Entrevista ao SG da ASEAN

ABC
ASEAN secretary general Mr Ong Keng Yong - 06/06/2006

In response to the recent security crisis in East Timor, Australia is leading a multi-national force, including troops from Malaysia, to try to restore law and order in the troubled new nation.

Canberra's actions are proving less controversial than in 1999, when the Australian-led intervention against Indonesia-backed militias in East Timor was viewed in Asia as aggressive.

Yet some analysts have been questioning why the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), isn't being more proactive in responding to security crises in its own backyard.

ASEAN also faces other challenges. Its narrow focus on economics and its non-interference policy is now being questioned by some member nations. Regional security is the issue which may shake ASEAN from what one analyst describes as "its semi-comatose state".

Someone who understands the strengths and weaknesses of ASEAN is its secretary general, Mr Ong Keng Yong. He talks about the possibility of a security role for the organisation; the ASEAN view of East Timor and the grouping's perceived failure in Burma.
Regional stability and security as a means of achieving economic goals are at the heart of the raison d'etre of ASEAN. How do you see the situation in East Timor, the problems there, playing out at the moment?

Well, it is a very unfortunate turn of events. We hope that the government and the friends that they have invited to come into East Timor will be able to manage it.

You don't think there's a problem having a predominantly Australian-led interventionist force in an Asian region, especially given that there was controversy over Australia's intervention before?

There is a situation there that the East Timor government warrants the invitation to friends around the region to help them. So, I think it is quite a different situation now. We have to be cautious about all our historical baggage. And we should look at the situation now, under the point of the president there at this moment. It is ready, at the invitation of the government, to control a law and order situation.

Malaysia's role is being seen as pivotal. How's that being seen both around the region and by ASEAN?

We all want to see a very stable and peaceful East Timor. And if our ASEAN member countries - whether individually or, even in the later case, collectively - can contribute to this process, I think it will be looked at positively.

When you talk about unstable states being in your region and in our region, of course, is there scope for ASEAN countries to take a greater role in this type of interventionist force?

I think there are some people in the ASEAN family who would like to do more than that. But the trouble is that we are not constituted to perform these kind of functions. And so we have to improvise as we go along, depending on the situation. And as you are aware, the individual ASEAN member countries were active in the Aceh peace process and some of them were involved in the Mindanao situation. And now with this East Timor situation, I believe that we should take it case by case.

One commentator was unkind enough to say that ASEAN hadn't played a greater role because of what he put down to "its semi-comatose state". What do you say about that?

Well, he's entitled to his own view but I think, at the end of the day, the facts on the ground and the consequences were theorised that there's a sort of wisdom in the policy of ASEAN vis-a-vis East Timor in the earlier years.

But is there not a need for ASEAN to remain proactive on this and to have some sort of rapid deployment group itself?

There may be a need for that. I think some of our member countries have been discussing this issue more and more openly among our family members, so to speak. There is a sense of feeling that we should be looking at the security of the region in a more long-term, more strategic view. And whatever we can do to preserve the stability and security of the region will be useful.

Malaysia's Prime Minister, Mr Badawi, has warned that "economic considerations are pushing nations in one direction and other considerations are pulling them in another direction". What do you think he meant by that?

There is always this interplay of political, economic, social and other kinds of forces at work. We feel that for ASEAN to maintain a competitive position, we have to integrate all our 10 economies. But at the same time, many of our countries are still very jealously guarding their own political position, their own policy vis-a-vis various other countries in the region and beyond.

Which countries are you talking about specifically?

Well, all of us have our own special positions and policies. And no-one in particular can be said to be completely devoted to just the concept of ASEAN economic integration. So, it is a question of our member countries deciding how to place the interests of ASEAN. If they feel that ASEAN has to be developed, has to be evolved into a credible regional grouping, then they must give more weight to what is considered ASEAN's interests.

So are you saying that the East Asia community is not a real prospect now?

If you are talking of a community based on the kind of experience the European Union has undergone, then I think it is very far from that goal. But if you are talking about more of the economic integration, more of the market coming together, into a more singular economic entity, then the prospects are very good.

Actually, on the ground now, the trade between ASEAN countries and the North East Asian countries of China, Japan and Korea is very substantial. And, overall, the trade among all these 13 countries in the region - South East Asia and North East Asia - is also very substantial.

One of the barriers to ASEAN's future growth has been said to be its policy towards Burma. Do you see that as a problem?

There is a problem only insofar as we have to deal with the representation made by external parties on a daily basis to ASEAN. Among ourselves, as you are aware, Myanmar's [Burma's] economy is not a very weighty one. And we are trying our best to work with the Myanmar people on what we call capacity building and bringing them more and more into the open market.

But the criticism of ASEAN has been that you're actually not dealing with Burma, that you're appeasing the regime there. And after all, Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest.

The political element is always there and we have to learn how to live with all the pressure being exerted on ASEAN as a result of the situation. The problem, as you pointed out, is that the outside world consider Myanmar an issue. And they have no leverage now and they think that ASEAN, as a regional organisation, can do more. But I go back to my earlier point that our organisation is not constituted to do all these kinds of activities.