ASEAN’s Response to the Myanmar Matter: From the Perspective of “Quest for Regional Autonomy”

Abstract

The domestic situation in Myanmar is broadly acknowledged to have posed significant challenges for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Consequently, a critical question arises: upon which premises does ASEAN formulate its responses to the situations in Myanmar? The doctrine of non-interference in the internal affairs of member states, long identified as central to the ASEAN principles, is now understood to be changing, albeit to varying degrees. Nonetheless, there appears to be a conspicuous absence of solid explanation frameworks, particularly in the recent context. Furthermore, the modus operandi of ASEAN is difficult to explicate in terms of normative studies involving the principle of non-interference in internal affairs based on constructivism, realism, and institutionalism. A diachronic perspective is imperative to decipher the foundational principles informing ASEAN’s approach to the Myanmar matter.

This article aims to examine ASEAN’s responses, spanning three decades, to the Myanmar matter and comprehend its actions. The Myanmar matter is categorized chronologically, encompassing debates surrounding ASEAN membership in the 1990s, the issue on ASEAN chairmanship in the 2000s, and the affair triggered by the 2021 coup d’état. These cases are united by the overarching theme of democratization/governance challenges within Myanmar’s domestic sphere. By encompassing an extensive temporal scope, this analysis facilitates an exploration of the factors shaping ASEAN’s approach. This article discusses these cases from the perspective of ASEAN’s quest for regional autonomy, a concept intermittently broached in ASEAN studies, albeit without comprehensive conceptual clarification. In this article, autonomy for ASEAN is construed as to not be controlled or constrained from outside the region and gives the ability to make its own decisions and act accordingly, with ensuing examination of ASEAN’s responses.

The points made in this article that ASEAN countries have considered extra-regional reactions towards Myanmar matters corroborates statements by member countries’ heads of state and governments and existing scholarly contributions. ASEAN has responded to these extra-regional reactions as constraints necessitating circumvention, which is related to the concept of pursuing regional autonomy. The article further highlights that it is hardly possible to comprehend ASEAN’s response to the Myanmar matters across varied temporal frames based solely on its relations with those outside of the region. Then, while reviewing the fact that ASEAN’s decision-making on the Myanmar matter involves an element that is also the basis of the term autonomy, “the ability to make decisions on one’s own,” it presents the view that this is practiced in conjunction with the intention to avoid constraints from extra-regional countries.