WE CAN start by arguing that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) wouldn’t have seen the light of day had it not adopted the principles of neighborliness, and consultation and consensus which derived its roots from the Javanese-inspired Musyawarah-Mufakat, a form of consensus-building introduced by Indonesia (Anggita, & Hatori, 2020) right from her conception and eventual birth.
ASEAN Secretary-General Rodolfo Severino, Jr. (2001) explained that goodwill and gradual winning and giving of trust is the Southeast Asians’ way of dealing with one another. Agreements are reached through consultation and consensus – musyawarah and mufakat, claimed Severino (2001).
While it has suffered criticism over the course of time, the ASEAN Way – tested and tried – has thrived. It is best to answer the question why.
First, it is non-confrontational. In a world full of great power rivalry, political bickering, poverty, negativity, and even violent extremism, the ASEAN Way stands out for promoting informal and personal approach aimed at conflict prevention. The manner is discreet to avert embarrassment to members which results in their isolation (WEF, 2018).
Second, in the realm of the ASEAN Regional Forum, the ASEAN Way has been credited for gathering several countries in one setting. According to Adrienne Woltersdorf, director of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation Singapore Office, “Other than ASEAN, there is no other organization in Asia that can bring so many countries, including Japan, China and South Korea, to one table” (DW Asia, n.d.).
Third, ASEAN’s multilateral conferences and networking are facilitated via the ASEAN Way. It has been institutionalized and well-recognized. In fact, these events are considered an important accomplishment of ASEAN (DW Asia, n.d.).
ASEAN has always stuck to her unique norms and have been relentless in pushing the same. Given our diversity as a region, if there is one character trait that singles us out for innovation and uniqueness, it is the distinct ASEAN Way! – Belinda Sales Canlas
***
ASEAN’s approach to interstate relations through norms, principles, and practices is encapsulated in the term ASEAN Way (Caballero-Anthony, 2005, p.2). It can be viewed as a continuing process of identity building that relies upon conventional “modern” principles of interstate relations as well as traditional and culture-specific modes of socialization and decision making (Acharya, 2001, p.28).
It was conceptualized during the formative years of ASEAN, defining the approach in the way the Association had managed regional conflicts and crises (Caballero-Anthony, p.11).
According to Tobing (2018), the principle of non-interference is a hallmark of the ASEAN Way and permeates ASEAN’s processes. It has enabled ASEAN to become a flexible organization with a wide diversity in membership (p. 56-57). The looseness and informality have given comfort among interlocutors by creating a flexible decision-making environment (Acharya, 2001, p.66). It was found important in the development of security dialogues and cooperation within and in a wider multilateral grouping in which ASEAN plays a role.
On the other hand, the ASEAN Way has been criticized for creating a tendency to filter out or exclude contentious issues from the formal multilateral agenda (Acharya, 2001, p.77) geared towards conflict avoidance rather than conflict resolution and has led to the conflict being “swept under the carpet”.
In the work of Caballero-Anthony (2005), Narine argued that ASEAN must change to cope with the new regional environment, particularly, to institutionalize rather than continue relying on its informal mechanisms in addressing problems (p.8).
Beyond doubt, the opportunities and challenges presented by the ASEAN Way balance alike. ASEAN Member States (AMS) remain non-intrusive because of the common understanding that domestic issues should be settled domestically (Suzuki, 2019, p.159) thus preventing AMS to rely on ASEAN institutions.
Moreover, the ASEAN Way is not often upheld in practice due to the failure of some AMS to consult fellow members on certain issues and where consensus-seeking does not always produce decisions and agreements acceptable to all, contributing to ineffectiveness and the lack of credibility of the Association.
To end on a positive note, the ASEAN Way is associated with the longevity of the Association because it extrapolated the “we feeling” identified through common cultural identity, socialization processes, and regional belonging (Acharya, 2001, p. 202). – Flordeliz Guilangue Madrid
***
Writer can be reached at belindabelsales@gmail.com. Twitter @ShilohRuthie./PN
