ASEAN Momentum: the relaunch of EU’s and Italy’s relations with Southeast Asia

ASEAN’s journey started on August 8, 1967, when the five founding countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) formally set up the organization. The remaining five countries, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia, joined it in 1984, 1995, 1997 and 1999 respectively. The original aim of integration in the late 1960s was to enhance security cooperation in the region, which has remained a key part of the ASEAN agenda along its history. The objectives of the organization are based on three pillars: “to promote peace and regional stability”; “to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region”; “to stimulate active cooperation and mutual assistance in areas of common interest in the economic, social, cultural, technical, scientific and administrative fields”. To understand why it became necessary, let us briefly analyse the historical context of those years. In the 1960s, Southeast Asia was composed of embryonic states in which the process of nation-building was weak or totally absent. The founding states of ASEAN also experienced a paradoxical situation: internationally recognised as states, they lacked domestic political legitimacy.

The advance of communism and the victory of the Vietcong in South Vietnam make the leaders of these countries fear further revolts and the expansion of subversive forces. It became clear to each of the founding countries of ASEAN that in order to resist and survive the turmoil of the time it was necessary to be able to count on additional allies, in addition to the Western countries most involved in the policy of containment. In addition to protecting and fostering nationbuilding within the countries concerned, ASEAN was also the product of various reconciliation mechanisms that emerged around the 1960s. It should not be forgotten that the founding countries themselves were not on good terms with each other. Just think of the conflict between Malaysia and the Philippines over the territory of Sabah, on the island of Borneo, annexed to the federation of Malaysia in 1963 as a state and claimed by the Philippines as its former possession. Another factor that favoured the emergence of Asian regionalism was economic: in 1967, Asian economies were essentially agricultural and not very industrialized, still subject to unbalanced power relations with the Western powers. The construction of an Asian regionalism therefore also had, among its main objectives, that of fostering and accelerating economic growth. Lastly, a political factor must also be mentioned, namely the desire to break away from the logic of power dictated by the West and to present a united front in order to avoid being manipulated or exploited by the former colonizing countries. It was thus that the different reconciliation mechanisms and the will to protect their national construction led to the birth of ASEAN in 1967 with the Bangkok Declaration.

The economic crisis of 1997-1998 made it necessary to change and deepen relations between ASEAN members and their neighbors, leading to the birth of ASEAN+3, i.e. a political and economic dialogue between ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea. The main goal of this new forum was to strengthen macroeconomic surveillance mechanisms, through the implementation of the ASEAN Surveillance Process (ASP) in 1998, and to create regional financial assistance mechanisms within ASEAN+3 such as the FMA, i.e. a monetary fund for the Asia region, which was supposed to prevent the emergence of further financial crises. Moreover, in 1997, heads of each member state adopted the ASEAN Vision 2020 as a means for the realization of a single ASEAN community providing peace and stability, closer economic integration, human and sustainable development, cultural heritage and the environment, among other goals. Formalized in 2003, the ASEAN Vision 2020 established three pillars of a single ASEAN community: Political-Security Community (APSC), Economic Community (AEC) and Socio- Cultural Community (ASCC). The bloc has since developed two blueprints under each of the three pillars that outline the goals and principles, institutional bodies and mechanisms and initiatives for the completion of each one.

The organization’s areas of intervention and membership have expanded considerably over the years. Through more than 50 years of economic, political, security and social integration initiatives, ASEAN has developed a complex and multifaceted institutional and governance framework to carry out its activities. With the adoption of the “ASEAN Charter” (15 December 2008), the association has taken an important step towards becoming a true community and transformed it into a legal entity. The charter is a legally binding document that codified norms, rules and values while setting clear targets for ASEAN and creating accountability and compliance mechanisms. The Charter stated ASEAN’s purposes and principles, outlined different ASEAN organs and their functions, set decision-making procedures and processes, created a dispute settlement system, and described its relationship with external and multilateral dialogue partners. It is important to note that under the Charter, ASEAN maintained the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of member states and consensus-based decision-making: a deliberate decision from ASEAN leaders to avoid creating a strong supranational body. ASEAN’s increasingly complex organizational structure and principles create a unique set of trade-offs in the development and implementation of initiatives. The institutional flexibilities, monetary limitations and ASEAN’s principle of non-interference and consensus decision-making establish a norm for a unique decision-making style which is oftentimes termed as the “ASEAN Way”.

Under this principle, ASEAN has had to constantly balance its commitment to national sovereignty and non- interference with the power and influence of a supranational body. Since its foundation, ASEAN has always played an important stabilizing role in Southeast Asia and East Asia in general. Today ASEAN has acquired a new centrality in the global geopolitical context. However, ASEAN’s capacity to offer a collective diplomatic response to the new geopolitics is now under scrutiny. Membership expansion from the group’s original five states has made reconciling national positions difficult. Security threats have expanded from territorial conflicts and domestic rebellions to pandemics, climate crises, and terrorism, imposing new burdens on ASEAN’s limited resources.