[ASEAN]What makes the summit season a "second generation ASEAN"?
Zhai Kun, Contributing Fellow, Institute of International Strategic Studies, Peking University; Professor, School of International Relations, Peking University
The three ASEAN countries - Cambodia, Indonesia and Thailand - were particularly prominent in this year's end-of-summit season. Cambodia hosted the East Asia Cooperation Leaders Series, Indonesia hosted the 17th G20 Leaders Summit and Thailand hosted the 29th APEC Leaders Informal Meeting. The three summits covered East Asia, Asia Pacific and the world, forming the ASEAN home turf, showcasing the ASEAN way of integration and the "second generation of ASEAN".
The "ASEAN Way" in the Summit Season
The ASEAN countries gave full play to the "ASEAN Way" during the Summit Season. The first is ASEAN-style coordination. The fact that these Asian countries were able to overcome the difficulties of putting the summit together was a great achievement in itself. Moreover, the timing of the summits had to be perfectly staggered and seamless to make it happen. Cambodia, Thailand and Indonesia started with small meetings in the first half of the year, and coordinated the timing, objectives, content and modalities specifically for the three summits at the end of the year, so that the three summits could be seamlessly integrated, participants from various countries could move smoothly, and the countries coordinated during the meetings to avoid breaking the ice. Second, the ASEAN-style balance. In today's world, the logic of political security prevails, suppressing the logic of economic development, which has been "politicised, securityised and weaponised". Asian countries prefer a balanced development of the two logics, restoring economic logic and releasing development potential. During the summit season, the ASEAN countries actively implemented the RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement), emphasising a "common recovery and strong recovery", practising open regionalism and reverting to the essence of development. Thirdly, ASEAN-style connectivity. President Joko visited a number of member states before the G20, actively facilitating consensus building and innovative ways of cooperation during the meeting. ASEAN used the summit to simultaneously strengthen and upgrade its comprehensive strategic partnership with major powers such as China and the United States, to some extent playing a role in redressing the imbalance in major power relations. Fourthly, ASEAN-style cognition. While the global deficit in peace, security, development, governance and trust has increased, the "perception deficit" between countries has risen sharply due to the lack of real communication during the epidemic. ASEAN has always advocated the principle of comfort and made good use of the short summit time to make the meetings informative and to gather consensus to alleviate the "perception deficit" crisis to a certain extent. All three summits were successful in reaching a consensus on development from the regional to the global level, throwing a ray of light on the gloomy international situation.
Underpinning the ASEAN Way's "Second Generation ASEAN"
ASEAN and its members have been able to take advantage of the opportunity to play a coordinating and connecting role in the ASEAN way in the midst of major changes and among major powers, demonstrating the ability to govern the regional order differently from the major powers. This is the quality of "second-generation ASEAN". The term "second-generation ASEAN" comes from Mr Wang Gungwu, a renowned overseas Chinese historian. In an online English lecture entitled "The New Silk Road: China and ASEAN" in October 2021, he said that the first generation of ASEAN emerged as the major countries in Southeast Asia turned to capitalism and re-aligned themselves with the Western powers. As the balance of power between China and the US changed, a more independent second generation ASEAN was able to emerge. The author agreed with Mr Wang's views on the second generation of ASEAN and immediately emailed him to ask if his speech could be translated into Chinese. Mr Wang agreed, and through the efforts of various parties, the idea of a second generation ASEAN was published in Chinese in the South Asian Studies, a Chinese academic research journal on Southeast Asia. And a year later, during the summit season, the article was reprinted on 18 November by Culture Vertical in its public edition, with the title changed to 'ASEAN must recognise the real source of hegemony between China and the US if it does not want to be a pawn'.
"No Questions Asked" by the "Second Generation ASEAN
In fact, ASEAN studies are gaining momentum in China. Many Chinese scholars are doing research on the history of ASEAN's development, its organisation and its ways, and analysing the roots of ASEAN and its behaviour. The author also has a little understanding of 'second-generation ASEAN', mainly from the perspective of the governance of regional order. Traditionally, the governance of regional order in Southeast Asia has generally been "administered" by the major powers, and it is unlikely to be the turn of these countries. But as ASEAN grew up, it gradually acquired certain qualifications, capabilities and roles in regional order governance. The first generation of ASEAN spanned the 30 years between its establishment in 1967 and the Asian financial crisis of 1997. The second generation of ASEAN is the 30 years from the creation of the East Asia Cooperation mechanism by ASEAN in late 1997 to about 2030. The first generation of ASEAN saw a watershed year in 1991: firstly, it witnessed the transition from war to peace. ASEAN went through the Vietnam and Cambodia wars and achieved peace in Southeast Asia in 1991. The goal of the first generation of ASEAN regional order governance was to seek peace, but it knew how difficult it would be to achieve it. Later on, with the dividends of the end of the Cold War in 1991, the Southeast Asian region experienced rapid economic development and the ASEAN organisation expanded rapidly. But by 1997 Southeast Asia was hit by the Asian financial crisis and experienced development to recession. The goal of ASEAN regional order governance in this period was to pursue development, but was well aware of the difficulties of pursuing it. A generation of ASEAN has experienced war, pursued development, and already has the awareness and dream of orderly governance in the region, but not enough self-identification, self-confidence and autonomy.
The second generation of ASEAN was transformed by the Asian financial crisis. Before it could learn from its mistakes, ASEAN broke away from the "coconut bowl" of Southeast Asia and established the ASEAN-led East Asia Cooperation Mechanism (EACM) in late 1997 to promote regional order and governance within East Asia. Looking at this strategic decision today, it is indeed a strategic idea that came out of nowhere. As a result, the second generation of ASEAN's regional order governance has a clearer sense of purpose, meaning and system - to maintain the centrality of ASEAN, to lead East Asian regional cooperation, to maintain the dynamic balance of major powers and to build an inclusive regional order. This is the underlying logic that enables the ASEAN approach to work in the summit season. In short, the second generation of ASEAN has seen an increase in self-identification, self-confidence and autonomy. On the one hand, it does not ask questions, regardless of geopolitics and great power games, ASEAN sticks to its independent and autonomous path of development; on the other hand, it is a "guide the south" to "find the north" and is brave enough to provide a platform and solution for an inclusive order for regional and global development.