Rocky road fails to jolt EU-Asia ties

Date: 05/09/1996

WHEN ten Asian presidents and prime ministers met 15 EU leaders for a summit in Bangkok six months ago, Europeans made romantic allusions to Marco Polo and waxed poetical about rediscovering one another while Asians talked about finally finding a seat on the political Mount Olympus.

Now they are getting down to business and discovering that things are not that easy.

The two sides disagree on many principles and most details. Quarrels over human rights are straining political closeness and spats over labour standards are hindering trade talks. Disappointment with each other and broken ranks on either side are now becoming increasingly evident.

“You could describe it as a rocky road,” said an EU diplomat. “It is all very well to talk about greater cooperation, but there are hard realities and nobody is under any illusions.”

But the goodwill created in Bangkok is not unravelling and, having agreed to disagree on divisive issues, both sides remain committed to the process of bringing two of the world's three major trading regions closer together.

“Bangkok was about doing business together,” said the diplomat. “I do not think that has been undermined.”

Trade is, and will continue to be, the crux of the relationship which is bringing Europe closer to China, Japan, South Korea and the nations of Southeast Asia. The two sides also have a political forum in which to discuss security matters - the Asian Regional Forum (ARF) - which is growing in importance almost daily.

EU bilateral ties with Beijing, Tokyo and Seoul are already fairly well developed and last March's Asia-Europe summit (ASEM) gave new impetus to links with the seven members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which, although 20 years old, were lacking in dynamism.

ASEAN might be compared to the EU in the role it plays on the Asian continent.

Its members are bringing down their internal trading borders, with the goal of creating a form of single market by 2003. By reducing tariffs on each other's products, they have already stepped up intra-ASEAN trade ahead of the opening date for the Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA).

Through the regional forum, they are also playing a key role in shaping the security of their continent. Because neighbouring Asian countries are seeking to join both the economic and the security groupings, ASEAN must play an EU-like role on its own continent, helping its neighbours to move towards market economies and democracy.

With some 425 million people and high economic growth (its members' combined average annual growth rate is 7.25&percent; - three times that of the Union), the ASEAN bloc also controls some of the world's most crucial shipping routes and is happily watching the world's biggest investment flows coming its way.

On the assumption that neither Japan nor China will let the other control developments on the Asian continent, the Union is betting on ASEAN as the key to future political and security developments in Asia.

And even if European capitals have not yet made ASEAN a high-profile priority, the European Commission is making its approach clear.

“Effective recognition of ASEAN's leading role should push the European Union to make it a focal point of its political presence in Asia,” said External Relations Commissioner Manuel Marín in a 28-page report to Union governments on EU-ASEAN ties published in July. “The EU-ASEAN axis can be a motor of the new Europe-Asia dialogue.”

The paper, which was warmly received by ASEAN members, complains that “our relations have not evolved at the same pace as the region itself”, and criticises “the concrete dynamic so conspicuously absent from our present relations”.

Marín is pushing for an action plan, saying in his report: “It is true that Europe and Asean have woven a web of ties over the years, but without a vision of the future and a strong political impetus we will gradually get bogged down in routine discussions.”

Calling for yearly meetings of political experts in fields such as maritime safety, nuclear capacity, drug trafficking and peacekeeping, the Commissioner continues: “Despite many contacts and important programmes, we are witnessing a regrettably static application of our agreement.”

The ARF already provides a forum for discussion on subjects such as nuclear weapons and landmines with all the major players on the Asian continent. It groups foreign ministers of the EU, China, Japan, Russia, the US, India and ASEAN, and Pakistan has applied to join.

Western nations see it as a potential counterweight to China if Beijing's military and political power grow out of hand. And Beijing itself is not averse to the group's growth in stature in a region where a vacuum might otherwise be filled by US influence.

The forum gives Chinese officials a chance to discuss security matters with Europeans, and gives Europeans a chance to compete with the planned upgrade in US-China security ties. Japan, once suspicious of the regional forum idea, has also come on board and shown a clear interest in proceedings.

Two events rattled participants at the ARF's July ministerial meeting in Jakarta. But they also demonstrated how important its members perceive the forum to be.

Arguing that their status as nuclear powers gave them a reason to be there in a capacity distinct from that of the EU, the UK and France applied to join, angering their Union partners. Paris and London had promised not to raise the matter until next year and their decision to do so at the meeting took many by surprise.

Subsequently, when Myanmar (Burma) was admitted to the forum, EU governments protested over Rangoon's political and human rights record. Having returned home from the Bangkok summit with the understanding that Europeans would not preach to Asians, the latter were upset by what they saw as Union backtracking.

Burma is just as divisive an issue within the EU itself. As both France and the UK have economic interests in Burma, they would probably reject the sanctions that other EU partners have already hinted at, and the Union looks set to continue wrestling with Burmese rights problems as it has for years with Indonesia over East Timor.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas has already given a taste of how the Asians will respond to what they see as western whining about human rights.

“Don't dictate to us and say that only the Westminster type of democracy is good or only the US type of democracy is good,” he said to a western journalist at the ASEAN meeting in Jakarta. “That is either intellectual arrogance or intellectual impotence.”

But Marín's paper, noting that human rights must be a factor in any of the Union's foreign relations (it is generally mentioned in the opening paragraphs of any treaty or agreement with a non-EU country), insists they “must be important elements of the political dialogue between the EU and Asean”.

“The Community and its member states,” states the paper, “should insist on programmes aimed at favouring and promoting respect for human rights.”

More potential disruptions are on the horizon. But for all its acrimony, the fact that the ARF survived the Jakarta meeting intact proved once again that although human rights will remain a serious bone of contention between the two sides, the overriding concern of both Europeans and Asians is to keep their trading partnership intact.

That conclusion is reassuring for the Asian participants and, even if public opinion and political correctness prevents European leaders from saying so, it comes as a relief to Union officials too.

As the two sides branch into social, environmental and cultural domains, it is clear that mutual economic interests will continue to be the basis of the Euro-Asian relationship.