Transcript ARF: Challenges & Prospects in PD

Preventive Diplomacy and the
ASEAN Regional Forum
Ralf Emmers
Coordinator, Multilateralism and Regionalism Programme
Tan See Seng
Head of Research, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Singapore
Evolution of Preventive Diplomacy:
Cold War
• PD not new. UN Charter Article 33 calls on disputing parties to seek
solutions by ‘negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration,
judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or othr
peaceful means of their own choice…’ UN Security Council to call on
parties to settle disputes by such means.
• PD as preventing disputes from escalating to conflicts & limiting them
from spreading (D. Hammarskjöld). Aim to avert major East-West conflict.
• Predominantly an inter-state enterprise, although UN engaged in limited
efforts at preventing escalation by insulating intra-state/civil conflicts.
Evolution of Preventive Diplomacy:
Post-Cold War
• Discernable rising interest worldwide in PD, within broader context of
relaxation of Cold War logics and redefinition in meaning and practice of
security. Under B. Boutros-Ghali, PD restated as ‘the use of diplomatic
techniques to prevent disputes from arising, prevent them from escalating
into armed conflict if they do arise, and, if that fails, to prevent the armed
conflict from spreading’ (An Agenda for Peace, 1992).
• Expansion of PD’s parameters to deal with with various ‘thresholds’
throughout the entire anatomy/life-cycle of a conflict.
• Involvement by other regional actors/agencies in PD. Broadening of PD
beyond the traditional realm of conflict to include other concerns, e.g.,
democracy and democratization, human rights, humanitarian crisis and so
forth.
• PD as both inter-state and intra-state in orientation.
ARF and Preventive Diplomacy
•
Concept Paper envisaged 3 developmental states: Stage I: Confidence-Building
Measures (CBMs); Stage II: Development of Preventive Diplomacy (PD)
Mechanisms; and Stage III: Development of Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms.
•
To date, the ARF has concentrated mainly on Stage I and to a lesser extent,
concurrently, on Stage II measures.
•
The ARF has been successful in achieving its twofold approach towards
confidence-building. How?
•
Firstly, by successfully institutionalizing ‘the ASEAN way’ as a shared code of
behavior and secondly, by establishing CBMs as the central action program for
the ARF participants to implement.
•
Concrete CBMs have been implemented at both a Track 1 and Track 2 level.
•
E.g. the ARF Inter-Sessional Support Group (ISG) on CBMs; Inter-Sessional
Meetings on Search and Rescue Coordination and Cooperation, Peacekeeping,
Disaster Relief Seminars; expert group meetings on De-mining, Transnational
Crime, Terrorist Financing and Prevention, Marine Security Challenges.
ARF and Preventive Diplomacy
• In contrast to CBM, there has been more controversy, debate, and
divergence in attitudes toward PD among the ARF participants.
• This is particularly true due to concerns over the erosion of sovereignty
• Activists: early warning systems, fact-finding missions, enhanced good
offices role of ARF chair in dispute mediation.
• Conservatives: define PD first before adopting measures, notably interstate conception of PD.
• Continued discussions within the ISG meetings on CBMs, as well as within
three CSCAP workshops on PD led to the development of a working
definition and statement of principles on PD.
• PD as inter-state enterprise underpinned by diplomatic convention (ARF
meeting in Hanoi in 2001). “ARF Concept and Principles of Preventive
Diplomacy” specified a definition for and principles of PD
ARF and Preventive Diplomacy
• PD has been defined as “consensual diplomatic and political action
taken by sovereign states with the consent of all directly involved
parties”
• PD is meant to prevent disputes from arising between States; to
prevent such disputes from escalating into armed confrontation;
and to minimise the impact of such disputes on the region.
• Eight key principles of PD: Diplomacy, Non-Coercive, Timeliness,
Trust and Confidence, Consultation and Consensus, Voluntary, interstate conflicts, conducted in accordance with international law.
• A number of PD initiatives have been identified: Confidence Building
Measures, Norms Building, Enhancing Channels of Communication
and Role of the ARF Chair. The first two overlap with the stage one
process.
• The ARF has generally been slow in achieving its own benchmarks;
e.g. with regards to “expanding the role of the chair”.