Asean+8: A New Approach to Asia’s Regional Architecture

Jakarta Globe, Dr. K. Kesavapany, May 09, 2010

As the international center of economic gravity moves towards East Asia, the challenge for the region is to develop a new architecture commensurate with its growing role in world affairs.

There is no doubt that East Asian countries are well-represented in the Group of 20, which is turning into a genuine platform for international economic cooperation. China and India, the two rising Asian giants, are prominent members of the G20. There are also Japan, South Korea, Australia and Indonesia.

However, the G20 is not, and cannot by its nature be envisaged as, an East Asian organization. The Asian voices are matched, if not overwhelmed, by those of the United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico and Argentina from the Americas; the European Union and its individual countries of Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Italy; the great Eurasian power of Russia; Turkey, another Eurasian country; Saudi Arabia, the leader of the oil-producing world; and South Africa.

The G20 is a global organization that seeks to reflect the existing balance of economic power. It is certainly necessary, but it is difficult to see how it could reflect the aspirations and responsibilities of an ascendant East Asia.

At the other end of the spectrum lies Asean. Arguably the most successful regional grouping in the Third World, it is small enough not to threaten anyone but large enough to attract the attention of countries that matter because of its developmental record, strategic location and not insubstantial population.

The proof of Asean’s importance is seen in its role as the driving force of three larger regional mechanisms: the Asean+3 process, the Asean Regional Forum and the East Asian Summit (EAS).

“East Asia has not been short of big ideas and visions but it has failed to organize itself to turn those ideas and visions into clear directions and workable plans for the region itself and in shaping the world,” the late Indonesian scholar Hadi Soesastro wrote. “Given East Asia’s prominence here, the region will need to organize itself more purposefully and strategically.”

The important question now is whether Asean can build on its record as the hub for multiple processes leading to greater East Asian integration. Can it do so in order to help provide the architecture that the region needs?

At the recently concluded 16th Asean Summit in Hanoi, the leaders of participating countries discussed the evolving regional architecture, including recent proposals to remodel it. They agreed that any new proposal should have Asean as its main foundation, be based on the central role of Asean and should build upon and strengthen existing Asean-based structures.

Asean leaders also discussed the growing interest shown by the US and Russia in deepening their engagement with the region. They considered some ways of achieving this outcome, including expanding the EAS to include the US and Russia, and a separate Asean+8 configuration that would bring in the two powers to join Asean’s existing partners China, Japan, India, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

Several leaders expressed support for the Asean+8 configuration. This was in recognition of scheduling difficulties in bringing the US President to Asia every year.

If the EAS were to be expanded but the US President was unable to attend its parleys, the summit process would be weakened. EAS expansion might also dilute ongoing efforts to consolidate and strengthen substantive cooperation. Correspondingly, Asean’s credibility would take a hit and its centrality would be called into question.

Given these realities, it would be the Asean+8 configuration that would provide a pragmatic way for Asean to engage the US and Russia. Asean+8 could be convened every two to three years, back-to-back with the APEC Leaders’ Meeting when it is hosted in the region. This configuration would also address the Australian idea of an Asia-Pacific community, with Asean at the core.

Asean is still discussing the best way to engage the US and Russia in the region. The Asean Coordinating Council (which is composed of Asean foreign ministers) has been tasked with considering the issue in greater detail and consulting its economic and defense counterparts.

These discussions provide Asean with a valuable opportunity in relation to its partners and provide the voice that East Asia needs. Meanwhile, however, credibility begins at home. If Asean is to keep driving the process of wider regional cooperation, it must work hard to realize the Asean Community by implementing decisions already taken.

Dr. K. Kesavapany is Director of the Institute of South East Asian Studies in Singapore and Singapore’s non-resident ambassador to Jordan.

East Asia Forum