Chapter 7: IN QUEST OF A REGIONAL IDENTITY THROUGH ASEAN

INTRODUCTION

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a regional grouping that promotes
economic, political, and security cooperation among its ten members: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia,
Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. ASEAN countries have
a total population of 650 million people and a combined gross domestic product (GDP) of $2.8
trillion. The group has played a central role in Asian economic integration, signing six free-trade
agreements with other regional economies and helping spearhead negotiations for what could be
the world’s largest free trade pact.

Yet experts say ASEAN’s impact is limited by a lack of strategic vision, diverging priorities
among member states, and weak leadership. The bloc’s biggest challenge, they say, is developing a
unified approach to China, particularly in response to Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea, which
overlap with claims of several ASEAN members.

The future of individual nations in Southeast Asia, including the Philippines, truly and greatly
depends upon their ability to work together for the common good. Why is this so? Some of the
fundamental reasons are as follows: First, nations need peaceful neighborhood to grow
economically, socially, culturally, and politically. Just look at countries at war with their neighbors
and it would be obvious how armed conflicts, arms race, insecurities, and social disorder pull
countries back from progress. As in most human relations, there will always be tensions, conflicts
and differences among nations. What is important is to develop predisposition to peaceful means of
settling disputes. We are fortunate that no one among the ten members of ASEAN has hegemonic
ambition, including Indonesia, our biggest member with a land area and population approximately
the same as the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam combined. Second, communities have
the power to shape and represent collective identities and interests, help nations find common
solutions to problems, prescribe expectations for behavior, and even define common security
threats. Positive interactions and friendship could direct our strengths and resources to community
building rather than permanent power struggle.

We need to turn around the under socialization of Southeast Asian states among themselves
as a result of centuries of colonization and separation by competing foreign powers. Understanding
that we are one people must make inroads into our collective regional consciousness.

This module provides the learners understand the structure and the importance of the
ASEAN as a regional organization. This will also include the reasons why some of the Southeast Asian
countries joined the ASEAN. For the intention of the module to let the learners realize how
important to establish connection such as international relations between countries within the
region.

SPECIFIC LEARNING OUTCOMES

The following are the specific learning outcomes expected to be realized by the learner after
the completion of this module:

1. Trace the historical background of the organization and establishment of ASEAN.

1
 2. Identify the member states of ASEAN by acknowledging their status and connection to
the organization.
3. Articulate the aims of ASEAN as a regional organization after acknowledging the
Blueprints of Community Pillars and functions of the different levels of the
organizational structure of ASEAN.
4. Analyze how ASEAN fosters political, economic and cultural cooperation within
Southeast Asia as a region.

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

Unlock the difficulties by performing this preparatory activity first. Get the
understanding of the following main concepts before you proceed to the next part of this
module by writing your understanding in the space provided after the terms.

1. Human Relations
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

2. International Relations
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

3. Economic Integration
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

4. Free-trade Agreement
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

5. Regional Consciousness
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

2
 Read the content and acquire further detailed information by accessing the sources
provided.

IN QUEST OF A REGIONAL IDENTITY THROUGH ASEAN

A. HISTORY OF ASEAN ESTABLISHMENT

Founding

ASEAN was preceded by an organization formed on 31 July 1961 called the

Association of Southeast Asia (ASA), a group consisting of Thailand, the Philippines, and the
Federation of Malaya. ASEAN itself was created on 8 August 1967, when the foreign
ministers of five countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand,
signed the ASEAN Declaration. As set out in the Declaration, the aims and purposes of
ASEAN are to accelerate economic growth, social progress, and cultural development in the
region, to promote regional peace, collaboration and mutual assistance on matters of
common interest, to provide assistance to each other in the form of training and research
facilities, to collaborate for better utilization of agriculture and industry to raise the living
standards of the people, to promote Southeast Asian studies and to maintain close,
beneficial co-operation with existing international organizations with similar aims and
purposes.

The creation of ASEAN was motivated by a common fear of communism. The group
achieved greater cohesion in the mid-1970s following a change in the balance of power after
the end of the Vietnam War in 1975. The region's dynamic economic growth during the
1970s strengthened the organization, enabling ASEAN to adopt a unified response to
Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia in 1979. ASEAN's first summit meeting, held in Bali,
Indonesia in 1976, resulted in an agreement on several industrial projects and the signing of
a Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, and a Declaration of Concord. The end of the Cold War
allowed ASEAN countries to exercise greater political independence in the region, and in the
1990s ASEAN emerged as a leading voice on regional trade and security issues.

Expansion

In 1984, Brunei became ASEAN's sixth member and on 28 July 1995, Vietnam joined
as the seventh member. Laos and Myanmar (formerly Burma) joined two years later on 23
July 1997. Cambodia was to join at the same time as Laos and Myanmar, but an internal
political struggle delayed its entry. It then joined on 30 April 1999 following the stabilization
of its government.

Nascent Economic Cooperation

3
 In 1990, Malaysia proposed the creation of an East Asia Economic Caucus composed
of the members of ASEAN, China, Japan, and South Korea. It intended to counterbalance the
growing US influence in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and Asia as a whole.
However, the proposal failed because of strong opposition from the US and Japan. Work for
further integration continued, and the ASEAN Plus Three, consisting of ASEAN, China, Japan
and South Korea, was created in 1997. In 1992, the Common Effective Preferential Tariff
(CEPT) scheme was adopted as a schedule for phasing out tariffs to increase the "region's
competitive advantage as a production base geared for the world market". This law would
act as the framework for the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), which is an agreement by
member states concerning local manufacturing in ASEAN. It was signed on 28 January 1992
in Singapore. After the 1997 Asian financial crisis, a revival of the Malaysian proposal, known
as the Chiang Mai Initiative, was put forward in Chiang Mai, Thailand. It called for better
integration of the economies of ASEAN as well as the ASEAN Plus Three.

Nuclear Free ASEAN

The bloc also focused on peace and stability in the region. On 15 December 1995,
the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty was signed to turn Southeast Asia
into a nuclear-weapon-free zone. The treaty took effect on 28 March 1997 after all but one
of the member states had ratified it. It became fully effective on 21 June 2001 after the
Philippines ratified it, effectively banning all nuclear weapons in the region. A similar treaty
was signed in 2017; however, Singapore abstained from the vote.

The ASEAN Charter

On 15 December 2008, member states met in Jakarta to launch a charter, signed in

November 2007, to move closer to "an EU-style community". The charter turned ASEAN into
a legal entity and aimed to create a single free-trade area for the region encompassing 500
million people. President of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono stated: "This is a
momentous development when ASEAN is consolidating, integrating, and transforming itself
into a community. It is achieved while ASEAN seeks a more vigorous role in Asian and global
affairs at a time when the international system is experiencing a seismic shift". Referring to
climate change and economic upheaval, he concluded: "Southeast Asia is no longer the
bitterly divided, war-torn region it was in the 1960s and 1970s".

The financial crisis of 2007–2008 was seen as a threat to the charter's goals, and also
set forth the idea of a proposed human rights body to be discussed at a future summit in
February 2009. This proposition caused controversy, as the body would not have the power
to impose sanctions or punish countries which violated citizens' rights and would, therefore,
be limited in effectiveness. The body was established later in 2009 as the ASEAN
Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). In November 2012, the
commission adopted the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration.

B. ASEAN MEMBER STATES

ASEAN was founded on 8 August 1967 with five members: Indonesia, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. It is headquartered in Jakarta. As of 2010, the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has 10 member states, one candidate

4
member state, and one observer state. The 10 States are ― Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia,
Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. 1
Observer – Papua New Guinea.

Also listed are participants of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), an organization
throughout the Asia-Pacific region whose objectives are to foster dialogue and consultation,
and promote confidence-building and preventive diplomacy in the region. ASEAN Regional
Forum (ARF) Membership 27 States – Australia, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia,
Canada, China, European Union, India, Indonesia, Japan, Democratic Peoples’ Republic of
Korea, Republic of Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua
New Guinea, Philippines, Russian Federation, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor Leste,
United States, and Vietnam.

The Ten Member State

Brunei Darussalam – As the smallest AMS of about 400,000 people, Brunei Darussalam has
embraced ASEAN fully – from its long-serving Sultan Bolkiah (ASEAN’s longest serving leader)
to its citizens – as the results of the survey on what ASEAN means to ASEAN peoples
indicate. In the essay written by Joyce Teoon Brunei Darussalam, the volume shows that
Bruneian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have benefited from their access to a
much larger regional market. She also indicated the domestic and policy reforms undertaken
with regional initiatives, such as on competition policy and consumer protection. She further
pointed out that ASEAN’s emphasis on SME development initiatives also benefited Brunei’s
SMEs.

Cambodia – ASEAN’s newest member, Cambodia, is also one of ASEAN’s most remarkable
transformations. Chap Sotharith, in his essay in the volume, puts it well: once a failed state
with civil war, genocide, and political turmoil Cambodia has been transformed from a
centrally planned economy into a free market economy and from a battlefield on the verge
of destruction into a country of emerging development that is increasingly becoming
integrated into the regional and global community.

Indonesia – As the largest economy and most populous country in ASEAN, it is not surprising
that Indonesia has greatly impacted the pace of the ASEAN economic integration project.
Nonetheless, the ASEAN integration initiatives have also helped shapes Indonesia’s domestic
policies. This interplay of the design and implementation of ASEAN initiatives and the
domestic policy environments in the AMSs can be considered as at the heart of the essential
characteristic of the ASEAN integration agenda. This is a much more measured (although
criticized as slow) liberalization and integration process against which there is no significant
backlash.

Laos (Lao People's Democratic Republic) – ASEANhas also been important in the transition
of the Lao PDR from a relatively closed and planned economy to an open market economy.
Before it became a member of ASEAN in 1997, the Lao PDR had a centrally planned economy
under the ambit of the former Soviet Union in 1975–1986, followed by a transition towards
a market economy in 1986–1997. ASEAN’s admission of the Lao PDR accelerated the process
of warming relations with its ASEAN neighbors and the process of economic liberalization
under AFTA and eventually the AEC. As a small and landlocked country surrounded by four
AMSs and China, the Lao PDR’s economic fortune is necessarily affected by the stability and
economic fortunes of its four ASEAN neighbors and China. As Leebuoapao and Sayasenh in

5
their essay, the volume points out, ASEAN is the ‘golden opportunity’, the nearest and
biggest market for the Lao PDR both for export and import, in particular Thailand and Viet
Nam. Thus, not surprisingly, the Lao PDR sees ASEAN membership as a safeguard to ensure
peace, security, and economic opportunities for its development.

Malaysia – ASEAN has always held a special place in Malaysia’s foreign and trade policy.
Malaysia’s Minister of International Trade and Industry pointed out that the fact that the
ASEAN division is the largest division in the Ministry of International Trade and Industry is
testimony to the importance that the ministry accords to ASEAN. ASEAN has been evolving
and Malaysia has been an active partner in this process. However, the conceptualization of
the AEC has happened at a critical juncture in Malaysia’s own development path because
the country’s goals and aspirations find strong resonance with those articulated by the AEC.
Malaysia is an active trading nation that is among the largest importers and exporters of
goods and among the top 30 trading nations of commercial services. The country’s total
trade to gross domestic product ratio is about 200%. Malaysia’s growth, development, and
employment have gained, in no small measure, from trade and foreign direct investment
(FDI). Since trade and investment is the cornerstone of Malaysia’s economic development, it
has adopted a market-oriented foreign trade policy. It is strongly committed to the
liberalization of the economy and has been a strong supporter of the multilateral trading
system.

Myanmar – Myanmar is a recent significant diplomatic success for ASEAN. Instead of

sanctions against Myanmar that many Western countries resorted to, ASEAN engaged and
quietly encouraged the former military rulers of Myanmar over the years to democratize the
country. The ascension of the neo-civilian government under President U the in Sein led to
major and wide-ranging reforms in the country complemented by the lifting of the sanctions
against investments in and trade with Myanmar. The successor civilian government, led by
State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and President U Hin Kyaw, is continuing the reform
process. The wide-ranging reforms were shaped partly in the context of ASEAN, especially
the AEC Blueprint 2015, but have been strongly facilitated and supported by major
international multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as
well as by major bilateral donors like Japan. The successful hosting by Myanmar of the
ASEAN Summit in 2014 is an affirmation of the dramatic political, diplomatic, and economic
reforms in the country consistent with the overall regional thrusts of the ASEAN integration
and community building efforts.

Philippines – The Philippines underwent wrenching domestic macroeconomic, trade, and

industrial policy reforms and adjustments under a series of IMF and World Bank
programmers for about 2 decades in the aftermath of the economic crisis in the country in
the early to mid-1980s. No other AMS experienced such wrenching adjustments for so long.
The structural adjustments of the transition economies of Cambodia, the Lao PDR, and Viet
Nam in the latter 1980s and 1990s were largely efficiency enhancing and foreign investment
attracting. In contrast, opening up the Philippine economy with comparatively high wage
costs from long decades of industrial protection and in a fragile macroeconomic
environment proved far more disruptive to the Philippine manufacturing sector and the
overall economy during most of the latter 1980s until the early 2000s. Only in the last
decade or so has the Philippines righted itself macro economically, and its underlying
comparative advantage has shown and become potent. As a result, the mediocre economic
performance of the 1980s through the early 2000s changed to sustained robust growth with
markedly rising foreign investments in recent years. And the contentious debates in the

6
latter 1980s between protectionism and openness have now been transformed into a
nationally agreed industrial strategy (‘Manufacturing Resurgence Program’): an open
manufacturing sector is a given to compete better in an integrated ASEAN and more open
East Asia.

Singapore - The quintessential globalist, Singapore nonetheless shows us an example where

ASEAN’s goals are in line with an AMS’s national interests; and the country can eventually
gain from what it contributes to regional integration. As a small country lacking natural
resources, Singapore needs ASEAN to foster regional political and security stability. Different
from the CLMV countries, it is concerned more with vulnerability from an unfavorable
external political and security environment.

Thailand – Saowaruj Rattanakhamfu shows the impact of ASEAN on Thailand through the
increased trade, investment, and labor flows. Thailand increased its import sourcing from
ASEAN; the region is now the second-largest import source after China. Thailand also
expanded tremendously its exports to ASEAN; indeed, ASEAN has been Thailand’s largest
export market, replacing the United States, since 2003. Thailand now has a large
merchandise trade surplus vis-à-vis ASEAN. The reduction and eventual elimination of intra-
ASEAN tariffs and ASEAN’s rules of origin facilitated the marked rise in Thailand’s trade with
its ASEAN neighbors.

Vietnam (Viet Nam) – Viet Nam has the enviable achievement of having the highest average
growth rate in ASEAN since the mid-1990s. Indeed, the country has one of the highest
averages growth rates in the world during 1996–2015. This meant a remarkable economic
transformation into a major global exporter of agricultural products such as rice, coffee, and
fish as well as an emerging manufacturing hub in East Asia. The country experienced one of
the sharpest declines in poverty rate in the world, arguably only second to China.
Underpinning this remarkable success story is the positive interplay of aggressive domestic
reform and proactive international economic integration efforts backed by solid human
capital and infrastructure investments. Like the other new members of ASEAN, and indeed
much more so, the sharp rise in foreign trade (with Viet Nam now having the second-highest
trade-to-GDP ratio in ASEAN) and FDI has been central to Viet Nam’s economic dynamism.

C. COMMUNITY PILLARS

The adoption of both the “Declaration of ASEAN Concord II (Bali Concord II)” and the
“Cebu Declaration on the Acceleration of the Establishment of an ASEAN Community by
2015” by ASEAN Heads of States indicate that the member states acknowledge that an
integrated, stable, knowledgeable and caring community will help ASEAN nations to
strengthen their economic competitiveness and attractiveness to investors, in particular
during economic downturn.

The three pillars of the ASEAN Community, namely the ASEAN Political-Security
Community (APSC), the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and the ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community (ASCC), are the most crucial areas deemed necessary for the progress and
evolution of ASEAN and its peoples. The Blueprints of these three communities have been
carefully formulated to detail specific strategic objectives and actions which intend to
achieve progress and positive development in the respective areas.

7
 Human rights seem to underpin all the three pillars of the ASEAN Community
although they may not be explicitly stated in the objectives, strategies or actions of the
Blueprints. As human rights encompass the principles of non-discrimination, equity, justice
and human dignity, it is therefore logical that human rights are directly or indirectly are
pertinent to the ASEAN Community. For instance, today’s economic advancement depends
heavily on human resources and unless people have equal access to education, training and
capacity building, the country may be deprived of a large pool of creative thinkers and
entrepreneurs. Therefore, although human rights have much fewer mentions in the ASEAN
Economic Community than the other two pillars, nevertheless, human rights are at the heart
of the ASEAN Economic Community. This is indicated by the adoption of “region of equitable
economic development” as one of the four objectives of the ASEAN Economic Community.

Articulated Human Rights in the Blueprints

ASEAN Political-Security Community (APSC) Blueprint – The APSC envisages to draw ASEAN
towards a rules-based Community of shared values and norms; a cohesive, peaceful, stable
and resilient region with shared responsibility for comprehensive security including a
dynamic and outward-looking region in an increasingly integrated and interdependent
world. The full implementation of this Blueprint is expected to bring about prosperity in the
region and protects the interests and wellbeing of ASEAN people. As the APSC Blueprint
seeks to mainly achieve an enhancement in political stability, democracy and good
governance through creating a just, democratic and harmonious environment, human rights
are expectedly apparent in this Blueprint. Respect for the promotion and protection of
human rights and fundamental freedoms is identified in this Blueprint as one of the main
elements in enhancing political development.

As the rule of law embodies human rights, aspects of human rights are more directly
addressed under the first key characteristic which is “A Rules-based Community of shared
values and norms”. Under this key characteristic, the APSC Blueprint lists a number of
specific actions, which are to be undertaken by ASEAN member states to promote and
protect human rights. These actions, among others, are to establish an ASEAN human rights
body; to cooperate closely with efforts of the sectoral bodies in the development of an
ASEAN instrument on the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers; to
strengthen interaction between 4 the network of existing human rights mechanisms as well
as other civil society organizations; to cooperate closely with sectoral bodies in the
establishment of an ASEAN commission on the promotion and protection of the rights of
women and children; and to promote education and public awareness on human rights.

The second key characteristic of the APSC, which is “A Cohesive, Peaceful and
Resilient Region with Shared Responsibility for Comprehensive Security”, also involves
important human rights issues. The human rights aspects addressed include trafficking in
persons and counterterrorism. Under combating trans-national crimes and other trans-
boundary challenges, the APSC Blueprint suggests actions such as strengthening criminal
justice responses to trafficking in persons and enhancing cooperation to combat people-
smuggling. In undertaking these tasks, member states are guided to be mindful of the need
to protect victims of trafficking in accordance to the ASEAN Declaration against Trafficking in
Persons Particularly Women and Children. Counter-terrorism entails intensifying efforts by
early ratification and full implementation of the ASEAN Convention on Counter-Terrorism.

8
ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) Blueprint– Despite lacking specific reference to human
rights issues within the text of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) Blueprint, there are
nevertheless indirect human rights implications. As mentioned earlier, among the four key
characteristics identified in the AEC Blueprint is “a region of equitable economic
development”. Recognizing the importance of equitable economic development for all
peoples, the actions under Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI) include human resource
development, information and communication technologies, capacity building, poverty
reduction and improvement in quality of life. In addition, in enhancing the food, agriculture
and forestry trade, the health of the peoples is not forgotten, and in fostering a culture of
competitiveness, consumer protection is strengthened through establishing the ASEAN
Coordinating Committee on Consumer Protection and establishing a network of consumer
protection agencies to facilitate information sharing and exchange.

ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) Blueprint – The ASCC is adopted to realize a

people-oriented, socially responsible ASEAN community with the view of achieving
solidarity, unity and a common identity as well as building a sharing and caring society. The
characteristics envisaged in the ASCC Blueprint are human development; social welfare and
protection; social justice and rights; ensuring environmental sustainability; building the
ASEAN identity; and narrowing the development gap. All these issues, except for building the
ASEAN identity, pertain directly to human rights.

As human rights issues in the ASCC Blueprint are numerous, only those important
human rights issues pertaining to the enhancement of the wellbeing, livelihood and welfare
of the peoples of ASEAN are highlighted.

A major human right element in the ASCC Blueprint is the enhancement of “the well-
being and livelihood of the peoples of ASEAN by providing them with equitable access to
human development opportunities by promoting and investing in education and lifelong
learning, human resource training and capacity building … “(p. 2 ASEAN Socio-cultural
Community Blueprint). This equitable access to human development is in accordance to the
Declaration of the Right to Development adopted by the UN General Assembly on 4
December 1986 while the right to education is enunciated in several human rights
declarations and instruments including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article
26), the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Article 13), the
Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 28) and the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Article 10). Three strategic objectives have been
identified to achieve this characteristic of the ASCC Blueprint, namely advancing and
prioritizing education, investing in human resource development and promotion of decent
work.

As regard to social welfare and protection, the ASCC Blueprint envisions to address
fully socioeconomic disparities and poverty by alleviating poverty and eradicating extreme
poverty and hunger. This Blueprint also calls for access to primary healthcare of the
vulnerable groups/ people at risk.

This Blueprint specifically emphasizes the promotion and protection of the rights
and welfare of disadvantaged, vulnerable and marginalized groups such as women, children,
the elderly, persons with disabilities and migrant workers. The implementation of the ASEAN
Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers is set forth as
a strategic objective of the ASCC Blueprint to achieve this particular goal.

9
 Promoting corporate social responsibility to ensure sustainable socio-economic
development in ASEAN member states and fostering sustainability of water resources to
ensure equitable accessibility and sufficiency of acceptable quality of water are aspects of
human rights incorporated in the Blueprint.

D. STRUCTURE OF ASEANS

Beginning in 1997, heads of each member state adopted the ASEAN Vision 2020
during the group's 30th anniversary meeting held in Kuala Lumpur. This vision, as a means
for the realization of a single ASEAN community, provides provisions on peace and stability,
a nuclear-free region, closer economic integration, human development, sustainable
development, cultural heritage, being a drug-free region, environment among others. The
vision also aimed to "see an outward-looking ASEAN playing a pivotal role in the
international fora, and advancing ASEAN's common interests". It was formalized and made
comprehensive through the Bali Concord II in 2003. Three major pillars of a single ASEAN
community were established: Political-Security Community (APSC), Economic Community
(AEC) and Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC). To fully embody the three pillars as part of the
2015 integration, blueprints for APSC and ASCC were subsequently adopted in 2009 in Cha-
am, Thailand. The ASEAN Community, initially planned to commence by 2020, was
accelerated to begin by 31 December 2015. It was decided during the 12th ASEAN Summit in
Cebu in 2007.

At the 23rd ASEAN Summit on November 2013, leaders decided to develop a post-
2015 Vision and created the High-Level Task Force (HLTF) that consists of ten high-level
representatives from all member states. The Vision was adopted at the 27th Summit on
November 2015 in Kuala Lumpur. The ASEAN community would revise and renew its vision
every ten years to provide a framework for continuous development and further integration.
The terms in the Vision are divided into four subcategories, namely APSC, AEC, ASCC, and
Moving Forward. APSC issues are covered under articles 7 and 8. The former generally states
the overall aspiration of the community aiming for a united, inclusive and resilient
community. It also puts human and environmental security as crucial points. Deepening
engagement with both internal and external parties are also stressed to contribute to
international peace, security and stability. The "Moving Forward" subcategory implies the
acknowledgement of weaknesses of the institution's capacity to process and coordinate
ASEAN work. Strengthening ASEAN Secretariat and other ASEAN organs and bodies is
therefore desired. There is also a call for a higher level of ASEAN institutional presence at the
national, regional and international levels.

AASEAN Summit Presidential Forum

ASEAN Coordinating Council Foreign Ministerial Forum

ASEAN Community Councils Coordinator Pillars Minister Level

AASEAN Sectoral Ministerial Bodies Minister Level

Committee on Permanent Representative ASEAN State’s Ambassador

Representative
National Secretariats Administrative Officers

10
 Committees Abroad Forum Outside Southeast Asia

ASEAN Organizational Structure

Functions

ASEAN Summit
1. Comprise the ASEAN Leaders (Head of Member States)
2. Supreme policy-maker in the ASEAN legal Framework
3. Deliberate, provide policy guidance and decide on strategies issues pertaining to the
implementation or achievement of ASEAN’s objectives
4. Instruct the relevant ministers in each of the councils concerned to tell ad hoc inter-
ministerial meetings, discussing important concerning ASEAN and cross sectoral issues.
5. Address crucial and emergency condition affecting ASEAN Member States
6. Appoint SGASEAN

ASEAN Coordinating Council

1. Comprise the Foreign Ministers of ASEAN Member States
2. A forum held to prepare meetings of the ASEAN Summit
3. Coordinator for implementation of agreement and decisions of ASEAN Summit
4. Coordinate with ASEAN Community Councils to enhance policy synergy and harmony,
efficiency and cooperation among three community councils.
5. Coordinate Community Council’s report to be discussed in ASEAN Summit.
6. Consider the annual report on ASEAN progress delivered by Secretary-General of
ASEAN.
7. Taking decision for appointment and termination of Deputy- Secretaries General of
ASEAN upon the recommendation of the Secretary-General

ASEAN Community Council

1. Comprise the ASEAN Political-Security, economic, and Socio-Cultural Community
Council.
2. Each Community Council shall have under its purview the relevant ASEAN Sectoral
Ministerial Bodies
3. Each member States shall designate its national focal point of each Community
Council.

ASEAN Sectoral Ministerial Bodies

1. Shall function in conformity with their respective establish mandates
2. Implement the agreements and decisions of the ASEAN Summit under their respective
purview
3. Strengthen cooperation in their respective fields in supports of ASEAN integration and
community building.
4. Submit reports and recommendation to their respective Community Council.
5. Such as Senior Official Meeting (SOM), Senior Official Meeting on Social Welfare and
development (SOMSWD), ASEAN Committee on Women

Committee on Permanent Representative

1. Shall function in conformity with their respective establish mandates

11
 2. Implement the agreements and decisions of the ASEAN Summit under their respective
purview
3. Strengthen cooperation in their respective fields in supports of ASEAN integration and
community building.
4. Submit reports and recommendation to their respective Community Council.
5. Such as Senior Official Meeting (SOM), Senior Official Meeting on Social Welfare and
development (SOMSWD), ASEAN Committee on Women

National Secretariat –The ASEAN Secretariat is located in Jakarta and supports the day-to-
day workings of ASEAN. Headed by the ASEAN Secretary-General, the Secretariat plays an
important role in drawing up plans of action in collaboration with ASEAN Senior Officials to
implement decisions made at ASEAN’s high level meetings.

One important role of the Secretariat is to facilitate ASEAN cooperation with

external partners. The relevant Directorate for this is the Community Affairs Development
Directorate. Find more information on how non-government organizations can engage with
ASEAN.

Committees Abroad–These committees comprise ASEAN COMMITTEES IN HIRD COUNTRIES

AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS (ACTC).

E. ASEAN REGIONAL IDENTITY

The regional identity of Southeast Asia one that yields the notion of Southeast Asia
as a distinctive region and sets it apart from neighboring regions such as South Asia or
Northeast Asia is not a given and is not preordained. Nor is it based merely on the facts of
geography or shared historical political and cultural features and experiences. These are
important but not sufficient conditions for regional identity. Rather Southeast Asia’s identity
which is the basis of the identity of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a
regional organization is socially and political constructed through interactions amongst its
governments and societies To the extent that it is a contrived but meaningful notion ASEAN
identity is also subject to challenge and change due to changing political strategic and
economic currents in the region and beyond.

An important clarification ASEAN identity is a reflection of Southeast Asian identity

but is not identical to it. Southeast Asia’s regional identity anchors ASEAN’s institutional
identity. ASEAN is not a region. Southeast Asia is ASEAN identity is more recent more
artificial and more dependent on political and strategic forces than Southeast Asia’s regional
identity is more enduring that ASEAN’s although the loss or weakening of ASEAN will
adversely impact on Southeast Asian identity. But the key point here is that one cannot
understand the nature of and prospects for ASEAN identity without considering the wider
context of Southeast Asian identity within which it is nested.

Identity and Community

Identity is a complex and contested notion. In simple terms identity refers to an

actor’s (which may be a person group of persons state or group of states) sense of being
unique or distinctive because of physical and social attributes values and patterns of
behavior Identity is a function of two main factors which are mainly subjective. One is how

12
an actor sees itself. The second is how others or outsiders see that actor. The two are
related but not identical. A person’s or group’s own sense of being distinctive may be
stronger than the outsider’s perception or recognition of it. For example the sense of ASEAN
identity is arguably stronger inside the grouping than when viewed by outsiders.

Identity is socially constructed combining instrumental logic with habit-forming

socialization norms and institutions. Moreover such identity building is not entirely divorced
from cultural and historical ties but is reinforced by it Simple proximity historical ties and
shared culture are sufficient for identity. Their outcome can be indeterminate proximity can
lead to either war or peace historical memories have been associated with war and cultural
ties do not make nations immune to conflict. One needs a sense of common or collective
identities to build a true community legitimize cooperation nationally and internationally
and reinforce the rationale for collective action.

Like a community, a regional identity can be imagined. Ben Anderson (1991) spoke
of nationalism and the nation-state as ‘imagined communities’. He referred to the role of
print media, colonial administration, and elite socialization in creating a sense of community
amongst disparate and disrupted localities that formed the basis of the nation state. Just as
nations are imagined, so can regions be. Southeast Asia is in many ways an imagined region;
its experience of regional identity building can be likened to a quest for identity. Without
forgetting the influence of historical interactions of its constituent units, Southeast Asia
could not have been conceived except through the imagination of historians (both Western
and indigenous), imperial strategists in the late colonial era, and above all by the elites of
ASEAN Member States. Hence, Singapore’s first Foreign Minister and a founder of ASEAN, S.
Rajaratnam, exhorted ASEAN members to recognize a ‘regional existence’, in addition to
national ones – a kind of existential community. Others, including nationalist leaders, sought
to return Southeast Asia to its pre-colonial ties through a regional organization. Here, the
actions of ASEAN’s founders were purposive and rational. But they were also underpinned
by a sense of history and identity. Its founders were ‘imagining’ themselves to be part of a
collective entity, or a region, by drawing upon a shared historical heritage as well as
identifying common goals in a contemporary setting.

Sources of ASEAN Identity

Southeast Asia, currently a region of 10 nations that comprise ASEAN, displays a

remarkable degree of political, cultural, and economic diversity. Being located at the
crossroads between China and India, and straddling the major sea lanes linking the Pacific
and Indian Oceans, Southeast Asia are also exposed to a constant stream of external
influences. Hence, ideas and identities in currency in Southeast Asia tend to be fluid and
contested. Nonetheless, the growth of a long-term and relatively robust form of regionalism
(ASEAN) has created a sense of regional identity alongside the still distinctive national
identities of Southeast Asian countries (Acharya, 2000; Acharya, 2013).

Within this context, the identity of ASEAN emerged from the five major sources:
nationalism, religion, cultural norms and modes of interaction, a modernist developmental
state orientation and approach, and regionalism.

In the pre-colonial history of Southeast Asia, there is no equivalent of the virulent

and bloody nationalisms that Europe, the birthplace of nationalism, experienced amongst its
states. On the contrary, Southeast Asian nationalisms were the product of anticolonial

13
struggles, and hence directed against a shared external threat. All Southeast Asian countries
were once part of Western colonial empires, except Thailand, which nonetheless ceded
territory to them and was subjected to significant restraints on its freedom of external
action. Moreover, anti-colonial sentiments were a powerful basis not only behind Southeast
Asian nationalism, but also regionalism. In this sense, nationalism and regionalism in
Southeast Asia were more complimentary than competitive (Acharya, 2000; 2013). The Cold
War polarization of Southeast Asia into pro-Western, pro-Soviet, and non-aligned
orientations was not really over nationalism, but security and domestic politics. Today
nationalism is a source of tension in the region, especially in Thai–Cambodia relations
(where it has fuelled an armed conflict over the border temple of Preah Viehar), and to
varying degrees in Thai–Myanmar, Singapore– Malaysia, Singapore–Indonesia, and
Singapore–Philippines relations. But its impact in destabilizing the region should not be
overstated. A striking feature of Southeast Asia is that despite having been subject to both
external colonialism and the intraregional imperialism of large pre-colonial states such as
Angkor (Cambodia), Ava (Myanmar), Ayutthia (Thailand), Majapahit (Indonesia), Viet Nam
(Dai Viet), and Malacca (Malaysia) there is nothing comparable here to the type of identity
conflicts or ‘history controversies’ that are so salient in Northeast Asia between Japan and
China, Japan and the Republic of Korea (henceforth, Korea), and even China and Korea, or in
South Asia, as between India and Pakistan. Contrary to some pundits who sense a growing
sense of competitive nationalism in Southeast Asia, I believe the milder form of competitive
nationalism, which facilitated and was sustained by the emergence of ASEAN, is unlikely to
give way to a pre-World War European type of nationalism.

Southeast Asia is home to several major religions, Buddhism is the religion of the
majority in Cambodia, Thailand, and Myanmar; Islam of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei
Darussalam; and Christianity (Catholicism) of the Philippines. While religion is a strong factor
in national identities, it has rarely been a source of major inter-state conflict. Rather, it has
been a factor in domestic separatist movements, ethnic strife, and extremist violence.
Islamic extremism, especially in and out of Indonesia, Malaysia, and southern Philippines, is
often seen as a threat to regional stability. But in general, Southeast Asian Islam is more
moderate and tolerant than that in the Arabian Peninsula. There is little evidence of any
‘clash of civilizations’ in Southeast Asia.

Cultural norms, to the extent they can be isolated from political ones, such as
communitarianism, patron–client mind-sets, are important in the sense that they tend to
modify more universalistic ‘Western’ ideas about economic development and governance,
producing a tendency towards state-led capitalism and dominant-party political systems (in
Malaysia, Singapore), military rule (Thailand), and other forms of ‘illiberal democracy’. Some
of these features are also present in Northeast Asia. The idea of ‘Asian values’, which
actually originated in Southeast Asia, stresses ‘society over the self’, ‘respect for authority’,
value attached to education, and propensity for high savings. But these norms are not
uniformly present in all states and the very idea of ‘Asian values’, a relatively homogenous
and pan-regional phenomenon, is a false construct, given the diversity of religious, political,
and economic approaches in the region.

The developmental state orientation, which stresses a focus on economic growth

over ideology and identity politics and calls for a strong role of the state in anchoring
development, originated from Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, and now
prevails throughout Southeast Asia, albeit to differing degrees. It helps to bridge the cultural,
political, and security tensions amongst the Southeast Asian countries and constitutes a
crucial basis for ASEAN.

14
 Despite these aspects of diversity, Southeast Asia has arguably developed a
relatively greater sense of a regional identity than South Asia or Northeast Asia. Indeed, the
very idea of Southeast Asia as a region in itself, distinct from China and India, has much to do
with the role of ASEAN, which expanded from five founding members (Indonesia, Malaysia,
Singapore, Thailand, and the Philippines) in 1967 to now 10 nations in 1999 under the idea
of ‘One Southeast Asia’. National and regional identities co-exist and to some extent
complement each other. ASEAN today is building three regional communities, covering
political-security, economic, and socio-cultural affairs. Despite some internal divisions and
constraints imposed by great power presence and influence seeking, ASEAN remains
amongst the most cohesive and dynamic regional groups in Asia and the world today. It is a
key factor mediating the flow of ideas into and out of Southeast Asia and in reshaping the
national identities of Southeast Asian states, making these national identities less
exclusionary and conflictual. The ‘ASEAN Way’, referring to a distinctive mode of interaction,
marked by informality, consensus, non-adversarial bargaining, and a preference for non-
legalistic and non-binding approaches to problem solving (Acharya, 1997), has been an
important source of regional collective identity with a growing relevance for the rest of the
world in a post-Western world.

Some of these five sources of identity in Southeast Asia may be seen to be in

tension, such as nationalism and regionalism, and religion and modernism. But remarkably,
ASEAN nations have found a way to reconcile nationalism with regionalism to the extent
that they exist in tandem and even complement each other. There is a degree of tension
between religion and modernity, especially in Muslim majority societies such as Indonesia,
Malaysia, and Brunei, but this has been managed by a shared commitment in the region to a
broadly capitalist mode of economic development, if not political democracy.

The notion of identity suggests a relational view of a group’s position and role.
Identity building occurs when a given unit, or group of units (the Self) begins to define its
character in relation to others. The identity of ASEAN depends on how its members define
their character and role in regional order in relation to others within and outside the region,
and how they develop a ‘we’ feeling.

As noted already, regional identity is not a cultural given, but something constructed
out of self-conscious social interaction. Unlike rationalist theories of international relations,
such as neorealism and neoliberalism, social theories, such as constructivism, do not treat
identity as a given, or fixed, but as being a constant state of ‘processes. It is through
socialization that states develop collective identities that ameliorate the security dilemma.
Socialization processes may start even when the participating units lack significant structural
commonalities, such as shared cultural heritage, similar political systems, or a common
language. Collective identities are ‘imagined’ during, and as a result of, an actor’s or group of
actors’ interaction within an institutional context. As such, the regional identity of Southeast
Asia goes beyond a simple estimation of the structural similarities and differences amongst
units, also known as the ‘unity in diversity’ approach. It should look not just at what is
common between and amongst its constituent units, but how the countries of the region,
especially the elite engaged in a process of socialization within an institutional context
(ASEAN) and in that processes ‘imagined’ themselves to be part of a distinctive region.

As historians of Southeast Asia remind us, before regionalism in its modern,

institutional sense made its mark on the area east of India and south of China, ‘region-wide’
patterns of inter-state relations and a degree of interaction and interdependence did exist

15
amongst the political units inhabiting what we call Southeast Asia today. Any serious study
of Southeast Asia’s international relations and its claim to be a region must therefore begin
with a historical framework that includes the inter-state system during the pre-colonial
period.’ This is not to say that ancient Southeast Asians had imagined themselves to be part
of a region. That sense of identity developed much later, with the emergence of Southeast
Asian regionalism. Hence, so much of the focus of the book is on ASEAN.

Southeast Asian elites could see in the end of colonialism both an imperative and
opportunity for reconstituting lost regional linkages and identities. The history of the
international politics of Southeast Asia before and after 1967 offers plenty of evidence to
support the existence of deliberate efforts to construct a regional ‘identity’. They include the
early days of the Asian Relations meetings in New Delhi, when delegates from Southeast
Asia rejected associated too closely with the Indian and Chinese regional frameworks. The
Declaration of ASEAN Concord, am important document of Southeast Asian regionalism
signed by ASEAN’s five original members in 1976, stated clearly that ‘Member states shall
vigorously develop an awareness of regional identity and exert all efforts to create a strong
ASEAN community.’ There is little question that a quest for regional identity played a causal
part, as it had done in explaining ASEAN’s rejection, about two decades earlier, of the
membership application of Sri Lanka on the ground that it was not sufficiently ‘Southeast
Asian’.

Later, there was the deliberate inclusion of ‘identity’ in ASEAN’s founding document,
and the deliberations over, and further to, the carrying out of ‘One Southeast Asia’, despite
the international censure of ASEAN’s courting of Burma as part of this effort.The need for
regional identity was forcefully reaffirmed in the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis and
the adoption of the ASEAN Community framework in 2003. The 10th general principle of the
Bali Concord II, adopted in 2003, proclaimed that ‘ASEAN shall continue to foster a
community of caring societies and promote a common regional identity.’ Amongst the goals
listed by the ASEAN Charter adopted in 2008: to promote an ASEAN identity through the
fostering of greater awareness of the diverse culture and heritage of the region’ (ASEAN
Charter, 2007). ASEAN has since consistently stressed the slogan of ‘One Vision, One
Identity, One Community’, in a good deal of its official statements and documents (ASEAN,
2015: 17).

SOURCES:

1. https://asean.org/asean/about-asean/history/
2. https://www.nti.org/learn/treaties-and-regimes/association-southeast-asian-nations-
asean/
3. https://www.asean2019.go.th/en/infographic/3-pillars-of-asean-community/
4. https://asean.org/asean/about-asean/overview/
5. https://www.fairobserver.com/region/central_south_asia/asean-formation-and-
functioning/
6. here
7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327307131_The_Evolution_and_Limitations
_of_ASEAN_Identity

16
 After reading the content, answer the following questions and perform the
suggested activities.

CHALLENGE YOUR SELF

1. Trace the historical background of the organization and establishment of ASEAN by

providing basic information on the significant event that happened on the dates
given in the following items. Write your answer on the space provided.

a. July 13, 1961

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

b. August 8, 1967
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

c. January 28, 1992

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

d. December 15, 1995

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

e. March 28, 1997

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

2. State the status and connection to the ASEAN of the given state members given by
the following items. Write your answer on the pace provided.

a. Indonesia
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

17
b. Cambodia
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

c. Laos
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

d. Myanmar
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

e. Malaysia
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

f. Singapore
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

g. Philippines
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

h. Vietnam
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

i. Thailand
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

18
 j. Brunei Darussalam
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

3. Articulate the aims of ASEAN as a regional organization after acknowledging the

Blueprints of Community Pillars and functions of the different levels of the
organizational structure of ASEAN by completing the two sets of tables below.

a. Community Pillars

Community Pillars Blueprints/Characteristics The Aims of ASEAN

realized
ASEAN Political-Security
Community (APSC)

Community ASEAN
Economic (AEC)

ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community (ASCC)

b. Structure of ASEAN

Levels of the Structure of Functions The Aims of ASEAN

ASEAN realized
ASEAN Summit

ASEAN Coordinating Council

ASEAN Community Councils

19
 ASEAN Sectoral Ministerial
Bodies

Committee on Permanent
Representative

National Secretariats

Committees Abroad

4. Analyze how ASEAN fosters political, economic and cultural cooperation within
Southeast Asia as a region by giving your general impression on the five major
sources of ASEAN Identity. Write your answer on the space provided.

a. Nationalism
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

b. Religion
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

c. Cultural norms and modes of interaction

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

d. Modernist developmental state orientation and approach

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

20
 _________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

e. Regionalism
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

TRY THIS OUT

1. Create a mini-documentary. Here are the guidelines below.

Description

This mini-documentary is a short-form documentary, no longer than two

minutes, highlighting resent social issues comprising in the Philippines and it should
be showing real-life situation. The format should be a feature length documentary,
but it will tell a simpler story in a shorter time span. The documentary should focus
on a singular story of an issue which is related or parallel to any social issue affecting
other Southeast Asian Countries.

Key Steps

1. Tell a story you care about – Start with a subject that excites you. Make a
documentary you're passionate about and makes sense to YOU. There will be
plenty of people who don’t “get” your idea. But if YOU get it, that’s what counts.
2. Research – Learn everything you can about your documentary subject.
Sometimes the story lines are obvious, sometimes not. Do a lot of digging and
follow leads. This is where you put on your reporter hat. Gather facts and search
for leads on interesting characters and story lines. The gems of your story are
sometimes buried deep out of sight.
3. Make a Plan – Create an outline. Think about HOW you’re going to tell your
story. What’s the structure? The style? Is there existing footage or photos that
help tell your story or will everything needed to be shot brand new? Who is your
primary character(s)? What are you core story points? What are the elements of
your story that are compelling and/or make you “tingle” with intrigue? How can
you create that intrigue for your audience? Is there some existing situation you
can film or do you need to create the moment?
4. Create a Shot List – This is a list of the footage and interviews you’ll need to
make your movie. Think of it as your list of “ingredients”. Depending on the
complexity of your project, you may or may not need to create a budget.
5. Start Shooting – Keep in mind HOW your movie will be viewed because that can
dictate your shooting and storytelling style. Make sure when you're shooting an
event to capture a variety of angles including close-ups, medium shots and wide
shots. Click here for a list of low-budget documentary filmmaking gear.
6. Write a Script – Once all of the footage is shot and you’ve gathered the various
production elements, time to start organizing it into a script. Pinpoint the most
compelling elements of your story and start crafting "mini-scenes" around those

21
 events. Remember, a script isn't necessarily what's spoken or a voice-over. A
script describes what the audience is seeing AND hearing.
7. Begin Editing – The process is like putting together a great big puzzle! First you'll
need to choose your video editing computer and video editing software. Once
you're all set with equipment, you'll start putting down your clips of footage one
right after the other in a sequence. The art with editing is to create a "roller
coaster" ride of emotion, some parts fast, some part slow to create a dynamic
viewing experience.
8. Check Legal and Copyright Issues – Even though this is near the end of the list, it
should actually be something you keep in mind from the very beginning and
throughout the ENTIRE filmmaking process.
9. Showcasing the Output – Now that you’ve done all the work making your
documentary, you want people to see it, right? Never before have there been so
many options for filmmakers to showcase their work. Submit first the soft copy
of the output for critiquing and checking. Once it’s approved by the instructor,
upload it on the social media particularly in Facebook. The reaction, interaction
and comments of the uploaded output should be considered in the process of
the assessment.

22