By Mai Phan
In late June 2019, in the ASEAN 34th Bangkok Summit, ten member-states agreed to adopt the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP) (1). Throughout the summit, ASEAN acknowledged both opportunities and collective challenges facing the regional organization, and alertly demanded an urgent response to those, leading to the creation of AOIP. The document has paved the way for regional commitment to combat challenges in the era of rising instability and nationalism across the globe. Moreover, it also serves as the guiding principle for ASEAN’s extending engagement in a broader geopolitical arena. The article’s main purpose is to deepen understanding of the document by assessing critical implications of the AOIP.
First and foremost, ASEAN’s policymakers are mistakenly seen as assimilating American foreign policy, evidenced by the unanimous endorsement of the concept “Indo-Pacific” in AOIP. Interesting, the term “Indo-Pacific” had been raised at ASEAN 33th Summit despite Singapore’s reluctance to accept the concept on paper (2). There are theories claiming ASEAN’s adoption of the concept to curtail China’s involvement in the region and support the presence of the U.S. in the region. In fact, the “Indo-Pacific” is an inclusive term of which the main purpose is to address ASEAN’s geopolitical importance in the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean region. Specifically, when Joko Widodo- Indonesian president - first introduced the Indo-Pacific vision, he was intentionally promoting an “open, transparent and inclusive” region (3). More important, ASEAN, by adopting the concept, has officially declared its independent role and refused to side with either the U.S. or China. Instead, ASEAN welcomes all major powers such as China, the United States, and India as its strategic partners. That is, the basic implication driven from AOIP is to address ASEAN’s centrality and unity in the context of a wider Indo-Pacific region.
Second, AOIP is considered as a significant milestone in ASEAN’s enduring journey to reach collective and timely responses to global challenges. Since its establishment in 1967, the organization has received a lot of criticism regarding its efficiency (4); especially, the rivalry between the U.S. and China came just in time for ASEAN leaders to showcase the organization’s clear standpoint. Without mentioning neither major powers by name, AOIP has indicated the rise of “material powers” and strictly addresses avoidance of “mistrust, miscalculation, and the pattern of behavior based on zero-sum game”. That is, Singapore Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Hoong, has said that the U.S.-China trade war is one of the most pressing concerns for Southeast Asia as regional leaders reflected on rising protectionism issues (5). Given the organization’s history, ASEAN’s ten member states have the best understanding of the cost and benefit analysis of cooperation and confrontation than anyone. Moreover, the five-page document represents ASEAN’s rigid and coherent standpoint on the Indo-Pacific, stressing on key areas of cooperation such as maritime environment and security, economic development, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030. In the era of escalating tensions in the South China Sea, AOIP keens on resolving tensions through dialogue and cooperation in accordance with UNCLOS.
Last but not least, the document remains as a work in progress and it requires further efforts for ASEAN to reach stated objectives. In fact, AOIP only represents ASEAN’s general standpoints on critical challenges without indicating specific steps and each member’ obligations. Additionally, most parts of the AOIP repeat ASEAN’s previous statements. Hence, the document remains an abstract writing unless ASEAN member states step forward and take specific actions to address urgent matters. In terms of maritime disputes, four of the ten ASEAN nations-Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines- have overlapping territorial claims in the South China Sea. Moreover, the simmering tensions between Singapore and Malaysia are recently added on by the collision of a Malaysian vessel in Singapore waters (6). In the light of such maritime disputes, ASEAN nations need to speed up the Code of Conduct deal in which territorial disputes must be resolved in a peaceful and adequate manner to all involved parties, avoiding future violent collisions. In terms of engagement with external partners, ASEAN needs to address the problems with detailed plans such as a strategic response to the U.S.-China trade war.
In summary, AOIP reaffirms ASEAN as the most dynamic region in the world which plays a significant geopolitical role in Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean region. By introducing the new concept of the “Indo-Pacific”, ASEAN leaders intentionally address its centrality and unity in facing both internal and external challenges. Importantly, the document also reminds regional leaders that those privileges are accompanied by responsibilities. ASEAN must take the lead in shaping its own economic and security architecture and to ensure that such dynamic continues to bring about peace, stability, and prosperity for people in Southeast Asia and in the wider Indo-Pacific area. However, AOIP still lacks specific plans for each member state to act accordingly to the collective goals. The document is an ongoing project which sets crucial stages for progress towards an integrated ASEAN.
Mai Phan is a senior at Lebanon Valley College where she studies Global Studies and Politics.. She is the Journal’s 2018-19 Correspondent for Southeast Asian Affairs.
