On Regional Tensions, Don't Expect Too Much of ASEAN
During the same week, Thai and Cambodian troops skirmished along a disputed part of their nations' border, leaving one Cambodian soldier dead. These incidents – alongside the ongoing conflict in Myanmar and persistent maritime clashes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea – underscore the increasingly dynamic and complex security environment facing the region.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is well-positioned to play an active role in managing, though not solving, these regional conflicts. While some believe that ASEAN should attempt to resolve such conflicts, it is important to clarify that ASEAN was established primarily as a conflict management platform. It is not structured, nor is it equipped, for conflict resolution in the traditional sense, given the nature of its operating and decision-making mechanisms. To understand ASEAN's limitations in resolving conflicts, we must revisit the rationale behind its formation and the foundational principles that guide its operations.
ASEAN was founded in August 1967, in the aftermath of the Indonesia–Malaysia Konfrontasi and during the intensification of the Vietnam War. Its aim was to foster peace, stability, and prosperity in the region. Its five founding members – Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, and the Philippines – envisioned it as a platform for regional confidence-building. Initially, ASEAN focused on cooperation on socio-economic and cultural matters.
Since the end of the Cold War, ASEAN has expanded to include all Southeast Asian nations, with the last remaining outlier, Timor-Leste, expected to become a full member by the end of 2025. It has also broadened its multilateral engagements through various mechanisms – such as the ASEAN Regional Forum, the ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting, the ASEAN Political-Security Community, and the ASEAN Community – which aim to facilitate dialogue on security and economic cooperation. These forums allow for inclusive discussions and trust-building but often stop short of producing concrete and binding outcomes, particularly on contentious geopolitical matters.
Two core principles define ASEAN's identity: non-intervention in the internal affairs of member states, and consensus-based decision-making. These enduring and pragmatic principles have enabled ASEAN to remain an inclusive and sustainable organization. ASEAN's approach to regional disputes stems from these principles, as demonstrated in the Five-Point Consensus plan addressing the Myanmar conflict, and in the ongoing negotiations over an ASEAN-China Code of Conduct for the South China Sea.
The Five-Point Consensus on Myanmar was adopted in April 2021, three months after the Myanmar military's coup d'état, when ASEAN leaders reached a collective agreement on how to manage the Myanmar crisis, though the Consensus lacks binding and enforceable actions. Meanwhile, negotiations for the ASEAN-China Code of Conduct have spanned over two decades, illustrating both the inclusive nature of ASEAN's consensus-based approach, which values every member's input, and the inherent difficulty of reaching unified agreement on complex and sensitive issues. Moreover, external actors such as China, the United States, and the European Union continue to exert influence on ASEAN's internal dynamics, further complicating the process of establishing unified regional positions.
It is therefore necessary to temper expectations regarding ASEAN's capacity to resolve deeply rooted regional issues. ASEAN and its mechanisms were never intended for such a role. The bloc lacks binding legal instruments and enforcement capabilities, and its consensus-based approach means that it is often hampered by divergent political priorities among member states, particularly on issues that touch upon their core national interests.
In light of these structural limitations, ASEAN cannot be expected to assume a greater role in managing today's regional security challenges. Instead, its value lies in providing an important platform for fostering dialogues and confidence-building measures. While limited in yielding immediate and context-specific tangible outcomes, these remain essential for long-term regional stability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NHK
6 minutes ago
- NHK
Over 300 memorandums between Japan and African nations eyed at TICAD
The Japanese government and companies plan to exchange more than 300 memorandums with their counterparts from Africa who are visiting Japan to attend the Tokyo International Conference on African Development, or TICAD. The Japan-led conference will take place over three days from Wednesday in Yokohama, near Tokyo. Sources say the Japanese government and firms plan to sign the memorandums with their partners from Africa in a bid to deepen relations with them. Some of them are designed to help the governments of African nations import Japanese products in seven fields, such as healthcare and agriculture. Japanese financial institutions will provide loans to governments in Africa via the African Export-Import Bank. Insurance companies affiliated with the Japanese government are to underwrite the loans to facilitate the transactions. In one case, the Kenyan government is expected to obtain a loan insured for hundreds of millions dollars so that it can be used as a subsidy to promote investments from Japanese automakers and others. Africa, with its growing population, is viewed as a growth market amid uncertainty for the outlook for Japanese exports due to the Trump administration's tariff measures.
Yomiuri Shimbun
8 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Leadership Struggle for AI Governance Spreads in Southeast Asia as Counter to Chinese Inroads in Region
Japan, the United States and Europe are in a leadership battle with China over rulemaking for artificial intelligence, and Southeast Asia has become a front line. Japan is trying to draw the Association of Southeast Asian Nations into the rulemaking process by backing efforts by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to promote trustworthy AI. On Aug. 6, about 30 ASEAN officials and AI experts gathered at the Japanese ambassador's residence in Bangkok for a workshop to explain the OECD's AI Policy Toolkit. The intention of the meeting was to give a hearing to the Southeast Asian countries' opinions on the Toolkit, which will be announced next spring. The OECD has established AI principles that emphasize a 'human-centric' approach to AI and respect for human rights. The Toolkit includes a self-assessment questionnaire designed to help countries bridge the gap between the OECD AI Principles and their own policies. It also provides examples of how the principles are being applied in other countries. Japan has been supporting workshops that use the Toolkit to promote the OECD AI Principles and that get ASEAN members involved in creating OECD-centered rules for AI governance. As international regulations will determine the future direction of AI development, Japan is trying to win over 'like-minded companions' at the rulemaking stage. 'We must establish a reliable framework in terms of ethics and transparency,' Ambassador to Thailand Masato Otaka said at the meeting. In the background of these efforts are similar moves by China, which has stressed the need to adopt the BRICS framework for AI governance. BRICS, a bloc of major emerging economies, has established a presence in Southeast Asia, with Indonesia recently becoming a member. Following a BRICS summit in Brazil in July, a document summarizing the results of the event was released. The document stated that 'Public Interest Comes First' in AI development. The OECD is wary that the statement reflects China's desire to take the lead in rulemaking in the field of AI. China is making inroads within ASEAN, with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies Co. having expanded its market share in various countries in the region. A participant in the August workshop expressed support for the OECD AI Principles, saying, 'Technological innovation and reliability should go hand in hand.' However, they added: 'Many groups besides the OECD have proposed AI rules. We need to consider which rules will best serve our national interests.'
Japan Today
8 hours ago
- Japan Today
Syria's Sharaa hopes for Kurdish deal to prevent conflict
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa attends a signing ceremony of a memorandum of understanding for investment in Syria, in Damascus, Syria August 6, 2025. REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi/File Photo By Suleiman Al-Khalidi Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has expressed hope that his country would avoid military conflict with U.S.-backed Kurdish forces if efforts to integrate their autonomous administration in northeast Syria into the state structure collapse. In remarks late on Saturday to senior figures from Idlib, where he has mustered loyalist forces, Sharaa said Kurdish leaders had signalled readiness to move forward with a landmark deal in March to bring their Kurdish-run areas under state authority. But their actions on the ground suggested otherwise, he told the publicised forum. 'At times on the ground there are signals opposite to what they say in the negotiations,' Sharaa said. Turkey and Washington, the main powers backing the deal to integrate Syria's oil-rich northeast into the state, wanted to resolve the issue peacefully, Sharaa said. "These parties are pushing for a solution peacefully. I hope we don't enter into a dispute. I am hopeful in a few months we will resolve it," he said. The collapse of follow-up talks since the March deal has escalated tensions in the region, triggering fresh clashes this month between government troops and the Kurdish-led, U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The SDF, which controls parts of northeast Syria where Arabs form a majority, has recently fortified extensive tunnel networks along the frontlines. Many tribal Arabs accuse the SDF of discriminatory policies - claims Kurdish officials deny. CONCERN OVER MAJOR ESCALATION Turkey-backed rebels have also reinforced their positions amid concerns over a potential large-scale escalation in hostilities, officials say. Ankara has warned of military action against the SDF, which it considers a terrorist organization and has targeted in past cross-border operations. It expects the Syrian government to address its security concerns but says it reserves the right to mount an offensive if needed. U.S. envoy for Syria, Tom Barrack - an advocate for a strong, unified Syrian state - voiced concern last month over Kurdish delays in implementing the March deal, urging faster progress. Authorities in Damascus reacted earlier this month angrily to a recent SDF conference calling for greater decentralization and which demanded a review of a constitutional declaration it said discriminated against minorities, a move officials said threatened Syria's territorial integrity. Syrian officials said any military push against the SDF would rely on Turkish-backed factions operating in northern Syria, adding that Ankara has grown impatient with what it sees as Kurdish foot-dragging. Sharaa said those who sought partition were 'dreaming' and insisted the country would not give up any stretch of territory. He also criticized Druze groups seeking support from Israel in their confrontation with Damascus. Thousands joined a large Druze protest in Sweida on Saturday, demanding self-determination, hoisting Israeli flags and praising Israel for a military intervention that forced Syrian forces to retreat after hundreds of people were killed last month. Sharaa acknowledged that 'violations' had been committed by security forces and army personnel in Sweida, but said Druze militias had also perpetrated crimes. © Thomson Reuters 2025.
