To establish an Asean Community (AC) in the next eight years, Asean leaders must show extraordinary political will and commitment to act.

The creation of the AC must comprise three pillars: political and security cooperation, economic cooperation and socio-cultural cooperation. These components are so intertwined that none can stand alone, and each remains a potential barrier to be crossed. The question remains: How can an AC be achieved if uneven development continues within Asean?

Asean leaders know that economic cooperation is the easiest part, as there are clear objectives and benchmarks such as tariff cuts, harmonisation of custom standards, etc. Asean economic ministers have already agreed to realise the Asean Economic Community by 2015. Even the new Asean members, especially Vietnam and Cambodia, are moving at speed to integrate with both Asean and the world economies. Vietnam's recent admission to the World Trade Organisation shows the imperative of the international trading system and how a developing country can catch up. The inclusion of the private business community is part of the process.

Laos, the only Asean member that has not yet joined the WTO, is likely to be the next "least developed" country to do so. Indeed, Vientiane began economic reforms, known as "Chintanakarn may" in 1984, two years before Hanoi. Due to domestic hindrances, these reforms have not been fully realised.

With all Asean members joining the WTO, this will further strengthen economic cooperation within the group. In addition, the ongoing free-trade agreement negotiations between Asean and its partners such as China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand are proceeding well. According to Ong Keng Yong, Asean secretary-general, all FTAs are expected to be complete by 2014.

An emerging trend can be detected in the region: do bilaterally for your neighbors what you pledge you can do for the world. Therefore, it is vital for Asean members to hasten implementation of their economic agreements and improve the mechanisms for solving trade problems. This way the gap in trading systems and practices within the group can be further bridged.

Asean officials admit the security and socio-cultural barriers are more difficult to overcome. Up until this point, Asean security and political cooperation is focused on highly selective issues of common concern. The long-standing principle of non-interference in other country's internal affairs continues to affect the group's collective security collaboration. Asean is too obsessed with sovereignty, even though the concept of a borderless world is an increasing topic of discussion. For instance, the current effort to forge closer cooperation on the anti-terror front in Asean since September 11, 2001 has been constantly hampered by the same Cold-War fears of the 1950s. At this juncture, the Asean attempt at the Cebu summit to conclude a region-wide treaty to fight against terrorism remains unresolved.

Asean members continue with their self-centred political and security views, failing to make mutual compromise for the group's collective security needs. They prefer the individual approach to security, leaving room for new initiatives. Increasingly, this tailored-made approach is being perceived as a threat to the group. The disagreement over the nature and scope of maritime security cooperation is a case in point.

Ironically, Asean has spent the past four decades trying to build up common norms and values. So far, the group has failed. These objectives will remain unfulfilled unless Asean changes its mindset and gets its act together now.

The Eminent Persons Group (EPG) on the Asean Charter can make a contribution by studying these limitations within Asean - to ensure the future Asean will not be stuck with this self-imposed rule of non-intervention. Many transnational issues these days need cross-border cooperation, such as combating drug and people trafficking, air pollution, disease, etc.

Asean should learn from other regional groups in Latin America and Africa that have enjoyed common security and foreign policies even though their members have divergent views and concerns. For the common good, such groups have shown they are willing to take the road of collective pursuit. They are more pro-active than their Asean colleagues, who prefer passive reactions.

The Asean socio-culture question is equally complex. Asean wants to establish a caring society. It sounds good on paper, but when it comes to practical implementation, Asean falls flat on the floor. How can Asean be a caring society if its members do not respect human rights or human security? The attempt to establish a regional human rights mechanism, already delayed by more than a decade, remains elusive. Some Asean members do not care about it at all. Furthermore, Asean still does not have a consensus on human security, even though the whole world has embraced this concept and agreed on common approaches. This is one area in which Thailand can play a role. The government should highlight the role of organisations in civil society in enforcing democratic values and openness. The previous administration destroyed the non-governmental sector's contribution. In 1995, Thailand proposed the establishment of a People's Assembly so that common people could contribute directly to Asean decision-making. But the idea was rejected as too liberal.

Since the last Asean summit, dialogue between Asean leaders and officials and civil society throughout the region has intensified. But there has been no concrete outcome. Nearly half the Asean members do not have independent non-governmental organisations. Instead they are dominated by government-sponsored bodies. At the upcoming summit in Cebu, the host has widened the space for interaction. It is hoped the Asean EPG will heed suggestions on policy approaches and implementations to make Asean more people-oriented and gender-conscious.

Nobody expects Asean to move in the direction of the European Union. But as with the EU, realisation of an AC will need more than just words and niceties.

Kavi Chongkittavorn