The ASEAN Miracle review: Does the grouping deserve the Nobel Peace Prize?

The proposition forwarded in this book is intriguing but the editors may be overstating the case

Marking 25 years of their relationship, India hosted heads of state of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as chief guests for the Republic Day parade this year. Although this creative diplomacy rightfully deserves praise, it is indicative of a larger logic of strategy that China has inadvertently accelerated — its arrogance is causing some of its neighbours to coalesce. And this is happening regardless of the inertial cultural impediments, ideological fixations and political hesitations of these countries.

The ASEAN Miracle is the story of one such group in China’s neighbourhood. Written by two former diplomats from Singapore and Thailand, the book makes a passionate case for ASEAN as a regional organisation that benefits not just Southeast Asia but the world at large. In their attempt to strengthen the narrative, the authors even go so far as to say that ASEAN deserves the Nobel Peace Prize! 

The book is a good starting point for anyone wanting to learn about Southeast Asia in general and the ASEAN in particular. The short chapters on the four waves of cultural influence and pen sketches of each of the 10 member states are helpful in situating the context in which ASEAN operates. 

Mahbubani and Sng make three major claims in support of the ASEAN “miracle”. One, no two ASEAN states have gone to war with each other since the organisation’s founding in 1967. Hence, ASEAN has successfully delivered peace. Two, what was once an impoverished region has undergone an economic transformation. So, ASEAN has delivered economic prosperity. And three, ASEAN has defied the “clash of civilisations” logic by demonstrating that different worldviews can cooperate peacefully within a single regional framework.

The ASEAN Miracle: A Catalyst for Peace, Author: Kishore Mahbubani and Jeffery Sng, Publisher: Oxford University Press, Pages: 264, Price: 750

 

The chapter on ASEAN and the Great Powers is the most interesting part of the book. The authors trace the trajectory of relations between ASEAN and the US, China, India, Japan and the EU. They acknowledge the pivotal role the US played in guiding ASEAN, especially during the Cold War. At the same time, they argue that the US often takes a myopic view of ASEAN as merely a “valuable geopolitical asset”. India’s engagement with ASEAN is welcomed. One line summarises the urgency in involving India — “If the China-US rivalry intensifies, the only power that can provide ASEAN with a geopolitical buffer is India.”

The section on China is overly generous, perhaps intentionally so. The authors surprisingly concede that ASEAN is China’s “geopolitical backyard” and insist on referring to China’s economic story as that of “peaceful re-emergence”. In the process, they downplay China’s hostile actions in the South China Sea towards individual nation-states, choosing to use these words: “it would be a mistake for any of the ASEAN countries to allow bilateral interests to determine the future of the ASEAN-China relationship. Instead, that should be based on an enlightened calculation of ASEAN’s long-term interests as a group via-a-vis China.” Why all ASEAN members, especially the ones most threatened by China, will heed this sanctimonious advice is not very clear though.

The success of most Southeast Asian nations in delivering prosperity to their citizens is indeed laudable and needs to be celebrated. But in their enthusiasm to project ASEAN as a contender for the Nobel Peace Prize, the authors commit two mistakes.

One, they overestimate the contribution of ASEAN as an organisation for successes while they pin the blame on individual members for failures. For example, while ASEAN is credited for its role in getting Myanmar to accept foreign aid following Cyclone Nargis, no justification is provided for ASEAN’s rather unspectacular role in the Rohingya genocide perpetrated by the government forces of an ASEAN member state. 

Two, the authors’ claim that “ASEAN’s strength can be found in its weakness” ignores the logic of international relations where power is the only currency. Even if the assumption that “many great powers have a vested interest in keeping the ASEAN going” is assumed to be true, it doesn’t hide the fact that ASEAN remains a permanent hostage to the prevailing Great Power framework of the day. As the authors themselves acknowledge, if US-China relations worsen, ASEAN would find it extremely difficult to remain as one unit. This structural weakness, where the existence of a regional organisation depends most not on its constituents but on external actors, constrains ASEAN’s options severely.

Over the next two decades, this structural weakness means that ASEAN will be disproportionately dependent on China’s attitude towards it. For India, this implies that ASEAN as a whole is unlikely to be a steady partner in countering China’s arrogant power play. For this purpose, India will have to rely on bilateral partnerships with specific ASEAN members. However, the prospect of collaboration between ASEAN and India is much brighter on the economic front. With the US backing off and China’s credibility run down, ASEAN and India have the opportunity to jointly champion the cause of globalisation. All in all, the upcoming visit of the ASEAN heads of state to India is a welcome move.

In the last chapter, the authors highlight that the ASEAN project currently receives focus only at the level of governments. And for this project to survive, they contend that an ASEAN identity needs to be imbibed by the people of ASEAN. This book is one such attempt to create this ASEAN identity and should be treated as such. To take the authors’ own analogy forward, the regional organisation might well remain a “catalyst” for peace but is unlikely to become an active “reactant” that will shape the major world-ordering decisions. 

The reviewer heads the geostrategy programme at the Takshashila Institution