Functional security
organization needed for survival in the 21st century
While serving as US Secretary of State, Hillary
Clinton was said to have considered evolving NATO to address the Pacific, thus
creating, or at least modifying the organization. Little emerged from the
hypothetical "Pacific–Atlantic Treaty Organization." However, the
need to establish a functional security organization in Asia-Pacific remains
present. Although history has not been kind to such propositions - recall the
Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) that predated ASEAN - and obstacles remain many, the
establishment of a regional security organization should not be abandoned.
In common defense
International forums such as APEC, ASEAN and its many
derivatives allow for member states to gather and engage in dialogue. They are,
however, ill-equipped to address and resolve pressing security concerns such as
maritime and territorial disputes. Although an argument for the United Nations
could be made, given the broad and extra-regional nature of the UN, it is
unlikely to establish much headway in Asia-Pacific, to say nothing of potential
Chinese resistance.
An Asian-Pacific security organization should be just
that - Asian-Pacific, and dedicated to the preservation of peace and security
in the region. As such, any proposed "Pacific Security Treaty
Organization" (PSTO) should function as a separate and independent agency,
rather than being part of an existing organization. Not unlike the European
Defence Agency of the European Union, a PSTO should establish and develop
defense cooperation between member states based on a common foreign and defense
policy (not unlike the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy).
Yet, for all the ground that has been broken on
establishing a multinational defense organization, transporting and
implementing a set of ideas from one part of the world to another will not be
so easily achieved.
SEATO, established as collective defense against the
spread of communism during the Cold War, lacked the necessary command
structures to provide for collective action, and failed to bridge the cultural
and linguistic divides of the member states. Moreover, it suffered from the
member states’ indifference. If the hypothetical PSTO were to move beyond the
planning stage, it must rectify those issues that SEATO failed to resolve. It
must rise to become more than "NATO of the Pacific."
Today, threatening peace and security in Asia-Pacific (and
Southeast Asia in particular) is not the spread of communism but competing
interests. Less ideological and more economics, there is a desire among
Asian-Pacific states to be more than a source of cheap labor for the West.
China, specifically, has grown increasingly assertive as it seeks to take its
place on the world stage and, in doing so, has begun to flex its diplomatic,
economic, and military muscle in conjunction with its maritime and territorial
claims, much to the alarm of many neighboring states.
No longer is the Asia-Pacific home to impoverished
nations struggling to get by. Rather, it has become one of the most dynamic
regions in the world and its rising political and economic importance will only
cause resident states to compete for their share of the pie. Now more than
ever, there is a need for a common foreign and defense policy, and an
organization to advance and protect said policy.
Searching for unity
Who then should be included in PSTO? Ideally, any such
security organization should comprise ASEAN states such as Indonesia, Malaysia,
the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam; as well as prominent states
such as Japan, South Korea, and Australia. The United States would necessarily
play an advisory, if not leading, role in its establishment. However, the
organization should not surrender itself as a tool of American foreign policy.
Partnering states should include NATO and the EU; and China, Russia, and India
should be invited as observers.
The challenge then becomes addressing those very same
problems that faced SEATO: linguistic and cultural differences, and
establishing a joint multinational command structure. Additionally, the
organization must also take into consideration the interests of each member
state, which may or may not be shared by other member states.
In this globally connected world, it has become easy,
or at least somewhat accessible, for people from different countries to meet
new people from different backgrounds. The Internet and social media sites have
erased national boundaries. Still, the world is far from free as countries such
as China and Vietnam continue to monitor and even censor online activities of
its citizens. It is not these curious citizens who are leading the country, but
rather the officials censoring the people that are dictating policy, thus
creating the very divisions that must be bridged.
As such, the importance of establishing a common
policy cannot be underestimated. If PSTO is to succeed, it cannot allow member
states to go their own way. If PSTO were to become another multilateral forum
espousing the "ASEAN way" then the organization has already failed.
What would be required from each member state is a willingness to act as a
collective and search for a common identity - PSTO, Asian, or otherwise.
Difficult as this might be - especially when considering the competing
interests of potential member states, particularly with regard to the South
China Sea disputes - it would be necessary that member states confront and
overcome differences. Agreeing to disagree could not be a solution with PSTO.
Regardless of the name or organizational structure of
any planned or hypothetical defense group in Asia-Pacific, there must be common
foreign and defense policy to bind member states. There must be shared values
and beliefs to give member states something worth striving for. Without this
common policy, and without a collective will, PSTO or any similar organization
would be doomed to fail.
Khanh Vu Duc
Business & Investment Opportunities Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd (SBC) is incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Strategy, Investment and Management, focusing Health care and Life Science with expertise in ASEAN 's area. We are currently changing the platform of www.yourvietnamexpert.com, if any request, please, contact directly Dr Christian SIODMAK, business strategist, owner and CEO of SBC at christian.siodmak@gmail.com. Many thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment