[Insight & Opinion] Rethinking ASEAN, Now in the Spotlight of the United States

[Asia Economy] Next year marks the 56th anniversary of the establishment of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), and its popularity is higher than ever. Recently, at the ASEAN-US Summit held in Phnom Penh on the occasion of the ASEAN Summit, both sides elevated their mutual relationship to the highest level of a ‘Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP).’ Considering that ASEAN-China relations were upgraded to CSP last October, ASEAN has effectively embraced the ‘G2’ within a year. Even the world’s strongest power, the United States, has judged that it is difficult to contain China without ASEAN, and from this perspective, ASEAN’s popularity is bound to continue soaring.

How did ASEAN become an entity receiving ‘love calls’ from the G2? The answer lies in diversity and unity. Unity is represented by ASEAN as a regional organization consisting of 10 Southeast Asian countries established in 1967. It was founded with the purpose of having individual countries concede part of their national interests to ASEAN to respond to the overall interests of Southeast Asia with one voice and stance, and it has evolved according to changes in the external environment. It exerts influence greater than the sum of its 10 member countries and is gaining prominence even amid US-China decoupling.

This characteristic of ASEAN is often expressed as ‘Unity in Diversity.’ There is almost nothing similar among them in terms of race, language, religion, population, land size, or income level, yet they unite to raise their voice in the international community. Diversity and unity are conflicting concepts, but they operate intriguingly in this region.

Understanding these contrasting characteristics of Southeast Asia well reveals the diplomacy of individual Southeast Asian countries and ASEAN. Without this understanding, their diplomacy may appear inconsistent and even ambiguous, risking an undervaluation of ASEAN diplomacy.

Regarding issues such as the South China Sea, China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and the US Indo-Pacific strategy, ASEAN does not take sides but skillfully mixes hedging, balancing, and bandwagoning strategies. In this process, they set their positions under a least common multiple cooperation due to diverse stances and calculations on each country’s security and economic issues. Outsiders often cite this as ASEAN’s vulnerability, but they have collectively responded to the rise of Vietnam and China for over half a century. They internalized Vietnam to neutralize the Vietnam threat and recognize China as both an opportunity and a risk. Granting the UK the status of a dialogue partner equivalent to an ASEAN associate member last year is in the same context.

Seeing ASEAN adapt to a volatile environment and enhance its own value, our diplomacy toward ASEAN also needs to evolve. While tailored bilateral diplomacy according to the characteristics of the 10 Southeast Asian countries and ASEAN-level unity policies toward ASEAN are important, efforts should also be made toward subregional cooperation and Indo-Pacific cooperation. Subregional cooperative diplomacy targeting the Mekong countries?Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Vietnam, Thailand?which are continental Southeast Asian countries, and maritime countries such as Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Brunei can serve as good examples. Additionally, the Korean version of the Indo-Pacific strategy proposed by our side at the recent Korea-ASEAN Summit in Phnom Penh is a new platform. This approach enables diplomacy that views the ‘mountains’ of the Indo-Pacific, the ‘forest’ of ASEAN, the ‘clusters’ of subregions, and the ‘trees’ of individual Southeast Asian countries concentrically and multilayeredly.

South Korea has maintained a dialogue partner relationship with ASEAN as an associate member for over 30 years. Now, after spending a generation with ASEAN, it is time for South Korea to adopt a strategy different from before.

Seo Jeong-in, Ambassador to Mexico