Why has Asean historically favoured diplomacy over military action?

Question

Accepted Answer

Asean's Historical Preference for Diplomacy Over Military Confrontation

Asean has historically favoured diplomacy over military confrontation due to the devastating costs of conflict that are deeply embedded in the region's collective memory. The founding generation of Asean members carried vivid recollections of past struggles, including the experiences in Indochina, insurgencies, separatist movements, and the broader geopolitical tensions of the Cold War. These historical events underscored the profound and often unbearable consequences of warfare within Southeast Asia, leading to a strategic imperative to prioritise dialogue and cooperative mechanisms.
The Unbearable Costs of Conflict in Southeast Asia

The establishment of Asean in 1967 was a direct response to the understanding that conflict in Southeast Asia had already exacted a heavy toll. The recent conflict in Eastern Europe serves as a stark reminder of how modern warfare can transcend geographical boundaries and technological advancements, impacting critical infrastructure, financial systems, and communications networks remotely. For Southeast Asia, a region strategically positioned along vital maritime trade routes like the Strait of Malacca and the South China Sea, any major conflict involving regional powers would invariably disrupt global supply chains, insurance markets, and investor confidence, leaving no member state untouched.
A Diplomatic Instinct Rooted in Historical Experience

In lieu of forming military alliances against external powers, Asean's founders opted for a diplomatic approach centred on dialogue. This fundamental inclination towards negotiation and peaceful resolution was formally articulated in key declarations and treaties, starting with the 1971 Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality declaration and the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation. These foundational principles subsequently guided the development of multilateral forums such as the Asean Regional Forum, the East Asia Summit, and the Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting Plus, all designed to facilitate ongoing discussion and consensus-building.
Dialogue as a Strategic Imperative for Peace and Prosperity

The consistent philosophy underpinning Asean's approach has been to prioritise talking, even when discussions seem challenging, recognising that the cost of diplomacy, while potentially frustrating, is significantly lower than the destructive consequences of war. The devastation witnessed in Ukraine reinforces the distinction between the costs of diplomacy and the immense destruction wrought by conflict, which includes repeated attacks on cities, damage to civilian infrastructure, displacement of populations, economic regression, and generational debt. Therefore, Asean's primary objective extends beyond avoiding participation in great power conflicts; it aims to prevent Southeast Asia from becoming a theatre for such military competition in the first place.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Why has Asean historically favoured diplomacy over military action?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends