Growth and Development
Introduction
Despite radical differences in cultural, political, and living standards in ASEAN countries, the 10-member state organization has come to an agreement in promoting democracy in 2003 ASEAN-Bali summit, Bali Concord 11, signifying a milestone in progressing towards a “community framework”, similar to that of the European Union [1]. They have traditionally undertaken a non-interference approach, whereby each state is not to interfere in the affairs of others.
Economic Growth
Under the 2003 ASEAN-Bali summit plan of a tighter economic unification, declarations were made to create an ASEAN Free-trade Area (AFTA) by 2020 [2], signifying the movement to a single market through the freeing of trade. This is to counter the economic threat of the economically fast-growing Asian giants, namely China and India, which are tapping off investment necessary for ASEAN’s economic development [3]. Hence states had great incentives to join together as an economic bloc to attract investment. Previously, poorer ASEAN countries have objected to such free trade agreements in fear of injuring politically sensitive industries such as agriculture.
With the reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers, AFTA will be able to increase the region’s competitive advantage as a production base in the world market, thus increasing foreign investment to ASEAN. Additional pr’grams to the AFTA such as the development of common product certification standards were also initiated over the last few years.
Trade agreements with China, India and Japan are also under negotiations to create the world’s most populous market of 1.7 billion consumers.
References:
- [1]ASEAN, changing but only slowly: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3173458.stm
- [2]ASEAN Free Trade Area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASEAN_Free_Trade_Area
- [3]ASEAN deals with Asian giants: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3173414.stm
Development in political and security relationships
Past
Member countries signed the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia at the First ASEAN Summit in Bali in February 1976, spelling out the basic principles for their relations with one another and the conduct of the association’s programme for cooperation. Retrieved from the official ASEAN website, they are as follow:
- Mutual respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and national identity of all nations
- The right of every state to lead its national existence free from external interference, subversion or coercion;
- Noninterference in the internal affairs of one another
- Settlement of differences or disputes by peaceful means
- Renunciation of the threat or use of force
- Effective cooperation among themselves
Present
Democratic societies
Communist government
Absolute Monarchy
Military-run
As mentioned beforehand, the ASEAN states, even communist ones, pledged to subscribe to democratic processes in their countries in order to promote regional peace and stability during the Bali Concord 11, despite their pre-existing political differences. With this pledge, they also highlighted their commitment to non-interference between member states. So the question is how has the political situation in each country progressed since this pledge? Even more puzzling is the question if this commitment to non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs is an optimal choice for the general development of the region? What are the consequences of this non-interference for ASEAN?
References:
- ASEAN Official website: www.aseansec.org
The Burma Protest
Following a government decision on 15 August to raise the prices of fuel (power and diesel), sporadic protests began in military-ruled Burma, in Rangoon, the capital city. Authorities acted quickly to quell the protests, arresting a dozens of activists.
On 5 September, the use of force to break up a peaceful rally in Pakokku injured at least 3 monks, upsetting the monks. Subsequently, the monks kidnapped several governmental officers, requesting for an apology by 17 September. The government did not respond, leading to an increase in protest participation by the monks.
The participation of the monks is significant as they are the spiritual pillars of the Burmese society, and 80 to 90 percent of the Burmese society subscribes to Buddhism. Playing vital roles such as religious guidance, they are given non-cash handouts in return for their services, thus allowing the donor to earn “spiritual credits”. The refusal to receive all handouts from the military would deprive the military members of earning the credits, and also diminish the image of the government as being pious. The Burmese military junta thus risked losing any inch of legitimacy they still hold.
The protests escalated into demonstrations when thousands of people from the public responded to the calls of the monks. At first, the military leaders did nothing about the protests. However, they started taking a tougher stance following the increasing protests. Dusk-to-dawn curfews were introduced; thousands of people were arrested and deported into detention camps. Tear gas and baton charges were even employed to suppress the protesters.
The Burma Protest: International Reaction
Sanctions were imposed on Burma by US. China, Russia and India called for the military leaders to use less violence. However, they maintained that they do not want to be involved in the domestic affairs of Burma. ASEAN, on the other hand, called for Burma to stop the violence. However, it is still internationally-scrutinized for not taking a tougher stance towards the Burma Protest.[1] It is heard that some Singaporean banks have stopped economic transactions with the Burmese community.
References
- Monks
- ASEAN grapples with Burma question: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7102936.stm