1976: Its impact on Southeast Asia

(Conclusion)

ZONE OF PEACE, FREEDOM AND NEUTRALITY. With the new political realties besetting the region, the 5 founding fathers acted and began the process of regional autonomy. In 1971, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers adopted the declaration of ZOPFAN.

ZOPFAN, however, caused disagreements among the AMS because of the issue of neutralization. At this point, while the AMS wanted to push regional autonomy, they also recognized that total self-reliance was not yet possible. In the case of PH, Thailand, and Singapore, their Western links were deemed vital to national security and regional order. The wrangling about ZOPFAN was overtaken by the Cambodia conflict in December 1978 (Acharya, 2009).

On the plus side of ZOPFAN, the instrument provided specific institutional objectives on regional cooperation. It further sharpened the concept of non-interference thus: “ASEAN distinguished non-interference “within” the region from “outside” (the region) by using the term “external’ interference.” From there, ASEAN equipped herself to come up with “collective action toward outside powers” (Koga, 2014). In an article on ‘The New York Times’ published on November 27, 1971; the 5 five states called on the major powers to respect the plan.

TREATY OF AMITY AND COOPERATION. At the heart of TAC was the creation of a “no-war regime” to facilitate progress and prosperity (Yamakage, n.d.).

The following principles stood out from TAC: Freedom from external interference; non-interference in the internal affairs of member states; peaceful settlement of disputes; and renunciation of the threat or use of force. TAC became a symbol of good neighborly relations among ASEAN countries while being regarded as the foundation of the institution’s regional cooperation (Koga, 2014).

BALI CONCORD I. The Bali Concord I provided ASEAN’s form, objectives, and prioritization, including the stability of each member state and of the ASEAN region. Interestingly, for the first time, ASEAN prioritized the promotion of national development, and strengthening ASEAN solidarity over regional solidarity (Koga, 2014). I would say this was the phase when full ownership of the region’s destiny began encompassing the political sphere, economic order, socio-cultural soul, and international relations. It would later evolve to “One ASEAN”.

ZOPFAN, TAC, and Bali Concord I, were the crystallized collective response of the 5 ASEAN leaders not only to safeguard regional survival which ultimately benefited the member states, but more importantly, to assert themselves as creators of the region’s – ASEAN’s – destiny and trajectory in an era of uncertainty.  

***

While at the topic, I would like to encourage you to revisit with me the non-interference principle which is held tightly by ASEAN leaders.

The 1967 Bangkok Declaration enshrined the principle of non-interference which is also adopted in the 2007 ASEAN Charter.

The ASEAN Charter provides, among others, respect for the “fundamental importance of amity and cooperation, and the principles of sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity, non-interference, consensus and unity in diversity”.

Nguyen (2016) highlights the numerous observations of countries outside Southeast Asia criticizing the non-interference doctrine for ASEAN’s ineffectiveness to manage regional problems. There are also calls for the adjustment and even abandonment of the said norm, but ASEAN has kept the principle at the core of her diplomacy (Nguyen, 2016).

Indeed, the principle has been the subject of many scholarly studies. It has earned both praise and criticism. However, ASEAN leaders have held on to the maxim.

Personally, I believe the tenet of non-interference goes against regionalism. The AMS could not just turn a blind eye and pretend not to see what’s happening in a neighboring state – like Myanmar, more so, if the incident affects the very people that ASEAN is sworn to protect and safeguard.

Using the ASEAN Charter as objective lenses, one can readily see that ASEAN is committed to respect, promote, and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms in the region, including the principles of democracy, the rule of law, and good governance. These are all stipulated in the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration. The Declaration is also expected to help push human rights cooperation in the region and contribute to ASEAN community building.

Thus, it is a paradox to me how non-interference could exist alongside protection and promotion of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law in the context of Myanmar.

***

Writer can be reached at belindabelsales@gmail.com. Twitter @ShilohRuthie./PN