-
100. ASEAN Vision 2020 and the Hanoi Plan of Action
- ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
- Chapter
- Additional Information
ASEAN Vision 2020 and the Hanoi Plan of Action 493 By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville 100. ASEAN VISION 2020 AND THE HANOI PLAN OF ACTION SIMON S. C. TAY Reprinted in abridged form from Simon S. C. Tay, “Institutions and Processes: Dilemmas and Possibilities”, in Reinventing ASEAN, edited by Simon S. C. Tay, Jesus P. Estanislao, and Hadi Soesastro (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2001), pp. 243–72, by permission of the author and the publisher. Amidst the most serious crisis that has faced the region, ASEAN declared its Vision 2020 on 15 December 1997. This broad vision aims to see ASEAN as a concert of nations, outward looking, living in peace, stability and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in dynamic development, and in a community of caring societies. In December 1998, the sixth informal ASEAN summit was followed by the Hanoi Declaration and the HPA. The HPA set out specific and concrete steps and goals to be implemented in the six years from 1998 to 2004. The HPA tries to set realistic goals. Yet, it is both ambitious and wide in scope, covering diverse and complex areas of policy-making: macroeconomic and financial co-operation; economic integration; science, technology, and information technology; social development and the social impact of the crisis; human resource development; the environment and the promotion of sustainable development; regional peace and security; ASEAN’s role in the world and the Asia-Pacific region; and the structures and institutions within ASEAN. The HPA is an attempt to spell out how the broad ASEAN 2020 Vision can be implemented. In this, there is a role for a regional institution — such as the ASEAN Secretariat — to co-ordinate and review government actions on the plan, and to point out shortcomings. This would enhance the impartial review of national efforts to further the HPA. The process for review has begun, albeit somewhat inauspiciously with the mere listing of various meetings held and plans drawn up. There will have to be increased scope for a central institution to review more strictly and evaluate national plans. Otherwise, the HPA is likely to remain more a plan than action. The ASEAN Secretariat could serve as such a central institution, if it is given the mandate and sufficient resources. There are lingering suspicions among some 100 AR Ch 100 22/9/03, 1:02 PM 493 494 Simon S. C. Tay By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville ASEAN member states, however, against having stronger regional institutions. As such, perhaps a Council of Ministers with special powers to oversee implementation might be more acceptable. It is essential, however, that such a Council should have strong powers to review, analyse, and cajole. The model should not be the usual meetings where general statements are issued, but along the lines of the peer review process in the area of financial co-operation. How does the ARF and the HPA impact on ASEAN as an institution? The impact at present should not be overstated. As acknowledged, much more remains to be done. The plans have generated expectations of implementation. It can therefore be argued that some forms of increased institutionalization is needed and must come about. If not, ASEAN may continue in the old “ASEAN way”, and face the danger of becoming increasingly irrelevant. These brief discussions of the ARF and the HPA point to a need for ASEAN to review and strengthen its forms of cooperation and interaction, and its modes for making and implementing foreign policy. This arises from functional needs and ambitions. If ASEAN wants to lead the ARF to the next stage, it must itself move to a next stage. If ASEAN wants to implement the HPA as a source of unity and strengthened co-operation, it must ensure timely review and implementation of the HPA. In so doing, institutions and processes in ASEAN will need to be strengthened. Given the preference for working within the framework of co-operation rather than confrontation, how can ASEAN proceed meaningfully? Given the negative sentiment against the model of union and the Brussels bureaucracy, how can ASEAN be united and institutionalized? There are some priorities and principles that can be suggested. Firstly, there would be the need for members to agree to certain rules of behaviour and commitment to principles of justice and the rule of law. Ideally, this would require the members to commit to...