Big powers achieving common ground on Asia-Pacific security

At first glance, the 26-member ASEAN Regional Forum seems a diverse, heterogenous and contradictory mix of states among whom unity of perception and purpose would be a near impossibility.

However, there is more than meets the eye here. Amid the fissiparous diversity is a commonality of purpose in the security sphere. In simple terms, the need for a stable, undisturbed Asia-Pacific region unites these states and gives the grouping some coherence.

A count of even a few states of the ASEAN Regional Forum, provides a pointer to its exceptional diversity. Besides the 10 ASEAN members, 16 dialogue partners attend the Forum's deliberations. A handful of them are: Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, China, the EU, India, Japan, North Korea, Russia and the US.

It could be seen, then, that besides the mighty and the weak, states from almost every region of the world enjoy membership of the Forum. In fact it is a representative cross-section of the "world community."

Why should this abundant slice of the "world community" have an abiding interest in a stable, secure Asia-Pacific region? The answer to this question will unravel the reasons for the recent swift moves by the Forum to form "a quick-reaction group" to respond to the outbreak of war and political crises in the Asia-Pacific region.

It will amount to labouring the obvious to emphasize that the Asia-Pacific region is the principal growth centre of the world economy. The ASEAN region is the fastest growing "economic zone" of the world. Besides export-led growth, it boasts a rapidly expanding manufacturing base and industrial development of substantial proportions.

Besides, the region is witness to growing affluence. It abounds with electronic and technological giants with the ASEAN coming to the notice of the world around 25 years ago on account of its "Leaping Tiger" economies.

Therefore, the Asia-Pacific region is too precious from the viewpoint of the number one economic powers to be left at the mercy of conflict, war and terror. If economic penetration of the Asia-Pacific is to go on unhindered by these powers, then peace and stability in the region needs to be maintained through an appropriate, cooperative mechanism among them.

This is the principal reason for the reported formation of the rapid-reaction group of the ASEAN Regional Forum. The idea is to nip conflict and war in the bud through a quick, cooperative conflict-defusion effort.

The inevitable question is: how come states as disparate in political orientation as China, the US, Russia, India and Japan, for instance, are arriving at a commonality of purpose on these issues?

The answer has to be sought in economic expansion and commercial success. On these questions, these seemingly disparate states are all agreed. The economy "is the thing" and in the current globalised economy, continued economic penetration of the world becomes a recipe for national success. Hence their banding together to ensure security.

If this agenda is to be propelled without interruption, conflict and crisis needs to be kept at a minimum.

This is the reason why the ASEAN Regional Forum would prefer to get its act together on the security front. One is reminded, once again, that economics could very well be driving politics. In this the age of globalisation, economic forces are proving to be more decisive than political forces.

The common need for economic advancement and the urge to conquer markets, could act as a catalyst for unity of purpose among the principal powers.

It does not follow from the above that we are about to witness a ceasing of political conflicts among states and blocs.

Competition for global hegemonic influence among these actors would continue but these contests among the world's foremost economic powers are likely to be devoid of ideological content, for, we do not have ideological polarities of the Cold War kind any longer. But national power would continue to be a decisive factor in the power consolidation calculations of most big powers. This would continue to be a source of friction among states.

However, some chief ideological polarities in the current global political economy would be increasingly derived from the forces of religious extremism and those claiming to be liberal democratic in outlook. This in fact is likely to emerge as a fundamental polarity in the world order currently taking shape.

[email protected]