This
week the
ASEAN foreign ministers agreed to support the bids of Malaysia and Thailand to
the United Nations Security Council as a grouping. That means that Malaysia’s bid for the 2015-16 term and Thailand’s bid for
the 2017-18 term would be made as a representative of ASEAN, rather than only
in their individual capacities.
ASEAN
members have served on the UN Security Council, of course. ASEAN members have also worked together to
support candidates for international organizations, such as Dr. Supachai
Panichpakdi’s candidacy for WTO director general and UNCTAD secretary general.
ASEAN countries coordinate their work at the WTO and other international forums,
and have standing committees in various foreign capitals to coordinate their foreign
policy. The ASEAN countries look to Indonesia as their representative to the
G-20.
This
agreement represents another step in ASEAN operating as a bloc, something
envisioned by the ASEAN Charter.
The question
will become whether an ASEAN member serving on the UN Security Council can
represent all of the bloc if there are internal conflicts within the bloc? Would Malaysia represent the bloc or only
Malaysia if there were another incursion by Philippine rebels into Sabah? Would Thailand put national concerns over
ASEAN-wide concerns should the International Court of Justice, another UN
entity, rule in favor of Cambodia in the Preah Vihear case? Diplomatic disputes among members of a
regional bloc are not new – this a regular occurrence in the EU with the United
Kingdom and France. But in less mature grouping such as ASEAN such disputes
carry more risk to the grouping.
How
these members would prioritize and handle their national and ASEAN responsibilities
as UN Security Council members, now that they would speak for ASEAN, will be
another test of the ASEAN institutions.
Let’s hope that they will give priority to their ASEAN responsibilities,
much as Indonesia and others have done for the grouping in other contexts.
