• 
• 

Published on March 3, 2008

Now the time has come to engage North Korea even further. For Asean, the best way of doing this is to convince one of the world's most reclusive countries to accede to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC), a regional code of conduct. It is a tall order, but not an impossible task.

That was exactly what Asean foreign ministers had in mind when they met at a retreat in Singapore last month. The Asean chair, Singapore, was assigned to officially approach the North Korean government concerning the possibility of accession to the TAC.

The initiative came after Pyongyang showed keen interest in the TAC last year during a working group meeting under the framework of the Asean Regional Forum (ARF) in Brunei Darusalam. The overture excited Asean as it augurs well with the grouping's broader and longer-term security agenda.

When Asean Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan was ARF chair in 2000, he persuaded Pyongyang to join the security forum and enhance dialogue related to the nuclear crisis in the Korean Peninsula. All stakeholders from the Northeast Asian region were present for the first time at a security meeting. However, eight years have elapsed; the dialogue on the world's most dangerous hotspot has failed to produce tangible progress. Within the region, the Maritime Security Shore Exercise hosted by Singapore last year is often cited as evidence of practical cooperation under the ARF.

Meanwhile, the six-party talks continue. Despite some occasional hiccups, this crucial process has produced results leading to a drastic improvement in US-North Korean ties and the easing of tension in the Korean Peninsula.

At Chulalongkorn University this weekend, US assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific affairs Christopher Hill said that while the US is actively engaged in security issues with the 27-member ARF, Washington also supports the formation of a Northeast Asian security mechanism because Asia still lacks multilateral security institutions. The six-party members, headed by Russia, are studying and working on the concept.

The proposal would certainly cause unease among Asean members, as it would dilute the ARF's eminent position as the only regionwide security mechanism. Hill even expressed his disappointment after attending past ARF meetings because of the low-end topics and lack of concrete actions taken afterward. The US wants practical concrete outcomes rather than simply just more talk.

At the summit in Kuala Lumpur in 1997 to commemorate 30 years of Asean, leaders of the grouping met with their Northeast Asian counterparts. Together, they addressed themselves as East Asia or Asean-plus-three. The Asean contingent thought one-sidedly that both Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian security issues from that moment on have been intricately linked. But China, Japan and Korea continue to view the crisis in the Korean Peninsula exclusively as their own. That explains why no attempts have been made to involve Asean.

In the past, it was repeatedly suggested by Asean that the ARF should appoint an envoy for Northeast Asia to serve as a focal point in engaging North Korea. But this was to no avail. The grouping hopes Pyongyang's signature will serve as a catalyst for a peaceful transformation and further denuclearisation in Asia. It would further consolidate the role of Asean as a driving force in regional security schemes.

Indeed, any new multilateral security forum in Northeast Asia would compete with the ARF, which is supposed to help resolve conflicts in the region. Founded in 1994, the Asean-led forum still remains at best a dialogue forum due to the less controversial issues discussed and joint-programmes undertaken.

After 14 years of confidence-building, the ARF has yet to move to the next level of preventive diplomacy that would further institutionalise the forum. Asean and China have made clear that they are comfortable with the current informal proceedings that move at a snail's pace.

In the view of the US, given the diverse security priorities in Asia it is better to have a multilateral security forum that can tackle security issues affecting peace and stability head-on. Issues related to humanitarian assistance, such as disaster emergency relief operations, would better fit the ARF's ongoing dialogue.

Such efforts come at a time when regional security architecture has been a hot topic of discussion among regional strategists and security experts. Unlike Europe or Latin America, Asia still lacks multilateral security institutions that can handle and settle interstate conflicts.

As far as Southeast Asia is concerned, North Korea is no stranger to the region. After all, it has long been identified with the Cambodian resistance movement under the former King Norodom Sihanouk, who still maintains a residence in Pyongyang. To this day, the security guards of the current Cambodian King Sihamoni are from North Korea.

In 1995, Asean contributed both financially and in kind to the now-defunct Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation, hoping to strengthen the effort to reduce nuclear tension in the peninsula.

Closer to home, along the Thai border adjacent to Burma, Laos and Vietnam, thousands of North Korean asylum seekers have, since 2005, risked their lives undertaking months-long journeys to seek freedom in Thailand.

The Kingdom has become the world's largest transit point for North Korean asylum seekers. One additional dark spot is the abduction issue of a group of Southeast Asian women including a Thai, in mid-1978. Pyongyang has dismissed these allegations as groundless.

During 2005-2006, former foreign minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon believed that with its excellent ties with North Korea, Thailand could play the role of an honest broker in the North Korean peninsula. His overture received a lukewarm response.

Asean will find out sooner rather than later whether Pyongyang will eventually respond positively to the grouping's grand security framework.

Kavi Chongkittavorn

The Nation