Click here to return to the archive of columns by Edward Neilan
APEC's main problem is ASEAN
November 11, 1998
By Edward Neilan
Special to World Tribune.com
TOKYO, Nov. 10 -- In the alphabet soup of Southeast Asian regional politics and
economics, it is important to be aware of the subtle differences between
APEC and ASEAN.
Many will be attempting to employ this discernment while U.S. President
Bill Clinton
takes his "victory lap" (based on domestic events ) through Asia over the
next few days, stopping at the APEC summit in Kuala Lumpur November 15-17
and then briefly in Japan and South Korea.
ASEAN, the acronym for Association of Southeast Asian Nations, started
with six members: Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, The Philippines
and Brunei. Recently there have been added Myanmar (Burma), Vietnam and
Laos.
The next ASEAN summit will be held in Hanoi, Vietnam, on December
15-16, one month after the
annual APEC meeting. ASEAN was founded with high hopes---generally
fulfilled--- for a Third World alliance or grouping that was based on
common economic good, lack of military provocations and a pledge not to
meddle in members' domestic political activities.
Conspicuous by their absence in the grouping were nations like the
United States, Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand. These old
"colonialists and imperialists" had hoped the security grouping
known as the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) could be carried
over as a regional security alliance.
But the "wisemen" of ASEAN--among them former President Suharto of
Indonesia, former President Marcos of The Philippines, Singapore's former
President Lee Kuan Yew, a then-young Malaysian politician named Mahatir
Mohamad-- preferred not to have a bunch of foreigners cluttering up the
landscape in positions of influence.
Nor meddling in the "Asian way of doing business," which barbarian
Westerners persist
in describing as "corruption." This particular "cultural pattern" is
ingrained, sometimes ungraciously called "crony capitalism," and will be
hard to change.
But ASEAN never quite got around to realizing its potential prosperity.
Ultimately the leaders had to turn to the West again for the capital and
big money management to help produce the "Asian tigers" syndrome. Westerners were only too happy to oblige and seized the opportunity to
get back in the region in a big way, some looking at security
considerations and others pursuing the limits of avarice.
Some give the idea for conception of APEC--Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation forum--to onetime Australia Prime Minister Robert Hawke or U.S.
Secretary of State James Baker. Others spread the praise for inception
around more evenly.
In November 1989 foreign ministers and economic ministers from 12
Asia-Pacific countries gathered in Canberra, Australia, for the inaugural
ministerial meeting of APEC. The countries represented were Australia,
Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, United States, and the
ASEAN members.
The Tiananmen Square unpleasantries in China a few months earlier had
given space for formation of a grouping that did not at first include China.
After the November 1993 ministerial meeting in Seattle, US. President
Clinton hosted an economic leaders' meeting at which time the respective
chiefs confirmed their shared understanding of the regional economy and
the issues facing it.
It was a major victory for the United States; the West was back in the
game in Asia. Whether for good or bad, whether the West aggravated or eased the
eventual crisis will be debated.
APEC added Chile, China, Hong Kong, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, "Chinese
Taipei," and will welcome Peru, Russia and Vietnam next week. Only Laos and Myanmar from the region, both ASEAN members, are excluded. ASEAN countries are the core problem because the confidence factor in
them is so low.
As World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn told me Tuesday, before I
introduced him as a breakfast speaker to the Foreign Correspondents' Club
of Japan, "At a time of crisis, everyone wants to cooperate. What comes
next is important."
This week Asia is flooded with proposals from the West about what to
do to solve the Asian financial crisis. According to Wolfensohn, the
headlines about "a $50 billion infusion" and "a $30 billion package aren't
the answer. "The answer lies in improving water supply and schools and
roads and administrative efficiency and transparency," he said.
Two points: APEC will not go anywhere as a group unless its ASEAN core
states first get on their feet.
For the ASEAN-APEC recovery-growth cycle to commence, high-visibility
America leadership is needed while Japan provides the cash and
on-the-ground know-how.
Wolfensohn suggested that the Japan-bashers should take a walk. "Read
the facts not the headlines," the top international banker said. "The
Japanese government and people have responded wonderfully. They should be
complimented."
Edward Neilan (eneilan@crisscross.com) is a veteran journalist, based in Tokyo, who covers East Asia and writes weekly for World Tribune.com.
November 4, 1998
|