In today’s world dynamics, Southeast Asia has shown the consistency of regional stability that has been tested for a long time. Unlike the European region, which in modern history was affected by two world wars and then continued to the Cold War, post-colonial Southeast Asia through ASEAN has maintained regional cohesion through the principles of non-intervention, dialogue, and consensus. If peace is a global narrative that must be pursued, Southeast Asia should be able to be the main narrative of world peace, not only because of its stability but also because of its capacity to resolve so many differences through diplomacy rather than confrontation.
If we go back to history, Southeast Asia has become a field for the hegemony of European colonialism. English in Malaysia, French in Indochina, Dutch in Indonesia, and Spanish in the Philippines. However, postcolonial Southeast Asian countries showed a new direction, namely building regional solidarity to avoid conflict. Such as the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung, which became an expression of regional politics that rejected intervention and supported the independence of other nations from the grip of colonialism and imperialism. Although there were internal conflicts such as the Indonesia-Malaysia Confrontation and the Vietnam War, the solution was not through a military alliance like NATO but through a non-aligned mediation approach. So that Southeast Asian peace was not born from military pressure but from the style of diplomacy and negotiation.Â
Back to ASEAN. The association was founded on avoiding Southeast Asia’s involvement in the escalation of the Cold War, and its founders realized that regional stability could only be achieved if countries trusted each other and had a common forum. The 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) became a milestone in regional law to ensure the non-violent resolution of conflicts. Followed by initiatives such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).
But the narrative given has not been heard globally enough. The international community often sees Southeast Asia as a region that is still trying to develop its economy, not as an example of the success of multicultural peace, even though the region’s main strength lies in its ability to manage differences peacefully in view of the reality of ethnic, religious, and political pluralism.
However, ASEAN’s credibility is not without tests. Currently, the crisis in Myanmar since the 2021 military coup is still a test for Southeast Asian peace, if ASEAN fails at home, then the narrative to develop ASEAN as a region that can be used as an example of peace will be hampered. Therefore, ASEAN needs the courage to condemn violations and act more decisively to address the issue, and currently ASEAN excludes Myanmar from the summit meeting to declare that it does not support elections in Myanmar if peace has not occurred. If Myanmar’s stability occurs, then ASEAN can have the credibility to narrate its region. Then after that happens, what should be done?
Southeast Asia can be an alternative narrative that peace does not have to be born from military alliances or the dominance of hegemonic powers, but from dialogue, cultural diplomacy, and diversity. So Southeast Asia needs the following:
– Promote Southeast Asian peace figures or representations in the United Nations and global institutions.
– Conducting student exchanges between ASEAN countries, cultural festivals, and cross-border youth programs so as to strengthen the soft power of ASEAN countries.
– Advocate for a model of peaceful pluralism such as the successful integration of diverse cultures, religions, and legal systems in ASEAN countries.
In a world that is multipolar and polarized by great powers, Southeast Asia can be an alternative, not from a unified military or ideological force but from a collective awareness of the importance of coexistence in diversity, and this should be the main strength of the region so that it is the reason why Southeast Asia deserves to be the main narrative of world peace.
