citizens "should take [the Charter] as a living document." Pitsuwan was speaking at a Pan-Asean video conference on the morning of Friday 20 February 2009, as part of his initiative to engage directly with civil society representatives, by-passing governments. The Singapore office of the World Bank lent their video-conferencing facilities. This discussion was part of the lead-up to the coming Asean summit in Cha Am, Thailand, in the last week of February. I believe the Secretary-general wanted a sounding of the concerns that ordinary people and civil society groups had, before he met with the heads of government. There will be a debriefing session post-summit via similar video-conferencing. I was among eight persons representing different civil society groups from Singapore. The group that I represented was Maruah -– the Singapore Working Group for the Asean Human Rights Mechanism. There were groups in video halls in seven other capitals: Jakarta, Manila, Hanoi, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Phnom Penh and Vientiane. Brunei and Myanmar were not represented because the technical facilities were not available, the Secretary-general said. Unfortunately, time was extremely limited -- the entire session lasting no more than 90 minutes -- and after Pitsuwan's short speech, each country was allowed only one question. The eight of us in Singapore had to quickly agree on a common question, and I was nominated to be the speaker. * * * * * First however, let me give you a gist of what Pitsuwan said in his opening remarks. He noted that according to the ideals expressed in the Asean Charter, we are supposed to build an Asean community by 2015, with three pillars:
Expanding on the second point, efforts must be made to raise living standards, yet ensuring that the fruits of development are equitably distributed. "Development must be inclusive," he stressed. He gave a few examples of the type of economic integration that leaders are aiming for. There is a push for mutual recognition of professional training, to open up space and opportunities for professionals in the region. But he warned that this is not all gain and no sweat. "It poses a challenge to professionals," he said. "If you are not well trained, you may find it hard to compete." There is much to be done with customs procedures. Currently, it can take three weeks for a consignment of spare parts to move from Vietnam overland through Cambodia to Thailand, when it should be two days. Imagine what might happen if the cargo consisted of perishable goods; they would be rotten by the time they reached the customer. Bureaucratic and non-tariff barriers to trade must be removed if we wish to see the benefits of Asean integration. Further on, he shared an unexpected insight: It is not the least-developed countries of Asean that stand in the way of free trade and integrated economies, as may be commonly believed. It is the middle-developed countries -– he didn't name them, like the true diplomat he is -– that do. These are the countries with industries and vested interests to protect, he explained. Rod Severino, the former Asean Secretary-general, who was seated on my right, nodded in agreement, "It's true," he said to me. He named the countries too, but I shall diplomatically not reveal them here. On the third pillar, much work needs to be done to make sure that the 570 million people of Asean "are awake and aware that they own the organisation," said Pitsuwan. When that happens, he continued a little further on, "I can guarantee you that [Asean] can be more than a talk shop." * * * * *
This must have been an issue that irked the Asean chief greatly, because I detected some undiplomatic humour when Pitsuwan condensed the issue thus: Here are two Buddhist kingdoms fighting over a scrap of land containing some Hindu ruins. More seriously, his reply was that quiet diplomatic moves have taken place involving many other Asean foreign ministers to lower the temperature and urge a resolution. However, the consensus was that the two sides should exhaust all bilateral mechanisms to solve the problem before Asean steps in. At the same time, other Asean foreign ministers have made themselves available whenever needed. It is true, Pitsuwan conceded, that Asean needs more precise procedures for dealing with such disputes. "But it is an evolutionary process. It's the first time we're dealing with such an issue and therefore we need to find and feel our way along." Laos' question was about the development gap between the richer and poorer Asean countries and how it can be closed. Pitsuwan tried to provide some perspective. Unlike the European Union, which has 80 – 100 billion Euros a year to help weaker members, Asean has nowhere near this kind of resources. Instead, Asean is engaging with external dialogue partners, such as Australia, China, Japan, Canada and the EU to lend a hand. These countries, he said, are all committed to supplementing our own initiatives. I couldn't catch Indonesia's question because the sound wasn't good, but from Pitsuwan's answer, I reckon it was about human rights. So I will fold this into the other questions about human rights, including the one I asked on behalf of Singapore. Malaysia asked a two-headed question. The first was about whether there was any convergence of economic policies, especially as the recent announcements of budget packages meant to fight the economic downturn are all national. Pitsuwan's answer was very general. He said that Asean is different from the EU. In Europe, countries have to meet certain criteria before they can join the group. In Asean, the only qualification for membership is that one has to be situated in this geographical region, so there are more differences to manage. Each economy will have a different pace, and economic convergence in Asean will have to be "at a speed that is comfortable to all in all areas." Malaysia's other query was how Asean was reaching out to the people sector and civil society organisations. Again, I will fold this into the human rights set. Philippines also asked a complicated question, much of which I couldn't quite catch, but there was some mention of the situation of farmers and minority groups. I'm not sure what kind of minorities the speaker was referring to. The Secretary-general's answer was brief and tended towards motherhood statements, about how minority rights form part of the third pillar, and how "we have to learn to accept this kind of individual minority values and rights". Trying to erase identities is not the aim of Asean integration, he underlined. Thailand referred to the "economic crisis". What is the status of the Asean Monetary Fund? (I had not heard of this before). How can Asean help and protect vulnerable groups in the downturn? In response, Pitsuwan assured the Thai panel that Asean countries were working together. He pointed out an interesting fact: In this part of the world -– and I think he was referring not just to Asean, but Asean + 3 (Japan, China and South Korea) -– even as more than 40 percent of GDP is saved, we do not have good mechanisms for mobilising these savings for development. Thus the idea for an Asian Monetary Fund, and other proposals for Asean+3 to pool resources. These would not replace existing institutions, but act as an alternative helpline in time of crisis. During this crisis, he said, there is tension between action needed for the short term and that needed for the long term, such as investment in infrastructure and human resources. The latter must still be done even as Asean countries try to take care of the poor and marginalised, like putting money in consumers' hands to jumpstart their economies. Vietnam spoke about "putting all Asean people at the centre". Asean leaders don't listen, said its spokesman, and our countries "don't have a mechanism for all opinions to be respected." "What is the practical solution to ensure that voices of Asean people are heard?" Their question was very similar to Singapore's, which I had asked before the Vietnamese had their turn. Consolidating the various opinions around our table, I registered Singaporeans' interest that Asean institutions and processes must have avenues open to individuals and civil society to plug in their concerns, especially when those concerns are not supported by our governments. What mechanisms are there, I asked, for us to do so, particularly with respect to the issues that the Singapore participants were seized with: human rights, the environment, democracy in Burma and corporate social responsibility?
|
|
|||
|
I wasn't surprised that it was not easy for Pitsuwan to give a specific answer to this type of question about access, despite it being asked, in varying ways, by four countries, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam. This was because it's a new agenda item for Asean. As Pitsuwan stressed in direct answer to my question, where Asean used to be an association of countries, today, post-Charter, Asean is meant to be a community. "With the Charter, every issue is on the table. Every issue is legitimate." But his very next sentence was strange. "It is up to each minister to pick and choose what issues he wants to raise." Which was not quite the point that four countries had raised. On our minds was how to get an issue on the table should no minister want to raise it. That being the case, I don't quite understand the answer provided. However, he also said that the people sector also has to be "inventive, innovative and creative" in making themselves heard. "The Charter is there," he pointed out. "Three common blueprints are there. The terms of reference for the human rights body are there. The appeal to the lofty principle of democracy is there." If one is inventive, the Asean processes "are more than ready to listen" to various non-governmental parties, Pitsuwan said. "This is a new era", he stressed again. Then, referring to the four specific areas I raised on behalf of the Singapore group, Asean is evolving, he assured us, into a community that is willing to express all these concerns. To Malaysia, he had given a similar reply. "The space is very much open." He noted a mushrooming of non-government organisations getting together and trying to register their grievances, complaints and contributions into Asean. "The people of Asean already have full credentials to participate and do what you are doing now." "Take it as an open invitation." He reminded all present that individuals and civil society groups have the space to participate by virtue of the fact that they are citizens. "I hope you will not wait for official statements" before taking the initiative. Likewise to Indonesia, he said he was very comfortable with the fact that there are eleven references in the Charter to promoting and protecting human rights. He conceded that when it comes to the concept of protecting, it may involve going in to investigate and coming up with judgements, and that in turn will come up against another provision of the Charter that speaks of non-interference. "How to implement that?" It will take all the "arts and sciences of diplomacy; it won't be easy." But the process has begun, Pitsuwan said optimistically. When Vietnam, in its question, zoomed in for "practical" solutions for access, he said the Secretariat would work through networking. He even mentioned emails. "You can write to us, or appeal to ministers." Exhorting the people sector to be more pro-active in the new landscape provided by the Asean Charter, he reiterated, "This time around, if we fail in achieving an Asean community, don't just blame the leaders and diplomats." * * * * * "With this kind of exercise, nobody should feel anxious." He was not here, he added, to "reveal anything", or to "encroach" on others' turf. He was merely inviting people to participate in the Asean project. Who do you think he was addressing with
those words? © Yawning Bread
|
|
|||
|
Footnotes None Addenda None
|
|
"Unless and until we have that second identity in everyone, Asean
will not be on firmer ground going into the future," said Surin
Pitsuwan, the Asean Secretary-general. The second identity he was
referring to was the identity of being an Asean citizen, not just an
Indonesian, Vietnamese or Thai.
