COLLECTIVE INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AND THE ROLE OF REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

COLLECTIVE INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AND THE ROLE OF

REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Introduction

The collective international security system is an international political and legal

agreement as outlined in the legal provisions in the UN Charter. The concept of collective

international security is accepted by the international community by combining international

legal and political factors in parallel, so that it is expected to form a global public order

system by taking into account relevant institutions, actors, components and instruments.

One very significant marker in the formation of the UN is the acceptance of the

concept of International Collective Security in this universal organization system. With the

enactment of the UN Charter as the basic instrument of the organization, which regulates the

normative and institutional basis of the International Collective Security system, the

international community accepts and institutionalizes the concept of collective international

security which is centered and or focused on the agreed international organization, namely the

United Nations.

This system requires the delegation of power from member states to a key UN organ,

the Security Council. Member states have agreed on a normative basis that confirms the

authority of this organ to carry out the necessary actions in order to maintain and sustain

international peace and security. The Security Council as one of the main organs of the UN is

given the mandate and primary responsibility in terms of maintaining international peace and

security.

When the UN Charter was being drafted, two concepts of the institutional framework

for realizing International Collective Security were proposed. One called for a centralized

institutional framework; the other favored a regional framework. In the end, when the UN

Charter was agreed upon the first approach was accepted and in the UN Charter is that an

approach with a regional framework is also accepted in the Charter and the UN system in

general.

However, the powers of Regional Organizations are limited, in that no action may be

taken under a regional agreement or by a regional body without Security Council

authorization. This is clearly outlined in Articles 52 and 53 of the Charter.

In 1992, UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali stated in his report that under

the provisions of the UN Charter, the Security Council has and will continue to have primary

responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, however, the regional

framework as a means of decentralization, delegation and cooperation with UN efforts not

only eases the burden on the Security Council, but, also contributes to engagement, consensus

and democratization in international affairs.

In subsequent developments, the UN also promoted initiatives to develop a framework

for regional international cooperation to support the global security system. On October 17,

2005, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution No. 1631 on Cooperation between the

United Nations and regional organizations in the maintenance of international peace and

security (the "Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the

maintenance of international peace and security").

In reality, the existing regional cooperation frameworks in the international

community are very diverse and not all of them have the capacity to carry out mandates in

relation to peacekeeping, peacebuilding or mediation operations. Therefore, it is interesting to

debate the position and role of regional organizations in implementing the concept of

International Collective Security that has been accepted by the international community after

the Second World War until today.

This brief paper will outline how the Concept of Collective International Security and

the Role of Regional International Organizations in the context of the current international

community. This paper will discuss three main points, namely: First, how the concept of

International Collective Security as part of efforts to build international peace and security

adopted in the UN system as stipulated in the Charter. Second, the position and role of

regional international organizations in the European Region in supporting the implementation

of the concept of International Collective Security. Third, the position and role of regional

organizations in the Asian region, especially ASEAN as an increasingly significant actor in

international governance.

Research Methods

This paper is a study of the concept of International Collective Security and the

position and role of regional organizations. The study is based on the framework of

international law and politics. The main materials reviewed in this research include:

 The provisions of international law contained in customary international law, general

principles of law, international treaties, conventions, declarations and decisions of

relevant international organizations.

 Recommendations of international organizations, guiding principles, minutes,

handbooks published by international organizations, international plans of actions,

reports of international organizations, published by international organizations.

 Relevant international legal doctrines and competent expert opinions published in:

books, scientific journals, international seminar proceedings, and working papers.

All materials relevant to the subject matter studied in this research were classified,

systematized, interpreted and critically evaluated according to the context of the problem.

Based on these interpretations and critical evaluations, it is followed by an explanation to

formulate contextual and factual arguments based on relevant and valid international legal

frameworks.

Discussion

The Concept of Collective International Security

 Historical and Philosophical Background

Starting at the end of the 19th century, international institutions were gradually

established by Nation-States to facilitate relations between Nation-States in various fields. At

the end of World War I (1914-1918), the international community established an international

organization, the League of Nations (LBB), with the main objective of maintaining

international peace. This organization was the first international organization with a broad and

complete portfolio with its secretariat in Geneva. In subsequent developments, for the

international community; the League of Nations set a precedent for establishing the United

Nations after the end of World War II. It can even be said that the UN is the successor to the

LBB.

One of the significant differences of the UN compared to the LBB is that, the

international organization that existed before, and which became part of the main structure of

the UN is the existence of a main organ with the mandate of international peace and security

politics called the Security Council (Security Council / DK). As one of the main organs of the

UN Security Council, member states are mandated as the main institution responsible for

efforts to maintain international peace and security. The mandate of the UNSC is expressly

formulated in the UN Charter, especially Articles 24 and 25 has a limited mandate in terms of

the maintenance of international peace and security.

The mandate given to the UN Security Council as the main institution responsible for

maintaining international peace and security is inseparable from the historical experience that

became the background of the birth of the UN after the international community had

previously formed the LBB. The main purpose when the mandate was given to the UN

Security Council was to prevent acts of aggression by states unilaterally as happened during

World War I and World War II and could not be prevented by existing international

organizations at that time, namely the LBB.

The founders of the UN and the drafters of the Charter were apparently referring to,

and did not want to repeat, the failure of the UN to prevent the World Wars that preceded the

UN. When the UN was being conceived and designed, it was thought that international peace

could be maintained and war prevented if there was an International Organization capable of

designing and facilitating and implementing active cooperation among the world's major

military powers.7 This is the rational thinking that became the basis for the concept of

International Collective Security and was accepted as part of the international system

institutionalized in the UN organization.

The concept of International Collective Security is the architecture of international

security within the framework of the UN8 as formulated in the Charter in efforts to maintain

international peace and security. The UNSC is envisioned as a buffer power to prevent

aggression by a country against another country that triggers international wars and even wars

on a wider scale and leads to world war.

The concept of International collective security is in line with the philosophy on

which the UN was founded as stated in the preamble of the Charter that, We the peoples of the

United Nations are determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war".

Furthermore, Article 1 of the Charter even states that the UN formulates the objective "To

maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective

measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of

acts of aggression and other breaches of the peace".

The UN provides two mechanisms in the maintenance of international peace and

security, namely: through peaceful settlement of disputes as contained in Chapter VI of the

UN Charter; and necessary actions when situations occur that qualify as threats to the peace,

breaches of the peace and acts of aggression (Action with respect to threats to the peace,

breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression) as formulated in Chapter VII of the Charter. In

accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter, the UN Security Council is

mandated to make efforts to maintain international peace and security which are carried out

by counteracting threats to peace and violations of international peace. The mandate includes

the authority to take coercive measures (the power to order coercive measures). Measures

that can be taken even include imposing diplomatic sanctions, military and the use of military

force where efforts to resolve peacefully are unsuccessful.

The normative framework of International Collective Security as set out in the UN

Charter includes: the obligation to resolve international disputes peacefully (peaceful means

of international disputes settlement) contained in Article 2 paragraph (3) and Chapters VI and

VIII; prohibition of the use of force in international relations (...refrain from use of forces and

threat to use of forces) in Article 2 paragraph (4); international cooperation in the

maintenance of international peace and security in Article 11; regulation of disarmament

(regulation of Arms and Disarmaments) in Article international peace and security (Article

39).

The UN Security Council has taken many necessary actions in carrying out its

mandate as stipulated in Chapter VII of the Charter. The implementation of the mandate by

the UNSC, in fact, also received a lot of criticism and criticism. For example, in terms of

enforcing International Humanitarian Law, the UNSC has been criticized for being

considered to have applied a selective and opportunistic approach. This happens because of

the political nature of the Security Council as the main organ of the UN. Even in certain

situations the UNSC has been considered inconsistent with the implementation and

compliance with Jus in Bello.9 In this regard, it should also be noted that criticism of the

function and performance of international organizations is in fact also directed at other

institutions such as; WTO, IMF, World Bank, etc. because the decisions taken and their

implementation are often not accountable to the citizens affected by the decisions of these

international organizations.

 Institutional and Legal Parameters

The architecture of international peace and security that the UN accepts and

implements has been much debated and will likely always be. In fact, after the end of World

War II and with the establishment of the UN, there have been very important developments in

international law relating to the concept of "International Peace and Security". These

important developments are: First, the prohibition on the use of force in international

relations. In this case there is an international legal norm that expressly prohibits the use of

force or the threat of the use of force in international relations as formulated in the UN

Charter Article 2 paragraph (4).10 This prohibition on the use of force in international relations

has been accepted and recognized as a Peremptory Norm of International Law (Jus Cogens/

Peremptory Norm of International Law), which is a legal norm that cannot be deviated from

in international relations. The provisions of international law emerged later and have the same

nature and position (as coercive norms).12 Thus, modern international law, especially in the

UN Charter, categorizes the use of force (war), namely: the use of force/war that is considered

legal (just wars: wars that are legal) and the use of force/war that is considered illegal (wars

of aggression: illegal wars), however, the use of force as an international law enforcement

action (enforcement actions) can be justified if it is carried out with the permission and or

carried out by the UN.

Second, the international community accepts and institutionalizes the concept of

collective international security, which is centered and or focused on an agreed international

organization, namely the United Nations. The collective international security system is a

legal product based on the provisions in the UN Charter. This system is based on the

delegation of power from sovereign states to an agreed collective entity by providing a

normative basis for regulating the behavior of sovereign states and conflicts that occur

between them. This collective international security system, provides institutionalized

procedures and ensures the legalization of collective action in order to maintain international

peace and security.13 The study of the collective international security system includes

institutional aspects, operational aspects and legal parameters associated with the existing

system within the UN. The concept of collective international security is accepted by the

international community by combining international legal and political factors in parallel, so

that in it a global public order system is formed by taking into account relevant institutions,

actors, components and instruments.

The use or threat of the use of force in international relations and international

collective security, as mentioned above, is in fact centered and entirely dependent on the

existence and capacity of the United Nations as the most comprehensive and competent

international organization. There are many other international organizations, especially

regional international organizations such as: the Organization of American States (OAS), the

European Union (EU), the African Union (AU), the Association of South East Asian Nations

(ASEAN), or sub-regional organizations such as the Economic Community of West African

States (ECOWAS), and also defense organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty

Organization (NATO), however, it must be recognized that the UN is the only international

organization and actor that has a global reach. In this regard, the Security Council as one of

the main organs of the UN is given the mandate and primary responsibility in terms of

maintaining international peace and security; while other organs have subsidiary authority.14

With its various advantages and disadvantages, the fact is that international organizations,

especially the UN, have been able to prevent the recurrence of a very brutal and terrible

World War as happened in the history of World War I and World War II which took place in

the first half of the 20th century.

 The UN Security Council and Contemporary Challenges

The implementation of the UNSC mandate in the context of contemporary security is

faced with the obligation to expand the scope and methods of operation in areas that require

the presence of the UN. There are now three international security issues that can be

categorized as crucial contemporary issues (high profile) that must be addressed by the UN

Security Council. The three issues are: humanitarian intervention; counter-terrorism

measures; and nuclear non-proliferation.

In practice, the UNSC is now also faced with the implementation of a mandate that

does not only carry out Peace Making Operations, but also broader operations that include

activities such as Peace Making and Peace Building. In fact, the UNSC must even be able to

come up with activities that were not originally formulated in the UN Charter such as:

monitoring the ceasefire between conflicting parties Implementation of a comprehensive

settlement; even the protection of humanitarian operations during conflict. In this context, the

UNSC is faced with a situation that requires it to be present and cooperate not only with

member states and or relevant regional organizations, but also to work together with other

"non-state actors".

In the context of contemporary international normative developments, the UN Security

Council has even become the main forum where the public directs and discusses and expects

confirmation of the legality of humanitarian intervention and the concept of "Responsibility

to Protect", which is relevant to the situation and conditions in various regions of certain

member states that are experiencing conflict.

Existence and Dynamics of Regional Organizations

 European Region

Why is the position and role of regional international organizations in the European

Region in supporting the implementation of the concept of International Collective Security

worth referring to and discussing? One of the most rational reasons is that countries in the

European region have developed a more established international cooperation framework

compared to other regions. In relation to cooperation between states, the European region can

be said to be the most advanced region in developing a framework for cooperation between

states and the formation of international organizations. Since before World War II, many

international organizations have emerged and are centered in the territory of European

countries.

We can see that the first international (regional) organization was the Central

Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine, which emerged after the Congress of Vienna in

1815.16 Meanwhile, the first general international organization that dealt with various issues

was the LBB, which was based in Geneva, Switzerland. The LBB was established on January

10, 1920 after the Paris Peace Conference, to end World War I agreed to form a new

universal international organization by the name of the United Nations after World War II,

which was formed based on the UN Charter of 25 June 1945 and became effective from 24

October 1945. The UN was the successor to the LBB, and survives to this day.

Since the 1860s, there has been a process of institutionalizing the framework of

cooperation in the international community. In fact, this process of institutionalization of

international cooperation started mainly in Europe. Multilateral international conferences that

were originally ad hoc in nature began to be replaced by more established and structured

international organizations supported by permanent secretariats and permanent organizational

headquarters in a country's territory. The institutionalization of cooperation between

countries, especially in the European region, even encouraged the emergence of international

dispute resolution institutions such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration (1899) in The

Hague.

With the historical background and established tradition of cooperation between

countries as briefly described above; it is not surprising that today in the European region we

can witness the existence of various international organizations. Today we also find

international organizations headquartered or with their secretariats in Europe.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

One of the international organizations relevant to collective state defense efforts and

later also related to the implementation of the concept of International Collective Security is

the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The founding countries of NATO signed the

North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949. NATO is an alliance of 30 member states bordering

the North Atlantic Sea. The United States, Canada and Turkey as well as most member states

of the European Union are also members of this international alliance.

When it was founded in 1949, NATO had 12 founding members, namely: The United

States, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,

Norway, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. In subsequent developments several other

countries also became new members of NATO, namely: Greece and Turkey (1952), Germany

(1955), Spain (1982), Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (1999), Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia,

Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (2004), Albania and Croatia (2009), Montenegro

(2017) North Macedonia (2020).17

Some say that the main purpose of the formation of NATO was to protect and defend

member countries from threats coming from communist countries in Eastern Europe, which at

that time was led and dominated by the Soviet Union. This statement is indeed true. In fact,

the formation of NATO was driven by three main reasons. First, to prevent the expansion of

the Soviet Union. Second, to prevent the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through

the US presence in mainland Europe. Third, to encourage political integration in Europe18 .

In addition, it should also be noted that the defense system built by NATO is also

intended to counter weapons of mass destruction, terrorism and cyber-attacks. The main

reason for US membership in NATO is to maintain the US presence in Europe to protect and

secure the European region. The presence of US military forces in Europe at that time was

intended to provide a sense of security in European countries in order to rebuild due to the

destruction that occurred during World War II. The presence of US military power in Europe

was also needed to prevent external military threats and the rise of militaristic fascism in

Europe.

Initially, the relationship and cooperation between NATO and the UN was limited;

especially during the Cold War. However, there was a significant change in 1992 when there

was a conflict in the Balkans. The crisis management that occurred in the region has

encouraged the international community through the UN international organization to make

changes. This has led to more intensive collaboration and practical operations conducted by

the UN together or with NATO.

Today, NATO can be said to be the Regional International Organization that has the

most reliable capacity in relation to collective defense efforts and also in the context of

implementing the concept of collective security as stipulated in the UN Charter. In fact, the

UN Security Council has passed a resolution mandating NATO to act as a collective defense

organization. NATO to conduct military operations in areas such as the Balkans, Afghanistan,

and Libya.20 NATO also provides necessary support to UN operations including providing

logistical assistance in several peace operations conducted in the Darfur region, Sudan, and

Somalia. NATO also supported UN operations in response to the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan,

escorting humanitarian aid to Somalia.

The end of the Cold War has changed the way NATO deals with and responds to

conflicts in Europe and elsewhere. Since the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia, it seems

that NATO has to deal with different conflict situations than it had to deal with during the

Cold War. The changes in NATO's tasks and responsibilities since the 1990s have led to

greater and more intensive cooperation between NATO and the UN.

The extensive cooperation between NATO and the UN as well as with other

organizations such as the European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and

Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), especially in various military operations in various regions

both in Europe and outside Europe has raised pros and cons. On the one hand, such

cooperation and achievements are considered proof of NATO's capacity as a reliable

organization and contribute significantly to the implementation of the concept of International

Collective Security.

On the other hand, NATO's presence with military operations in certain areas is also

considered to have caused complications and triggered criticism that NATO has exceeded its

mandate and has had a negative effect on the credibility and accountability of its

responsibility for the defense of NATO.

 Framework for Regional Cooperation in Asia.

Factually, there is a significant difference between countries in the European region

and countries in the Asian region in terms of engagement, establishment and development of

international frameworks. Countries in the European region seem to be faster and much more

established in developing inter-state cooperation frameworks through regional international

organizations and other multilateral international organizations.

In contrast, countries in the Asian region have been slower to engage in international

cooperation through regional international organizations and organizations that operate on a

global scale. Countries in the Asian region as well as the Pacific have not been able to

establish rapid and well-established political and economic cooperation as countries in the

European Region have done. Many countries in Asia try to maintain their traditions and legal,

political and economic systems, so regional international cooperation is not easily developed

among them.

Another disincentive to the development of regional cooperation in Asia is that, in

general, countries in Asia prioritize engagement with larger external powers, rather than

strengthening cooperation with fellow countries in the region. This reluctance to form a

regional cooperation framework and prioritizing engagement with larger external powers is

the main cause of the difficulty of consolidation among countries in the Asian region.

A further implication of this lack of consolidation among Asian countries is that it is

very difficult for the region to form a "voting bloc" and unify their aspirations in global

decision-making processes and contestation. In fact, Asian countries are currently among the

"under-represented" countries in the governance and of a quarter of all countries in the world,

cover nearly a third of the world's land area, account for nearly 50% of gross domestic

product (GDP) and comprise 60% of the global population.24 However, Asian countries are

underrepresented in international leadership and governance. This can be seen in the roles and

positions of Asian countries in the UN Security Council and the Bretton Woods institutions

(the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund/IMF). Asia also has only five

representatives in the UN Security Council membership, including one permanent member,

China. In contrast, Western Europe and Others Group countries hold one-third of the UN

Security Council seats, including three permanent members and two non-permanent members

elected on a rotating basis.

This situation occurs because of the lack of cohesiveness among Asian countries to

voice their aspirations and interests at the global level. On international issues, it seems that

Asian countries tend to have less voice or their voices are not proportional to their numbers,

and the magnitude of their power in the global landscape. Individually, China in particular

now appears to have significant influence at the global level, but it is difficult to find the

influence of Asian countries as a cohesive group vis-à-vis other groups in matters that need to

be voiced on a global scale. Even when Asian countries have adequate representation such as

in the UN General Assembly; they never move as a voting bloc or cohesive regional group.

Unlike groups of countries in Africa or Latin America, for example, Asian countries at the

UN do not appear to have common positions on the policies being debated. Even if there is

cohesiveness, it generally occurs when there is a nomination process for certain positions in

organs within the international organization.

Initially, the initiative to develop a framework for international cooperation in Asia

began a decade after the end of World War II through the organization of an international

conference of Asian-African countries in Bandung. The 1955 Asian-African Conference

resulted in an agreement

The international agreement of countries in the Asian and African region was

contained in the Bandung Principles;26 or the Bandung Principles. The 1955 Asia-Africa

Conference was followed by: the Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Conference in Cairo in

September (1957) and the Belgrade Conference (1961), and led to the formation of the Non-

Aligned Movement. However, these international conferences never led to the formation of

regional international organizations in Asia.

Why has regional international cooperation not developed further in the Asian region?

Most countries in Asia were established or emerged as independent states due to the

decolonization process after the end of World War II. Until two decades after the end of

World War II and the establishment of the UN universal international organization, it was in

fact difficult to imagine the formation of a regional organization in the region. The countries

in the region were generally engaged in an intense struggle to uphold and build nationalism,

complete decolonization, resist the influence of stronger external forces, and were faced with

real difficulties to build regional cooperation throughout the Asian region countries in Asia,

Asia and the Pacific, or Asia and Africa is not easy to realize as an effort to shaping

international order. First, most countries in Asia are still struggling to manage their domestic

political issues. Second, there was a greater influence of external forces as an implication of

the geopolitical situation at that time, mainly due to the Cold War between the United States

and the Communist countries led by the Soviet Union.

Proliferation of Regional International Organizations in Late 20th Century Asia

There seem to be significant and exciting developments in the late 20th century in the

Asian region. In fact, there has been a proliferation of regional international cooperation

frameworks in the Asia and Pacific region. We now find various regional international

cooperations in Asia and the Pacific, including the Association of South East Asian Nations

(ASEAN); East Asia Summit (EAS); Asia- Europe Meeting (ASEM); ASEAN Regional

Forum (ARF); South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC); Pacific Islands

Forum (PIF); Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO); the Asia-Pacific Economic

Cooperation (APEC); the Economic Cooperation Organization; the Forum on Regional

Cooperation among Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar; the Indian Ocean Rim

Association; the Mekong-Ganga Cooperation.

The involvement of Asian countries in the framework of international cooperation is

indicative of the changes taking place in the international environment at the end of the

twentieth century. In fact, there has been a change in the center of global economic growth.

The economic development and capabilities of some countries in Asia have grown and

developed very rapidly. Some countries in Asia have developed and become very important

economic growth centers. The involvement and initiatives of Asian countries in international

economic and political cooperation through various international organizations reflect the

occurrence of new dynamics and transitional processes in international governance, especially

the rise of countries that are included in the Non-Western countries group.28 This transitional

process taking place in the Asian region needs attention in relation to international governance

in various aspects.

ASEAN's Presence as a Regional Organization

In relation to the development of international cooperation frameworks and the

establishment of regional organizations in the Asian Region, until now, the Southeast Asian

region can be said to be the most dynamic and interesting sub-region or region to be analyzed

and referred to. The Southeast Asian region consists of countries that share a common

historical background, in that they have been colonized by other nations in the past. Due to

the influence and domination of external forces, especially by European imperialist countries,

the region had to inherit conflicts between them such as: territorial boundary disputes,

upheaval in the framework of national unity and trigger suspicion, distrust, and prolonged

fragmentation in Southeast Asia. Such a situation has been faced by the region as it happened

in the countries of: United States-Malaysia-Singapore-Philippines, and Vietnam-Cambodia-

Thailand.

In the past, countries in the region have also been drawn into geo-political contestation

and global political hegemony during the Cold War era, as experienced by Vietnam,

Cambodia and the Philippines. In addition, it should also be noted that the countries in the

region also face a plurality of legal traditions and systems, as well as political traditions and

systems among themselves.

A significant and noteworthy development was when five Southeast Asian countries

agreed to declare the formation of ASEAN in Bangkok 1967. In subsequent developments,

several other countries in Southeast Asia also joined ASEAN, so that currently ASEAN has

10 member countries.

The Evolutive Process of ASEAN 1967-2007

After three decades of existence and development as an international institution that

develops cooperation among its member states and with partners, ASEAN has slowly but

surely undergone important changes. This important change was marked by the adoption of

the ASEAN Charter in 2007.

The acceptance and ratification of the ASEAN Charter by its 10 members

demonstrates strong commitment and tangible support for building an ASEAN Community

with a clear institutional framework and legal status. The ASEAN Charter is also regarded as:

an attempt to codify norms, rules and values; set clear targets; and, as a way to achieve the

goals of the ASEAN Community. With the entry into force of the ASEAN Charter, the

organization began to operate under a new legal framework and was equipped with new

organs to accelerate the process of ASEAN community building.

The entry into force of the ASEAN Charter also marks the evolutive process that has

taken place in this institution of cooperation among countries in the Southeast Asian region.

ASEAN, which was originally a loosely organised regional body, has transformed into a

clearer and firmer rules-based organization in order to address the challenges faced in

realizing regional integration, expansion in relation to external parties and the accelerating

process of globalization. With these changes, ASEAN is expected to become a more effective

actor on the global governance and stage.

In such a context, the ASEAN Charter will serve as the framework and legal basis for

restructuring existing mechanisms and improving decision-making processes within the

organization. With such an approach, it is envisioned that there will be a process of efficiency

and increased clarity and certainty in the implementation of all agreements and decisions that

ASEAN has made.

Furthermore, the ASEAN Charter also confirms important matters for this

organization, namely: Juridical personality & legal standing; Clarification of common goals

and basic principles of the organization; Strengthening the ASEAN secretariat, and decision-

making processes; Formulating the structure, mechanisms and activities of the organization;

Promoting regional identity; Regional economic integration; Cooperation to manage trans-

national issues and; and efforts to protect human rights.

ASEAN's Contribution to International Governance

ASEAN's existence since its declaration in 1967 and the transformation that followed

in the three decades after the declaration mark and attest to ASEAN's contribution to regional

governance in Southeast Asia and even on an international scale. ASEAN has been able to

maintain and sustain a peaceful situation in the region, especially among member states.

ASEAN has also become an actor to be reckoned with in terms of international relations

among member states as well as in relation to external parties (ASEAN partners). Taking into

account these matters, the existence and sustainability of this organization is important future.

ASEAN's achievements and contributions to international governance have also

changed the pessimistic attitude towards the situation and conditions in Southeast Asia in the

past. Before ASEAN was declared in 1967, it was difficult to imagine the formation of a

regional international organization in the Southeast Asian region. Some even described the

situation in Southeast Asia as the Balkans of Asia.29 At that time, the countries in Southeast

Asia were newly independent, and Singapore had just separated from Malaysia. There were

border disputes between them and also rivalries between neighboring countries. There was

also the dependence of certain countries on extra-regional powers to deal with domestic and

external threats, such as the strong security ties between Thailand and the Philippines with the

United States; Malaysia and Singapore with the United Kingdom. Under these circumstances,

it is difficult to imagine a regional organization in the region.

ASEAN Political Security Community

A significant development after the transformation in 2007 was the adoption of the

ASEAN Political Security Community (APSC) concept. APSC seems to be designed to

solidify political and security cooperation in Southeast Asia. The leaders of ASEAN member

states agreed to develop and realize the APSC as one of the collective agendas of ASEAN

members. The main objective of the APSC is to ensure that all member states live peacefully

side by side with each other and with the world community in a just, democratic and

harmonious environment.

The APSC initiative originated from the idea of an ASEAN Security Community in

Bali Concord II (2003) and was later refined into the APSC; and further detailed in the APSC

Blueprint. The APSC Blueprint was adopted at the meeting of ASEAN leaders during the 14th

ASEAN Summit, March 1, 2009 in Cha-am/Hua Hin, Thailand.

The APSC Blueprint envisions ASEAN to be a rules-based community. A region that

accepts values and norms, is cohesive, peaceful, stable and resilient and shares responsibility

for The APSC is a dynamic and far-reaching region in an increasingly integrated and

interdependent world. The APSC is designed as an elaboration of the ASEAN Charter and its

principles and objectives. The Roadmap indicates that the APSC could be realized by 2015,

however, there is also flexibility to continue relevant programs and activities beyond 2015 in

order to maintain its significance and achievements.

The main argument for the adoption of the APSC was that the members agreed to

resolve differences and security concerns in the region through a peaceful process, given the

interconnectedness of the members due to geographical considerations, and shared vision and

goals. The APSC includes several components namely: political development, establishing

and sharing norms; conflict prevention, post-conflict development; conflict resolution, and

implementation mechanisms.

The APSC is intended to lead ASEAN to further political and security cooperation.

Member states coexist peacefully, promote political development based on the principles of

democracy, rule of law and good governance and the promotion and protection of human

rights. The APSC is also intended to strengthen dialogue between ASEAN and its dialogue

partners and other countries. The APSC embraces a comprehensive approach to security

issues, preventing and countering the use of violence as well as the settlement of disputes by

peaceful means.

ASEAN's achievements and capacity in the context of international stability and

governance in Asia can be proven by ASEAN and Southeast Asia's ability to balance and

establish good relations with great powers such as China, India, and Japan, so as to reduce

political conflicts and contestation among great powers in Asia and even become a hub for

them. ASEAN's role and contribution has strengthened its position in the global political

landscape.

ASEAN Problems and Their Future Relevance

Observing ASEAN's position, transformation and achievements, it is interesting to

discuss how ASEAN's future prospects to take part in international governance at a broader

scope, especially how to place ASEAN as a regional framework as stipulated in the UN

charter and become part of the concept of collective international security as played by NATO

serious consideration by ASEAN and its member states in relation to its involvement in the

implementation of the concept of international collective security in accordance with the

normative provisions in its charter and the practical aspects of its operations as a regional

international institution. First, in the era of globalization and globalism ASEAN needs to

evaluate and provide a new interpretation of the Sovereignty and non-interference paradigm.

This interpretation and evaluation of the Sovereignty and non interference paradigm needs to

be done in relation to new challenges and developments that ASEAN needs to respond to

issues that require a trans national approach such as: "erga omnes" obligations, "law beyond

sovereignty" situations, as well as issues arising from international interdependence situations.

Second, structural issues in relation to ASEAN as a regional international organization

with certain rules, organs, objectives and programs that have been agreed upon in the basic

instruments in the form of the ASEAN Charter and other instruments. ASEAN needs to make

significant changes to the legal and institutional framework aspects.

Third, the integration that has been achieved needs to be continued with effective

multilateral approaches and more implementable political and military cooperation (move

beyond functional security cooperation). In this regard, ASEAN needs to consider several

fundamental issues such as: the capacity of the organization and its members, the commitment

to implement political and military programmes, as well as the willingness to undertake

burden sharing and provide the necessary budget to implement such political and cooperation.

Fourth, ASEAN may need to consider membership expansion to strengthen its

position and capacity in an increasingly dynamic and challenging international governance

environment. ASEAN will also need to design and accept the new institutional framework

required for this.

Fifth, ASEAN needs to respond more progressively and reposition vis-à-vis its

traditional partners. In this regard, ASEAN and its member states also need to conduct

coordinated and orchestrated policies both individually and collectively. This coordinated and

mutually supportive policy is very important to respond to the emergence of new powers

(responding and supporting each other) such as India and China.

Conclusion

The existence of regional international organizations and their correlation with the

universal organization of the UN has a clear normative basis in the UN Charter. However,

there is currently a need for practical operational and collective approaches and international

consensus to empower and maximize existing regional frameworks beyond the European

region.

Regional OIs in Europe are more established and ready to play an effective role in

international governance, this is because countries in Europe have a more cosmopolitan and

intensive history, traditions, political systems and international interactions. Regional OIs in

Europe have the support of member states through strong political commitment, have

structural, legal and resource frameworks; including adequate budgets so that Regional OIs

such as NATO can play an effective role in supporting the implementation of the concept of

collective international security. NATO's ability to play an effective role in supporting the

implementation of the concept of collective international security in various regions of the

world has been recognized and appreciated by the international community. However,

NATO's achievements and role in supporting the implementation of the concept of collective

security need to be viewed critically. On the one hand, such cooperation and achievements are

considered as evidence of NATO's capacity as a reliable organization and contribute

significantly to efforts to ensure international security architecture based on the concept of

International Collective Security. On the other hand, NATO's presence with massive military

operations in the territories of countries is also considered to cause complications and trigger

concerns that NATO has exceeded its mandate. In addition, the massive military operations in

fact also have a negative effect in the form of doubts about its accountability, credibility and

responsibility to provide protection in the event of serious violations of human rights in the

future.

In the late twentieth century, there has been a proliferation of regional organizations in

Asia. The Asian region, especially the Southeast Asian region, has great potential to develop

and play an important role in supporting and becoming an important actor in the

implementation of a more just, balanced and humanist concept of collective international

security. In this regard, ASEAN has proven to be a new frontier in international governance

and delivering international security in the Southeast Asian region and contributing to the

future geopolitical landscape relating to the structural aspects as a regional international

organization with relevant rules, organs, objectives and specific programmes as well as the

political commitment of member states. Finally, ASEAN should carefully and

comprehensively consider whether political and military cooperation in a more

implementable, practical and operational manner is a relevant option for ASEAN and the

Asian region at large.