Recent Development Of Bilateral/Multilateral Cooperation In ASEAN And Australia

Recent situation regarding the development of multilateral cooperation

1. Describe the recent event/situation outlined in the article and explain how it represents an example of the development of bilateral/multilateral cooperation. 

2. Identify and describe the policing/security agencies involved and the processes of cooperation between them. 

3. Argue a position to support or refute the theories and views contained in Modules 1 and 2 readings. 

From the recent newspaper article, the recent situation that has been outlined is related to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. This summit was held in Australia for the first time. A multilateral cooperation deals with the process of international policing. It discusses the recent development of the relation of Australia with Southeast Asia. Australia therefore  played a role in ASEAN sponsored institutions that involves the major powers of other countries consisting of India, China, Japan and United States. Therefore, this Summit in Sydney will help in providing a significant opportunity for reviewing the relationship of ASEAN as the purpose was to consider the guidelines for future development. It has determined a situation where there was an establishment for improving the confidence and trust among the members. Australia had therefore represented and proved how it had cooperated with other countries.

Generally, it had ignored the exercise of the leadership and the changes that were based on consensus along with the cooperation that proceeded at a contented level. There is existing cooperation between ASEAN and Australia had played a significant role in the development of the peace process. Multilateral relations have advanced between Australia and other existing nations. Over the years, it has been observed that the relations between ASEAN and Australia have become stronger and it is vastly identified and it must be done under both the sector levels of public and private. Massive contribution was made for maintaining stability and peace. Along with the development, it can be said that other factors can affect ASEAN as well. It has progressed towards the goals of security cooperation and integration (Goh, 2018). Thus, it is noteworthy to mention in the present scenario that, Australia has received a huge number of merits from the contribution of ASEAN to stay secured and stabilize. 

Thereafter, this paper discusses the various issues that have been associated with the relations of ASEAN and Australia and their members. Firstly, there have been important relations while dealing with the prospects and economies for making the changes and development in the plans of cooperation. The second issue of this scenario is the ongoing challenge of the existing power and its competition in Southeast Asia. This led to disagreements or arguments and over the efforts contributed by the ASEAN. The purpose was to form an agreement with China based on the code of conduct. It therefore helped in improving the interactions with all the parties involved with the association. Thirdly, the multilateral countries faced the problems of the Islamic terrorism as it was highlighted as per the conflict. Lastly, there was an issue of the political order in the Southeast Asian countries (Goh, 2017). This already consists of the distresses in Australia regarding all the restrictions based on the political activities in Cambodia.

Identification of the security agencies and cooperation processes

In the present situation, the basic or the central component in relations with Australia with the ASEAN has been for a long period. Australia has done its duties by taking part in the events of annual dialogues along with the ASEAN foreign ministers. The recent issues and developments also include the successive governments of Australia (Li, Wang & Whalley, 2017). It has been observed that Australia was considered to be a participant since 1980 while making annual consultations with the foreign ministers and other ministers of ASEAN. The relation of Australia with the ASEAN had paid attention on the issues of trade even when there was a conflict over Cambodia. Hence, the cooperation between ASEAN and Australia has developed over the years and there have been a peace process that led to it being involved with the United Nations. However, in the last five years, the relations among the multilateral countries have progresses. The Government had therefore, discovered the new plan of Colombo that engages the young Australians for studying in Asia and obtaining the new experience. Thereafter, the relations with Malaysia were also enhanced by the cooperation among the nations (Ge, 2016). It is evident in this situation to mention here that there has been a strategic partnership between Australia and Vietnam and other countries as well since it agreed to develop and raise the strategic partnership. Economic associations and negotiations have developed among the nations as they did work.

The members of ASEAN have been the most essential partners for Australia and hence their significance has increased substantially in the future. In the year of 1974, there have  been the inauguration of the multilateral relations where it was seen that there was an economic balance between ASEAN and Australia. The present government of Australia had placed the GDP of Australia at an amount of US$1.3 trillion (Ishihara, 2014). The importance of the ASEAN economies have developed communally as collaborates with whom the trade of Australia has increased and became large in number as compared to United States and Japan (Rutström & Harrison, 2017). Therefore, if the rate of economic growth rises and follows the trend then automatically the ASEAN market will have a level of increase along with the number of households engaged with ASEAN. Due to such developments, the businesses of Australia can pursue the upcoming opportunities that consist of education, information technology, health services and the support of e-commerce. The Australian businesses can also take part in the regional production of the chains that are associated with the networks and activities in all the multiple countries of ASEAN (Nethery & Gordyn, 2014). This situation therefore, formed the investment in the ASEAN as it deals with the two-way process of investment of all the multilateral countries.

Arguments for and against theories and views from Modules 1 and 2 readings

Since the prospects for the ASEAN and Australian economic relations are not that weak, it is therefore identified globally as it needs to be done in both the private and public sectors. Promotion and the awareness process by the businesses of Australia for the opportunities of the trade and investment in the economies of ASEAN have risen thereafter. 

There are security agencies that deal with the processes of cooperation between the existing countries. ASEAN was said to be severely fractured in plenty of ways. The agencies therefore exist to make peace between the countries associated. It has been observed that there has been a dispute between Malaysia and Philippines. Evert country generally has a boundary or other kinds of territorial disputes with the neighboring countries (Feldman, Vignolo & Chiffelle, 2017). Due to these situations, the agencies of the ASEAN decided that in these unavoidable situations the leaders of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Philippines and Indonesia had transcended their own each differences by raising the stake of each country associated with it (Wilkins, 2015). The purpose of the agencies was therefore to build and maintain peace among the multilateral countries. Its basic and essential approach was to resolve the issues that can however lead to conflict. This process of integrating the economy of ASEAN focused in making productive efficiency and increased investments by generating jobs and providing less costly commerce (Hufnagel, 2016).  

The agencies with cooperation helped in making the texture of regionalism better and stronger. This gives a regional recognition to the Southeast Asian and other countries. In return, it raises the stake in all the regional progress and peace. This process of cooperation expands the kinds of endeavors including status of women, education and health, rural development, drug addiction, food, agriculture and drug trafficking. These growing networks help in contributing all the mutual understanding between the officials and private citizens. It is noteworthy to mention here that there are other existing initiatives existing in the multilateral countries (Li, Wang & Whalley, 2017). The purpose of this was directly linked with the stability and regional peace of the countries (Thayer, 2016). The multilateral countries therefore had devised a few formal devices for advancing and maintaining peace in all the above-mentioned countries. It is however, the advancement of treaties because it will help in maintaining the peace among all the existing countries (Brewster, 2015). For building and maintain the peace, ASEAN had enjoyed the support of the agencies of United Nations as well itself.  The ASEAN countries and its other powers along with its interest in the region generally undertake the consultations and dialogue on the security and political issues in all the activities. It should obtain for ways to prevent conflict in the future. Therefore, it can be said that these agencies have to institute a basis for improving the trust and confidence among all the existing members of ASEAN. The purpose of this was to lose the arrangements. The essential or basic value in ASEAN from the outset of the region was to set out the principles and internal affairs.

ASEAN was treated to be a product of the Cold War era as well. This is because it obtained international prominence. Hence, it is in a solid international as well as the regional conflict that arose after Vietnam invaded Cambodia in December 1978. It was observed that the ASEAN members did not approve the Vietnam’s invasion as a contravention of the principles of territorial sovereignty and non-interference in the existing internal affairs (Wilson, 2015). It was therefore stated that the campaign was formed against the Vietnam in the United Nations. Thereafter, it cooperated with both China and US to oppose the presence of Vietnam’s. ASEAN thus then played a core role in the peace procedure that led to the intervention of UN and the re-creation that takes place of the independent Cambodian state and government. The political security community however helps to obtain and extend the record of the Association in providing confidence in order to avoid the conflicts among all the members associated with it. ASEAN therefore seeks the process of creation in forming a deeply integrated and economic growth (Kelton, 2016).

When the agencies are involved, there were four newest members involved in it who had suffered from the conflict of cold war. ASEAN had observed mainly on the development of the surroundings. As it has been mentioned above, the purpose was to maintain peace thereafter among all the multilateral countries (Rutström & Harrison, 2017). Regional peace and stability is significant as it will make it easier for the nations to carry out the activities or perform them accordingly. Since there have been security and political issues all these countries, it is important to reduce that by increasing the level of harmony among the countries. The main motive of the agencies is to check on this. 

From the very beginning, various arguments were raised in regard to the prospectus and the development of the future for the existing economic relations between Australia and ASEAN. However, arguments can also be raised upon the realization of the fact that the dependence is mostly upon the stability and security in the parts of South-east Asia (Driver, 2018). Modern autocrats were of the opinion that, the issues concerning political security have been a question of matter for Australia and the ASEAN. According to the perspectives of modern scholars, the competitive roles on the part of the chief powers have always been the centre of focus of the ASEAN’s political and security forces (Goh, 2017). Modern autocrats emphasized upon the administrative system under the patronage of Barrack Obama which created a major rebalance towards East Asia (Li, Wang & Whalley, 2017). As a result of it, much emphasis has been laid upon the presence of military and security structure by engaging with the Trans-Pacific Partnership. According to modern scholars, there has been active involvement in multilateral institutions by focusing upon the ASEAN (Feldman, Vignolo & Chiffelle, 2017).

It is noteworthy to mention here that, policy implementation under Donald Trump’s administration since the beginning of 2017, are continuing to materialize. However, the first year of the administration, uncertainty and ambiguity has been observed in the procedures and approaches (Jacob, Graham & Moller, 2017).  According to modern bureaucrats, few areas of policing have been reaffirmed with active intervention on the part of US to alliance with its ongoing concern regarding the dangers posed by the missile and nuclear attacks of North Korea. In recent year, according to the perspective of modern researches, it can be evidenced that China has showed considerable interest in the ASEAN however; the major part of the attention is directed towards the South China Sea. It is worthwhile to mention here that, China under the patronage of President Xi Jinping has shown active support towards the concept of globalization, multilateral cooperation and institutions (Rutström & Harrison, 2017).

In the perspective of modern authors, Japan has a significant role as an economic partner for the ASEAN region. In recent era, Japan contributed significantly towards the security of the ASEAN region (Petri & Plummer, 2016). In this regard, it is worth mentioning that, Japan and Australia has made significant efforts in advancing the process of negotiations with the remaining participants among which four of them were ASEAN members. From the very beginning, the Government of Australia has emphasized on the part that Australia is not a claimant state. However, Australia being a state was very much involved in the negotiation process with the opposition of artificial modifications and militarization of the adjoining islands. Scholars are of the opinion that, since time immemorial, Australia has been supporting the concept of freedom of navigation along with a legally binding code of conduct.

Modern autocrats emphasized upon the decision of the arbitral tribunal and have taken a more assertive approach which is different from the ASEAN. Such distinction in approach was evident during the ASEAN’s Ministerial Meeting held in August 2017 (Nethery & Gordyn, 2014). However, during such approach, the Foreign Ministers did not consider to the decision taken on the part of the Arbitral Tribunal during the joint statement. In the perspective of autocrats, US, Japan and Australia has issued a joint statement during the meetings and in such process urged both China and ASEAN to sign a legally binding code of conduct. However, the functioning of such code of conduct is uncertain even today. It is worthwhile to mention here that, ambiguity exists on the part that whether the nature of the code of conduct is such that, it is likely to emerge from ASEAN’s negotiation with China (Feldman, Vignolo & Chiffelle, 2017). There were uncertainty regarding the fact that, whether the code on conduct will be legally binding upon the parties. 

Modern autocrats argued on the part that the nature of the code of conduct is such that, it shall be legally binding upon the parties. In this regard, modern critics argued on the concept of quadrilateral cooperation which proved to be uncertain on the part of the ASEAN members; who were concerned about the fact that their regional dialogues are receiving less attention. In the year 1974, Australia became the first dialogue partner of ASEAN. As a result of such advancement, the relation between Australia and the ASEAN has improved under successive Australian governments. It is worth mentioning that, from the year 1980, Australia has been an active participant in collaboration with the ASEAN foreign ministers during the Post-Ministerial Conferences (Rutström & Harrison, 2017). Due to this reason, the interactions on the part of the senior ministers have been regular in regard to certain areas. Initially the relations of Australia with ASEAN emphasized upon trading issues however; after the 1980s issues regarding security, it created a major conflict over Cambodia. Mention can be made about the fact that, the active cooperation between Australia and ASEAN played significant role towards the development of peace in the later part of 1980 marked the involvement of the United Nations along with the restoration of the elected and independent government of Cambodia in the year 1993 (Li, Wang & Whalley, 2017).

Modern researches provided valuable evidences regarding the improvement of relations with the States. Relations have continued to progress and will take a new turn in the future (Jacob, Graham & Moller, 2017).  The New Colombo Plan was introduced by the Government in the year 2013 which proved to be beneficial in assisting young Australians in studying and gaining experiences regarding work in Asia (Feldman, Vignolo & Chiffelle, 2017).

In the conclusion, it can be stated that in accordance to the evidences provided by modern researchers, there has been promotion of greater knowledge and awareness in regard to the Australian business of opportunities for the purpose of carrying on trade and investment in the ASEAN economies. Such an attempt on the part of the Australian government has proved to be a major theme of the Business Summit in ASEAN- Australia. Therefore, it can be finally concluded that as a result of the development of various multilateral treaties on the part of developing countries, the economic and political drawbacks have ceased to a considerable level. 

References:

Brewster, D. (2015). The Australia–India framework for security cooperation: another step towards an Indo-Pacific security partnership.

Driver, R. G. (2018). Understanding ASEAN-An Alternative Approach to International Relations Theory in Asia.

Feldman, M., Vignolo, R. M., & Chiffelle, C. R. (2017). The Role of Pacific Rim FTAs in the Harmonization of International Investment Law: Towards a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific. In Asia's Changing International Investment Regime (pp. 177-205). Springer, Singapore.

Ge, Y. (2016). International Police Cooperation in Fighting Telecommunication Fraud Crimes between China and ASEAN Countries. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Policing Diplomacy and the Belt & Road Initiative (p. 178). URL: https://www.scholarspress.us/conferences/pdf/PDBR-2016.pdf#page=178

Goh, E. (2017). China in the Mekong River basin: the regional security implications of resource development on the Lancang Jiang. In Non-Traditional Security in Asia (pp. 237-258). Routledge.

Goh, E. (2017). China in the Mekong River basin: the regional security implications of resource development on the Lancang Jiang. In Non-Traditional Security in Asia (pp. 237-258). Routledge.

Goh, E. (2018). ASEAN-led multilateralism and regional order: The great power bargain deficit. In International Relations and Asia’s Southern Tier (pp. 45-61). Springer, Singapore.

Hufnagel, S. (2016). Policing cooperation across borders: comparative perspectives on law enforcement within the EU and Australia. Routledge.

Ishihara, Y. (2014). Japan-Australia Defence Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region. Beyond the hub and spokes: Australia-Japan security cooperation, 93-122.

Jacob, A., Graham, L., & Moller, A. K. (2017). Implications of Brexit to the Asia-Pacific region: with a focus on least developed countries.

Kelton, M. (2016). 'More than an Ally'?: Contemporary Australia-US Relations. Routledge.

Li, C., Wang, J., & Whalley, J. (2017). China’s regional and bilateral trade agreements. In THE ECONOMIES OF CHINA AND INDIA Cooperation and Conflict: Volume 1: China and India—The International Context and Economic Growth, Manufacturing Performance and Rural Development (pp. 175-194).

Li, Q., Chen, Z. A., Zhang, J. T., Liu, L. C., Li, X. C., & Jia, L. (2016). Positioning and revision of CCUS technology development in China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 46, 282-293.

Nethery, A., & Gordyn, C. (2014). Australia–Indonesia cooperation on asylum-seekers: a case of ‘incentivised policy transfer’. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 68(2), 177-193.

Petri, P., & Plummer, M. (2016). The economic effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New estimates.

Pickering, J., McGee, J. S., Stephens, T., & Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. I. (2018). The impact of the US retreat from the Paris Agreement: Kyoto revisited?. Climate Policy, 18(7), 818-827.

Rutström, E. E., & Harrison, G. W. (2017). The effect of manufacturing sector protection on ASEAN and Australia: a general equilibrium analysis. In The Political Economy of Manufacturing Protection (pp. 184-213). Routledge.

Thayer, C. A. (2016). US Rebalancing Strategy and Australia’s Response: Business as Usual. In Asia Pacific Countries and the US Rebalancing Strategy (pp. 175-191). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Wilkins, T. S. (2015). From strategic partnership to strategic alliance? Australia-Japan security ties and the Asia-Pacific. asia policy, (20), 81-112.

Wilson, J. D. (2015). Multilateral organisations and the limits to international energy cooperation. New Political Economy, 20(1), 85-106