What a paradox that a regional community finds cohesion in prioritizing individualism.
ASEAN (The Association of Southeast Asian Nations), aims to promote cooperation, collaboration,and most importantly, peace among the South East Asian countries. But curiously it is also built upon the core principles of non-interference and non-confrontation (Head, 2016). How long can this regional community keep promoting peace with such a grave inconsistency between its core principles and objectives? This paradox evokes nothing but skepticism, given the nature of the core principles, their inherent disregard of the importance of adhering to Human Rights International Law, and the permissibility of human rights violations. These are significant barriers for the protection of Human Rights in South East Asia. and, therefore, for the promotion of regional peace.
First, the nature of the principles of non-interference and non-confrontation, are themselves a
barrier for promoting human rights within South East Asia. This is because the former prevails in countries’ diplomatic relations over the nations’ responsibility to protect (R2P), which requires their intervention when human rights are being violated overseas. A case in point is the unlawful response that Thailand had to the Rohingya refugees by allowing diplomatic relations to prevail over human rights statutes. In June 2020, thirty-five Rohingya refugees were detained for an indefinite period, and threatened with refoulement to their country of origin, Myanmar, where they face grave risks (Fortify Rights, 2020).
Second, these two principles disregard the importance of international legal tools that
contribute to the promotion of peace. When it comes to the adoption of the key Conventions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there is no consensus among ASEAN countries. Moreover, only the Philippines and Cambodia have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, which is essential for the protection of the refugee’s rights. Besides, only these two countries are members of the International Criminal Court, and the International Court of Justice, which are indispensable judicial platforms, to ensure the prosecution of Human Rights perpetrators in international settings (Takemura, 2018).
Lastly, these two principles, indirectly tolerate ASEAN member countries shamelessly
violating human rights domestically. A vivid example is the atrocious actions that the Laotian Militia has been performing against the ethnic minority “Hmong” since 1975. To date, approximately 120,000 Hmong have become refugees, feeling the effects of arbitrary arrests, killings and enforced disappearances from the authorities (The Invisible Refugees Project, n.d.; The Invisible Refugees Project, n.d.).
No peace is achievable without a real balance. The conflicting principles in the structure of
ASEAN policies should be rectified, perhaps, if not by the complete renunciation of the nation's self-interests, then by the implementation of a more uniform Human Rights framework. This will be essential for the fulfillment of the ideals of regional peace.
Bibliography:
Fortify Rights . (2020, June 05). Thailand: Protect Rohingya Refugees from Forced Return,
Indefinite Detention. Retrieved from Fortify Rights: https://www.fortifyrights.org/tha-inv-2020-06-05/
Head, J. (2016, July 25). What's the Point of ASEAN? . BBC News, p. 3.
The Invisible Refugees Project. (n.d.). The Hmong Refugee Crisis in America . Retrieved
from The Invisible Refugee Project: https://blogs.brown.edu/invisiblerefugees/regions/asia/the-hmong-refugee-crisis-in-america-t
he-summary/
Takemura H. (2018) The Asian Region and the International Criminal Court. In: Nakanishi Y. (eds) Contemporary Issues in Human Rights Law. Springer, Singapore. Retrieved from:
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-10-6129-5_6#citeas
UNPO. (2020, May 12). Hmong: New Deadly Attack Launched by Laotian Military. Retrieved from Unrepresented Nations & Peoples Organization: https://unpo.org/article/21883
Comments