What's new

Time for ASEAN Peacekeeping Force?

Reashot Xigwin

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 20, 2012
Messages
5,747
Reaction score
0
There is already a thread about a "ASEAN Defense Bloc" in the forum, but this Thread is to discuss about ASEAN as a peacekeeping force. Please don't flame this thread :frown:
May 02, 2011
By Fuadi Pitsuwan

ASEAN-Logo.gif


The latest clash between Thai and Cambodian troops over a disputed area surrounding the ancient Preah Vihear temple along the two countries’ border should be a wake-up call for ASEAN.

Years of negotiations have proved ineffective in resolving the crisis as Thailand’s insistence that the issue is a bilateral one has been sharply rejected by Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen. Hun Sen’s response has been to call for UN peacekeepers to be deployed to the area, a call that raises an interesting question—is it time for ASEAN to seriously consider a peacekeeping force?

Ad hoc ceasefire agreements reached after each clash have been too fragile and prone to being breached by both sides—every time a skirmish has broken out, each side has been quick to blame the other.

Political efforts to find a solution, meanwhile, have been complicated by the domestic politics of both countries. Hun Sen has been accused by his political opponents of exploiting the border dispute to maintain his tight grip over his country, while Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, who is expected to dissolve the Thai parliament in early May, is loathe to appear weak heading into an election. All this is complicated by the close relationship between Hun Sen and the de facto leader of the Thai opposition, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Indonesia, as chair of ASEAN, has played an outstanding role in trying to broker a resolution to the dispute, but it can only do so much. For example, it put proffered the suggestion of dispatching a team of Indonesian observers to monitor the disputed area to avoid further clashes. This proposal was reportedly actually agreed on by the political leaders of both sides in the dispute, but there have been suggestions that objections from the Thai military, which feels uneasy with the idea of having a third party present in the conflict zone, have meant the idea is still on hold.

The latest clash started late last month, and many observers believe it is the most serious so far. At the time of writing, the official death toll stood at 17, although this is expected to increase. A temporary, fragile ceasefire was reached between the two militaries last Thursday, but quickly broke down after only 10 hours, leaving a tense situation and the prospect of war looming over the border.

What can ASEAN do to prevent all-out conflict? It could start by pooling the resources of all member states—including Thailand and Cambodia—to establish and deploy a peacekeeping force at the first opportunity.

This wouldn’t be the first time such a force has been considered. Back in March 2004, Indonesia’s then-Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda moved to propose the establishment of a regional peacekeeping force. Indonesia’s current foreign minister, Marty Natalegawa, voiced his support back then, saying: ‘ASEAN countries should know one another better than anyone else, and therefore we should have the option for ASEAN countries to take advantage of an ASEAN peacekeeping force to be deployed if they so wish.’ However, the idea was opposed by a number of other foreign ministers, who noted ASEAN’s stated principle of non-interference in countries’ domestic affairs.

The problem with Wirajuda’s proposal at the time is that it was akin to planting a seed without soil and water—there was really no immediate benefit that ASEAN member states could see from engaging in such cooperation, meaning the environment just wasn’t right.

But with the ASEAN Charter, a legally-binding document signed in 2007, calling for ASEAN to become an economic, socio-cultural and political-security community, the time has come for the idea of an ASEAN peacekeeping force to be put back on the table.

The inaugural ASEAN Defense Ministerial Meeting, along with eight other dialogue partners (ADMM+) in October last year, has provided an excellent foundation for a bolder form of security cooperation among ASEAN member states. Indeed, the ASEAN Political and Security Blue Print, which supplements the Charter, already has language backing peacekeeping cooperation. It eyes: ‘(Establishment of) a network among existing ASEAN Member States’ peacekeeping centres to conduct joint planning, training, and sharing of experiences, with a view to establishing an ASEAN arrangement for the maintenance of peace and stability, in accordance with the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM) 3-Year Work Programme.’

The African Union, which in many ways looks to ASEAN for inspiration as a successful regional bloc, has already formed the African Standby Force (ASF), to be deployed as a preventive measure aimed at averting conflict. Although still a work in process, it’s designed to consist of five brigades with 4,500 personnel, 350 vehicles and four helicopters per brigade.

The ASF has engaged in exercises with significant assistance from the EU and the United States. ASEAN member states currently have deployed 5,000 personnel worldwide as part of various UN Peacekeeping operations, yet these forces have no presence in their own backyard.

The benefits of an ASEAN peacekeeping force would go beyond resolution of the Thai-Cambodian border conflict. Any region must have its own processes and mechanisms for ensuring confidence and stability to maintain economic growth and sustainable development. ASEAN has made a remarkable transition into a formidable player in Asia and beyond, and a regional peacekeeping force would build on this progress and contribute to a greater sense that the region can take care of itself in times of crises—manmade or natural.

Of course, there’s bound to be opposition to any such development. Back in 2004, Singaporean Foreign Minister S. Jayakumar was quick to dismiss the idea, arguing that: ‘ASEAN is not a security or defence organization…Perhaps sometime in the future there may be scope for such an organization.’

Yet it should be clear that that future has now arrived, and as chair of ASEAN this year, Indonesia should again explore the possibility.

If it is to have legitimacy in the current spat, any force would clearly need to consist of an equal number of Thai and Cambodian troops, stripped of their respective national military uniforms in favour of one bearing the ASEAN flag. To ensure neutrality, an Indonesian four-star general could serve as commander. :P If Indonesia was somehow to make such a peacekeeping force happen, it could well be the country’s single most important contribution to the future of ASEAN during its chairmanship.

It will, of course, inevitably have to keep pushing to bring the idea to fruition and overcome opposition from some of its neighbours. But the country is the only member of ASEAN with sufficient political capital and respect to put forward a proposal for such a paradigm shift in ASEAN’s security cooperation.

The ASEAN Summit to be held this weekend in Jakarta presents a timely opportunity for Jakarta to really step up.



Fuadi Pitsuwan is an associate at The Cohen Group, a strategic advisory firm headed by former Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and an adjunct research scholar at Georgetown University’s Asian Studies Department. The views expressed here are his own.

source: Time for ASEAN Peacekeeping Force - The Diplomat

With an ASEAN peacekeeper we can efficiently mediate conflict between country like Cambodia & Thailand. Don't get me wrong both side have shown great restraint its just the Border Skirmish that distraught me. With the Peacekeeping Force we can also help with the Humanitarian crisis inside ASEAN like the Philippines Bopha tornado, etc. Of course the Peacekeeping force cannot interfere with any ASEAN country internal matter & No it must not be used against external threat, hence the name Peacekeeping Force.
 
Well its a good plan but i hate to be a prick but the following reasons will explain one ASEAN is fragmented Thai-Cambodian border territorial Disputes, Us and Malaysia territorial disputes, Us and Vietnam territorial (not really a problem both sides are talking) And China's handy work with Cambodia added more to the already fragmented ASEAN we have to solves this first than tackle this plan lets see how Brunei tackles this am placing my hope in that country i think it was a mistake to leave the chairmanship to Cambodia
 
Well its a good plan but i hate to be a prick but the following reasons will explain one ASEAN is fragmented Thai-Cambodian border territorial Disputes, Us and Malaysia territorial disputes, Us and Vietnam territorial (not really a problem both sides are talking) And China's handy work with Cambodia added more to the already fragmented ASEAN we have to solves this first than tackle this plan lets see how Brunei tackles this am placing my hope in that country i think it was a mistake to leave the chairmanship to Cambodia

ASEAN still has the most potential to form a multi-national peacekeeping force than anyone else in the region. What puts your in a stronger position is your robust integration of economies that you all have in the grouping. Cambodia cannot help itself but listen to what China says simply because China is a big donor to the country.

If ASEAN countries start massive collective industrial investments in countries like Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, these countries could be weaned off Chinese aid and the group could further develop a robust economic-military alliance together.
 
To: Reashot Xigwin

Just wondering, how are Indonesian/Malaysian relationships? I get this impression the two countries are not agreeable with each other on many things but not sure if this is just surface or something that has a deeper undercurrent?
 
To: Reashot Xigwin

Just wondering, how are Indonesian/Malaysian relationships? I get this impression the two countries are not agreeable with each other on many things but not sure if this is just surface or something that has a deeper undercurrent?

Do you prefer the truth or the lie? :)
 
Well its a good plan but i hate to be a prick but the following reasons will explain one ASEAN is fragmented Thai-Cambodian border territorial Disputes, Us and Malaysia territorial disputes, Us and Vietnam territorial (not really a problem both sides are talking) And China's handy work with Cambodia added more to the already fragmented ASEAN we have to solves this first than tackle this plan lets see how Brunei tackles this am placing my hope in that country i think it was a mistake to leave the chairmanship to Cambodia

It's doesn't have to start right now,like almost everything it needs to be taken step by step. It will be years or decade before an ASEAN Peacekeeping Force can be deployed into a conflict area, but it should start helping with environmental disaster or humanitarian disaster in the region.
 
To: Reashot Xigwin

Just wondering, how are Indonesian/Malaysian relationships? I get this impression the two countries are not agreeable with each other on many things but not sure if this is just surface or something that has a deeper undercurrent?

I am sure that I know I am not the one who you are demanding your answer from. But allow me to share some interesting things that happens between Indonesia and Malaysia before we go to your answer.

The lie is, Indonesia and Malaysia are brothers, bound by cultural ties, religious similarity, and pledge allegiance to serve the best interest of ASEAN, therefore our oath to keep the peace in South East Asia is unquestionable. The truth is, yes, Indonesia and Malaysia has certain tenses between each other that may forsake the stability of the region and the ASEAN community itself as two of them are one of founding members of ASEAN. The harder truth is, Indonesia and Malaysia are still at war by law, the two countries only signed ceasefire and peace treaty that not officially ended the war between the two countries, the "confrontation" is still in force technically.

And for the answers of your question ; the lie is no, there is no undercurrent or something that goes beneath the words of this agreements, the two countries have proven their role to keep the region stable for decades and will continue to keep it for decades to come with full participation from all of ASEAN members. The truth is, I don't know, there is no answer for such a question of yours, but both countries are seeking a place to place their teeth at each other, why do you think the writer suggest that Indonesia's four star general should be the leader to ensure its neutrality when Indonesia itself is not in her "true neutrality"? question inside question, would you agree my friend? And for the harder truth is, both countries are just sleeping in wait, I am sure when Indonesia finally has a "fanatic" man leading the country, he will be declaring the long postponed war, more than just a deeper undercurrent i believe.

But the convenient thing is, both people don't actually have much disagreements, don't really care if I have to say the truth. Both people have been working and doing "mutually benefiting" things for centuries and none of them are wanting something that can break the links between them, some loyal "Malaysians" are having their big families as loyal "Indonesians". Well, unless you remind the people of Indonesia about how their thalassocratic Majapahit empire conquered the lands of Malayan people, they will die for that dream to redo the things that their ancestors had accomplished if they have to. Hahaha quite a dream huh? or so i say, ambition.

I hope my answer is not complicated, sir.
 
It's doesn't have to start right now,like almost everything it needs to be taken step by step. It will be years or decade before an ASEAN Peacekeeping Force can be deployed into a conflict area, but it should start helping with environmental disaster or humanitarian disaster in the region.

I think ASEAN has that already but i agree with you comrade it should be done in small steps
 
Nah. Someone already post a good answer in the thread

Yea just saw it lol, not sure how I missed it :)

I am sure that I know I am not the one who you are demanding your answer from. But allow me to share some interesting things that happens between Indonesia and Malaysia before we go to your answer.

The lie is, Indonesia and Malaysia are brothers, bound by cultural ties, religious similarity, and pledge allegiance to serve the best interest of ASEAN, therefore our oath to keep the peace in South East Asia is unquestionable. The truth is, yes, Indonesia and Malaysia has certain tenses between each other that may forsake the stability of the region and the ASEAN community itself as two of them are one of founding members of ASEAN. The harder truth is, Indonesia and Malaysia are still at war by law, the two countries only signed ceasefire and peace treaty that not officially ended the war between the two countries, the "confrontation" is still in force technically.

And for the answers of your question ; the lie is no, there is no undercurrent or something that goes beneath the words of this agreements, the two countries have proven their role to keep the region stable for decades and will continue to keep it for decades to come with full participation from all of ASEAN members. The truth is, I don't know, there is no answer for such a question of yours, but both countries are seeking a place to place their teeth at each other, why do you think the writer suggest that Indonesia's four star general should be the leader to ensure its neutrality when Indonesia itself is not in her "true neutrality"? question inside question, would you agree my friend? And for the harder truth is, both countries are just sleeping in wait, I am sure when Indonesia finally has a "fanatic" man leading the country, he will be declaring the long postponed war, more than just a deeper undercurrent i believe.

But the convenient thing is, both people don't actually have much disagreements, don't really care if I have to say the truth. Both people have been working and doing "mutually benefiting" things for centuries and none of them are wanting something that can break the links between them, some loyal "Malaysians" are having their big families as loyal "Indonesians". Well, unless you remind the people of Indonesia about how their thalassocratic Majapahit empire conquered the lands of Malayan people, they will die for that dream to redo the things that their ancestors had accomplished if they have to. Hahaha quite a dream huh? or so i say, ambition.

I hope my answer is not complicated, sir.

Very well thought thru, and deep. Thanks :tup:
 
India should be an active member of ASEAN. The north east is culturally and racially akin to the South East Asian region. Roads and railways can be built right upto Vietnam.
 
India should be an active member of ASEAN. The north east is culturally and racially akin to the South East Asian region. Roads and railways can be built right upto Vietnam.

Then, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh will be asking to join ASEAN too. Moreover, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have been eyeing for a seat in ASEAN. India is the core of SAARC, by joining ASEAN, SAARC will be abandoned by the other members. But personally, I welcome India as a active member of ASEAN.
 

Back
Top Bottom