• 검색 결과가 없습니다.

Understanding the ASEAN Centrality

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "Understanding the ASEAN Centrality "

Copied!
16
0
0

로드 중.... (전체 텍스트 보기)

전체 글

(1)
(2)

Board of Editors

Edy Prasetyono Evi Fitriani Bantarto Bandoro

Managing Editor

Shofwan Al Banna Choiruzzad

Financial Manager

Yuni Reti Intarti

Supporting Team

Agus Catur Aryanto Putro Darang Sahdana Candra

Layout & Cover Design

Ivan Sanjaya ASEAN Insights is a monthly newsletter which aims to provide important insights

on ASEAN issues. The newsletter is published by ASEAN Study Center, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, with the support

from the Mission of the Republic of Korea to ASEAN.

From the Editors Contents

Articles

Understanding the ASEAN Centrality

1

ASEAN +3: the Way Forward 4

Avoiding Resource Curse in an Integrated ASEAN: A Proposal from Indonesia

8

ASEAN Updates

ASEC Celebrates 47th Anniversary of ASEAN

13

Engaging Business for Competition Compliance in ASEAN

13

ASEAN Statistics Releases Latest Economic Updates

14 Dear readers,

This September edition tackles the issue of ASEAN Centrality. Following changes in the global political and economic system, many observers doubt the ability of ASEAN to remain significant for its members and for regional and global architecture. Is ASEAN Centrality still relevant?

To answer this question, this September edition of ASEAN Insights presents articles from well known scholars and influential activists to share their ideas. In the first article, Termsak Chalermpalanupap from the Singapore-based ISEAS explains the concept of ASEAN Centrality, which has three basic components: external engagements; community- building; and institutional framework to support both the external engagements and community-building. He argues that the ASEAN Centrality is very relevant now, and will be even more important in the years to come as ASEAN and its Member States pursue community- building beyond 2015. In the second article, Fithra Faisal Hastiadi, an economist from the Faculty of Economics, University of Indonesia, outlined the way forward for ASEAN to develop a better regional architecture. The third article, written by Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa from the Institute for Essential Services Reform, argues for a regional framework in the governance of extractive industries.

Enjoy reading!

With best wishes, Shofwan Al Banna Choiruzzad

Shofwan Al Banna Choiruzzad

Shofwan Al Banna Choiruzzad

Vol 4/September/2014 Revisiting ASEAN Centrality

ASEAN Study Center Department of International Relations

Faculty of Social and Political Sciences

Universitas Indonesia

Nusantara 2 Building, 2nd Floor Depok, West Java - Indonesia Tel & Fax: +6221 7873744

email: aseanstudiescenter@ui.ac.id

(3)

UNDERSTANDING THE ASEAN CENTRALITY| Termsak Chalermpalanupap

1

1 In alphabetical order: Australia, Canada, China, the EU, India, Japan, the RoK, New Zealand, Russia, and the US.

2 27 Participants in the ARF are: 10 ASEAN Member States, 10 Dialogue Partners of ASEAN, Bangladesh, the DPRK, Mongolia, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, and Timor-Leste.

3 18 EAS participants are 10 ASEAN Member States and eight Dialogue Partners except Canada and the EU.

4 18 participants in the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus are 10 ASEAN Member States plus eight Dialogue Partners except Canada and the EU. However, it should be emphasized that it is simply a coincidence that the same eight Dialogue Partners are participating in both the EAS and the ADMM-Plus. Membership in the ADMM-Plus was determined in 2006-07; whereas the decision to expand the EAS to include Russia and the US was made in 2010.

5 Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar cannot yet join APEC because of the membership moratorium.

6 The ASEAN Chairman (Myanmar in 2014) is invited to attend the annual G-20 Summit. The ASEAN G-20 Contact Group consists of Indonesia (a regular member of the G-20), the ASEAN Chairman and the Secretary-General of ASEAN. The Secretary-General of ASEAN accompanies the Head of Government of the ASEAN Chair country to the G-20 Summit, which in this year will be hosted by Australia in Brisbane from 15-16 November.

Before asking whether the ASEAN Centrality (AC) is still relevant nowadays, one needs to know first of all what AC is all about. This article explains the concept of AC, which has three basic components:

external engagements;

community-building; and institutional framework to support both the external engagements and community-building. It will confirm that yes, AC is very relevant now, and will be even more important in the years to come as ASEAN and its Member States pursue community- building beyond 2015.

External Engagements

The ASEAN Charter prescribes AC as an ASEAN principle in external relations in Article 2 Paragraph 2 (m) as follows: “the centrality of ASEAN in external political, economic, social and cultural relations while remaining actively

engaged, outward-looking, inclusive and non-discriminatory...”

AC calls for active, efficient, constructive and forward- looking leadership of all the dialogue and cooperation processes that ASEAN has initiated. They include ASEAN+1 with 10 Dialogue Partners1 and the UN, the ASEAN Plus Three (China, Japan and the RoK), the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)2 , the East Asia Summit (EAS)3 , and the ADMM-Plus4 . ASEAN and its Member States, especially the one serving as the ASEAN Chairman, must be active in APEC5 , ASEM, the G-206 , the Non-Aligned Movement, and the Asia Cooperation Dialogue, etc.

ASEAN should make better use of its inter-regional cooperation with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), the South Asian Association for Regional

Cooperation (SAARC), the

Shanghai Cooperation

Organization (SCO), and the Forum for East Asia and Latin America Cooperation (FEALAC), which brings together for cooperation dialogue the ASEAN Plus Three countries, Australia and New Zealand on the East Asian side, and 20 countries from Central America and Latin America. More specifically, ASEAN should develop its cooperation with the GCC, which consists of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and UAE).

Most of these Gulf states have oil wealth which can contribute to infrastructure investments in the ASEAN region.

At the sub-regional level, ASEAN Member States that are Mekong River riparian states (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and

Understanding the ASEAN Centrality

Termsak Chalermpalanupap

(4)

UNDERSTANDING THE ASEAN CENTRALITY| Termsak Chalermpalanupap

2

7 At the Fourth Meeting of Friends of the Lower Mekong in Nay Pyi Taw on 11 August 2014, the “Friends” included Australia, the EU, Japan, the RoK, New Zealand, the US, the ADB, World Bank, and the Secretary-General of ASEAN.

8 Myanmar hosted the Third BIMSTEC in Nay Pyi Taw, 3-4 March 2014, when BIMSTEC Leaders agreed to set up the BIMSTEC Secretariat in Dhaka, and to appoint Mr. Sumith Nakandala from Sri Lanka its first secretary-general.

9 Timor-Leste is chairing the WPF in 2014; next year, Papua New Guinea will chair the WPF. Timor-Leste applied in 2011 for the ASEAN membership. Its application has been under ASEAN consideration.

10 See the Bali Concord III of the 19th ASEAN Summit, issued in Bali on 17 November 2014

Viet Nam) have development cooperation with China and the ADB in the Greater Mekong Subregional Economic Cooperation (GMS), with India in the Mekong- Ganga Cooperation, and with Japan, the RoK, the US and other

“Friends of the Lower Mekong7” . A serious question here is how to make these Mekong meetings complement one another, and to avoid wasting time and resources in overlapping efforts.

Myanmar8 and Thailand are active in the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), which includes Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka.

Indonesia and the Philippines are prime movers in the West Pacific Forum (WPF), which involves Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste9. The Committee of Permanent Representatives to ASEAN (CPR) in Jakarta is ASEAN’s frontline in engaging ASEAN external partners on a day-to-day basis. At last count, 78 countries and the EU have accredited their Ambassadors to ASEAN. The US, Japan, China, the RoK, and Australia have set up their Permanent Missions to ASEAN in Jakarta headed by their respective resident Ambassadors to ASEAN.

The EU, New Zealand and India may soon follow suit.

In external economic engagements, ASEAN is the driving force in an ambitious negotiation on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). The goal is to create new synergies among the 10 ASEAN economies with their free- trade-area counterparts from China, Japan, the RoK, India, and

Australia and New Zealand. If successfully created, RCEP can rival the emerging Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) led by the US and Japan. Four from the ASEAN side are also taking part in the TPP negotiation: Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore and Viet Nam.

In finance, ASEAN Member States, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea have created a pool of US$240 billion for currency swap under the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization. So far, this regional financial “safety net” has not yet been tested.

Community-Building

Active and effective ASEAN leadership can win external recognition for ASEAN as the primary driving force in Southeast Asia. To make such recognition long-lasting, ASEAN must increase its own weights through meaningful community-building beyond 2015. This is the crucial internal dimension of AC.

As a combined one ASEAN market and regional production base of over than 630 million, the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) is one of the top five international traders in the world. A more integrated ASEAN market through increased infrastructure connectivity and harmonization of rules, regulations and laws will enhance the AEC’s competitiveness and attractiveness for foreign direct investment.

Increased political weight will enable ASEAN to speak with one authoritative voice, especially on Southeast Asian affairs. By the year 2022, ASEAN will have its

“common platform” to formulate “a more coordinated, cohesive, and

coherent ASEAN position on global issues of common interest and concern”. Then ASEAN will be in a better position to contribute as a responsible global player.

In the international strategic landscape, the most important challenge facing ASEAN is how to continue to play its constructive role in maintaining regional peace and harmony in Southeast Asia in the wake of rising China and US rebalancing to Asia. Obviously China and the US are competing for ASEAN attention. As a group, the 10 ASEAN Member States need not and should not take sides, although individually some of them may be pro-US and others pro-China. Their most pragmatic common stand is to be “pro-ASEAN”.

Therefore, ASEAN Member States should continue to enhance AC and build a successful ASEAN Community. A strong, unified, and prosperous ASEAN Community can cope with the dynamics of great power rivalries. It can also help shield its individual Member States from excessive external pressure, making it unnecessary for any of them to take sides and antagonize any external powers.

In community-building, AC calls for goodwill in exercising equal rights of the ASEAN membership, and best national efforts in fulfilling all obligations in ASEAN. In the ASEAN Charter, Article 5 Paragraph 2 states : “Member States shall take all necessary measures, including the enactment of appropriate domestic legislation, to effectively implement the provisions of this Charter and to comply with all obligations of membership.”

(5)

UNDERSTANDING THE ASEAN CENTRALITY| Termsak Chalermpalanupap

3

At a minimum, all ASEAN Member States are obliged to ratify without delays and implement all ASEAN agreements signed by their Leaders and Ministers. Better still, they should also adjust their national policy to keep it in line with what they are doing in ASEAN at the regional and international levels.

Nowadays, national sovereignty is no longer absolute, especially when a country interacts with others in the international community, in the UN, and in ASEAN. Every government must fulfil all obligations arising from the UN Charter, international conventions that it is a party to, and the ASEAN Charter. ASEAN Member States are not expected to give up their sovereignty and national interests when they participate in ASEAN.

What they need to do is to develop a good balance between national interests (sovereignty) and ASEAN common interests. In the long-run, they should complement one another. After all, ASEAN common interests come from the sum total of national interests of Member States.

Institutional Support

To sustain and enhance its role as the premier regional player, as well as an emerging global player, ASEAN requires efficient and coherent institutional support and resources.This is the institutional part of AC.

The High Level Task Force on Strengthening the ASEAN Secretariat and Reviewing the ASEAN Organs has been set up to look into ways and means of improving efficiency of ASEAN mechanisms as well as intensifying ASEAN external engagements. In both aspects, the key ASEAN bodies that deserve urgent support are the CPR, the ASEAN Secretariat, the ASEAN

Foundation, and the 10 ASEAN National Secretariats. For these are the ones handling ASEAN affairs on a full-time basis.

Unfortunately, ASEAN is a poor regional grouping. It has very limited resources to fund development cooperation projects, let alone to invest in major infrastructure construction.

Financial responsibility in ASEAN is, as a rule, equally shared by Member States. How to mobilize more resources remains a tough question in ASEAN’s quest to strengthen its institutions, particularly the ASEAN Secretariat.

ASEAN Centrality is Relevant Undoubtedly, AC is very much relevant nowadays. In fact AC will become even more important as ASEAN and its Member States advance in community-building beyond 2015.

Since external recognition may come and go, ASEAN needs to be vigilant and prudent about enhancing AC in external

engagements. ASEAN must know, understand and pay due attention to legitimate strategic interests of its external partners. This will keep them engaged and supportive of AC.

Internally, ASEAN Member Statesmust show they are really serious about community-building and about their shared commitment and vision. They must promptly ratify and implement all the ASEAN agreements their Leaders and Ministers have signed. They must comply in good faith with the ASEAN Charter.

Moreover, they must provide more resources to strengthen ASEAN institutions, especially those that are handling ASEAN affairs on a full time basis. And to prepare for the future, they must take serious steps towards creating the “ASEAN common platform on global issues”

by the year 2022.

ASEAN and its Member States will succeed if they can continue to enhance the ASEAN Centrality.

*Mr. Termsak Chalermpalanupap (termsak@iseas.edu.sg) is a visiting research fellow at the ASEAN Studies Centre (ASC) of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) in Singapore. Prior to joining the ASC in July 2012, Mr. Termsak had served 19.5 years at the ASEAN Secretariat, where his last postbefore retirement was Director of the Political-Security Cooperation Directorate of the APSC Department.

(6)

ASEAN +3: THE WAY FORWARD| Fithra Faisal Hastiadi 4

East Asia: An Integrated Environment

East Asian countries cannot escape from the fact that they are now being more integrated than before.

Regionally speaking, East Asia has been nurtured by a market driven expansion of trade and FDI.

According to Linn (2011), an integrated East Asia will become significantly important for the region’s overall development at least for six reasons. First, in order to sustain region-wide economic growth; second, to have positive spillovers and better respond to global challenges; third, to create long-term stability and prosperity; fourth, to set up a stepping stone for poorer countries so that they can move up the value change and maximize their growth potential; fifth, to be an important bridge between the interactions of individual East Asian countries and the rest of the world; and the last but not least is to have the voice and influence in the global agenda that is commensurate with its economic weight.

The process of trade regionalization can be associated by a growing tendency of trade flows among countries that reside in the same region. This process is often named as intra-regional trade. Increasing number of regional integration agreements (regionalism) is deemed as influential factor of the trend of intra- regional trend. This is well matched by the tendency of firms in expanding their activities within the region

(market-driven regionalization). Therefore, having deep analysis of trade patterns for the ASEAN + 3 countries is very fundamental.

Hello ASEAN+3, Goodbye Europe

A Distinguished Speakers Seminar (DSS) held by Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI) in Tokyo in 2011 has lead to a powerful conclusion that the European mess is getting messier. As stated by Wyplosz and Collignon(2011), since late 2009 the European debt crises has not given any sign of recovery. For some reasons, the policy responses have been wrong. They argue that the mother of all mistakes may lay in the policy options to provide 110 billion Euros to save Greece through its tough austerity program. There were two major flaws on the policy. First, it violates the no- bailout clause in the European Central Bank (ECB) system; second austerity in the midst of recession cannot act as a remedy. These have eventually led to a liquidity crisis that overwhelmed the European banking system. Colloquially speaking, the liquidity shock caused a sudden deterioration in specific classes of asset values that spills over into banks which in dire need of liquidity.

The liquidity shortage then created a Bank distress since the deteriorating asset prices put their balance sheets into difficulties thus reducing bank capitals. These difficulties then spill over into real economy in the form of recession.

ASEAN +3: the Way Forward

Fithra Faisal Hastiadi

(7)

ASEAN +3: THE WAY FORWARD| Fithra Faisal Hastiadi 5 On the other hand, ASEAN is fueled by a youthful spirit

that could bring new hope to run through the global imbalances. ASEAN members are becoming more connected nowadays. It experiences sustainable growth of intra-regional trade share. In 1990, the intra-regional trade share was only 17 per cent but in 2010 the figure went up to 25.2 per cent. If we expand the coverage to the plus three countries (China, Japan and Korea), the intra-regional trade figure is becoming more robust. In 1990, it already reached 47.2 per cent and it developed over a decade as it leaped to 58.4 per cent. The FTAs and EPAs that is well emerging since the mid 2000 have a significant contribution to the closer relation among the ASEAN + 3 countries. An important factor explaining the success of the ASEAN + 3 economies has been their participation in a dynamic, regionally integrated economic structure beyond just ASEAN + 3. Strong and dynamic production networks have progressively linked East Asian and ASEAN + 3 countries. The fragmentation of manufacturing production and “fragmented trade”

linked to rising intra-industry trade have enabled ASEAN + 3 countries to maintain their competitiveness and successfully pursue an export-led development strategy.

ASEAN + 3 countries also developed robust, flexible and vibrant small and medium size enterprise (SME) sectors.

Although this region has experienced two period of crisis (late 1997 and late 2008) but it did well to bounce back afterwards. For the first crisis, total ASEAN + 3 intra- regional exports fell from 179,732.1 million US dollars in 1997 to 146,166.3 million US dollars in 1998. The imports also declined from 186,630.5 million US dollars in 1997 to 141,979.3 million US dollars in 1998. This number contributed for an almost three per cent decline of ASEAN + 3’s intra-regional trade from 49.9 per cent in 1997 to 47.2 per cent in 1998. It bounced well in 1999 to 49 per cent followed by 51.4 per cent in 2000. This figure was a big help for East Asian countries at that time to recover well from the crisis.

The second crisis in late 2008 was also causing regional trade imbalances in ASEAN + 3 countries as the total exports and imports fell from 547,427 5 million US dollars and 518,966.8 million US dollars in 2008 to a figure of 450,665.6 million US dollars and 411,663.3million US dollars in 2009. But again, it persistently bounced back in 2010 for a figure of 630,089.6 million US dollars for exports and 609,465.3 million US dollars for imports. It was also reflected from the intra-regional trade share figure that experienced a hike from 55.8 per cent in 2008 to a 58.4 per cent in 2010.

If we compare the two crises period, we can get a general conclusion that East Asia has learned well in coping the crisis. It is reflected by the speed of recovery in 2010 which is better than 1999. Also, the closer integration among the countries has created a vaccine-

like treatment in the region. Looking into the future, based on ADB projection, in 2030, per capita GDP in 2007 constant US dollars will mount to a number of 9012 for ASEAN, 12361 for China, 40,415 for Japan and 41,674 for Korea.

The figures surely give a very optimistic path for the region in taking powerful role globally, but in order to play that role the region, especially for the ASEAN countries, have to put more attention some very crucial factors as summarized in the next section.

Making East Asian Regionalism Works

For years, regionalism has become a new trend in East Asia. East Asian Countries have been focusing on ways to expand intra regional trade that include: the establishment of Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) in the form of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). The study of regionalism is very vital since the trend has indeed created a profound regional and indeed global significance (Harvey and Lee, 2002). Japan, Korea and China are regarded as the key actors for such action in East Asia. Regionalism acts as a powerful mantra that spells the word “whether you with us or against us”. The act of exclusion from regionalism will only lead to marginalization. Therefore, the general idea is how to make it work.

In the short run, there might be a rivalry competition between China and ASEAN, then again the mind set in viewing the economic opportunity or threat depends on whether China’s economy is perceived as complementary or competitive vis-à-vis individual ASEAN economies and on whether the latter economies are able to exploit their complementary opportunities and overcome the competitive threats.

In a sense of creating integration in East Asia, there is a need to set up more formal institutional mechanisms for trade. It is rational for such mutually dependent countries in the region to institutionalize de facto integration through the establishment of regional arrangements (Kawai, 2005). The growing significance of China, Japan and Korea market for ASEAN along with other economic modalities such as product complementarities, comparative advantage and intra industry trade in the region will then serve as the basis for a single East Asian Wide FTA.

In East Asia, tariff is cut unilaterally which in turn creates complexity for East Asian firms. But the complexity is acting as building blocs for regionalism since efforts to form regionalism will gain more in the low tariff environment. As the membership expands, regionalism will find its way to have a greater grip in East Asia (domino effect). But we have to note that this only

(8)

ASEAN +3: THE WAY FORWARD| Fithra Faisal Hastiadi 6 happens when “Race To the Bottom” (RTB)

unilateralism preventing complexity for becoming problems while the opposite still likely to happen. If this happens then, as Baldwin (2006) suggests, the combination of complexity and unbundling may create a new political economy force which in turn creates big push from the East Asian multinationals.

The next task is to shape the future of EAR, but then will the future exist? Using the test of convergence, it is found that EAR will be there to stay. The robust finding surely creates optimistic view for EAR. But knowing the future is not enough, we still need to find out the clear path to reach the future. What are the paths then? From a static panel data simulation it is found that sound transportation infrastructure, good governance, competitive taxation policy, sizeable market, good education, democracy and the trend towards industrialization are the main factors that serve as building blocks for EAR.

These findings are coherent with the study conducted by Asian Development Bank in 2006 which identifies four solid pillars for the East Asian regional cooperation and integration. Those pillars are: (i) trade and investment; (ii) money and finance; (iii) infrastructure and connectivity; and (iv) regional public goods.

The factors above can be classified as technical pillars, should it be reached, non-technical factors still need to be tackled. Among those factors, some has proven to be major obstacles. First is historical factor, what had happened among China, Japan, and Korea in the old days is still noted to be influential clash. Second is ideological factor, political polarization happened in the cold war has given major impact for the relation among countries in East Asia. Although ideological concentration is now becoming insignificant but in some cases the conflicting interests among countries are deemed to be the indirect exposure of the remaining ideological concept. The absence of political bond among countries in East Asia would be a major problem when they have to face common enemy that take form as global economic crisis. This paper define political bond as regionalism/institutionalism.

Regionalism has some important roles in guiding directions, providing visions, and setting up the principle in organizing and creating a regional community. The overall roles have give to raise important question of what kind of regional organizations should be formed, and how they should be formed and operated (He, 2004).Moreover, Kawai (2005) views a mounting need of institutionalization in East Asia in order to internalize externalities of the spillover effects.

The top rank meeting of ASEAN + 3 in Singapore 2007 is a giant leap towards better bond among East Asian

countries. One of the points in the Chairman’s Statement has given signs of acceptation for the “plus three” concept which in turn creates positive prospect to go beyond the next level. By concept, ASEAN+3 will have a broad scope of economy, security, politics and social cooperation (Yoshida 2004). Since ASEAN has already become a mature institution, they will be on the driver’s seat to eliminate the non technical problems facing the East Asian regionalism.

Having identified the factors that determine regionalism in East Asia should be equally matched by actual implementation on the field by the East Asian leaders.

The question then arise, will they be ready to go through the path towards regionalism?

Efforts to bring East Asian regionalism to its path is not like it has never been done before but it has not effectively done. The FTAs happening in East Asia has created the so called “noodle bowl” (adapting the term of spaghetti bowl). However, the connection between RTB and domino effect will clean the mess. Given the overall tariff protection and the non resistance from the anti-membership side, the pro-membership side will urge the government to join the existing FTA. Due to the big push and the prospect of higher profits, the government is expected to set a region wide FTAs into force. Moreover, the principles of a good policy are credibility, flexibility and political legitimation. Rule of law could create credibility if the rule is widely known and well understood by the public. With credibility, it will be easier to handle any economic turbulence with the policy instrument that is controlled by the economic authority. Credibility could function more when there is a transparent and an accountable framework in which strengthens political legitimation. Effective policy would merge up if the policy makers have the ability to react promptly in every unprecedented shock. Credible policy makers are those who make the policy with respect for transparency. With the high level transparency, any economic shock would be easily diminished. Without transparency, every policy with regards to economic target and fiscal rule would become obsolete since the public could not compare between the target and the realization. Moreover, the political legitimation would become very important since the policies being made should reflect regional consensus. This in turn creates balance of power and also general responsibilities which could reduce the negative effect from the uncoordinated policy.

Regionalism in East Asia will enable the region to cope with the future challenges of globalization and remain internationally competitive. An integrated East Asia would lead to the advancement in economies of scale, fuller development of production networks. Moreover, Chia (2007) stated that East Asian regionalism could

(9)

ASEAN +3: THE WAY FORWARD| Fithra Faisal Hastiadi 7

References

Baldwin, Richard (2006).’Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocs on the Path to Global Free Trade’.

NBER Working Papers.

Chia, Siow Yue. (2007). Challenges and Configurations of a Region-wide FTA in East Asia’, FONDAD Conference.

Hastiadi, Fithra Faisal. (2011) ‘Regionalism in East Asia: The Role of North East Asian Nations’ American Journal of Economics and Business Administration 3 (2): 242-253.

Harvie, Charles and Hyun Hoon Lee. (2002) ‘New Regionalism in East Asia: How Does It Relate to the East Asian Economic Development Model’, University of Wollongong Department of Economics, Working Paper Series.

He, Baogang. (2004). ‘East Asian Ideas of Regionalism: a Normative Critique’. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 58(1), 105-125.

Linn, J. (2011). ‘Regional cooperation and integration’. In H. Kohli, A. Sharma, & A. Sood (Eds.), Asia 2050: Realizing the Asian Century. (pp. 245-275). New Delhi: SAGE Publications

Kawai, Masahiro, (2005) East Asian Economic Regionalism: Progress and Challenges, Asian Economics, Vol. 16, pp. 29-55.

Yoshida, Tadahiro. (2004) ‘East Asian Regionalism and Japan’, IDE APEC STUDY CENTER Working Paper Series.

Wyplosz, Charles and Stefan Collignon (2011). ‘Europe Sovereign Debt Crisis: Lessons and Application to Asian Countries’.

Distinguished Speaker Seminar, Asian Development Bank Institute.

Fithra Faisal Hastiadi is a lecturer at the Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics University of Indonesia hold close the less developed East Asian economies that

would otherwise become marginalized as they lack the attraction of sizeable market and lack negotiating resources

Having said this, institution lead regionalism should replace the existing market lead regionalism. This is important not only to have East Asia as one block of countries that has powerful political and economic abilities but also to create sustainability with the shared welfare among the members. As the former Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Alatas said in 2001, ASEAN plus three is equal to peace plus prosperity as it can contribute substantively to the achievement and maintenance of sustained and sustainable peace, stability and security and welfare in this part of the world.

Now, that we are come to the point that regionalism must take place in East Asian Region, we have to encounter some problems embedded on it. The trade creation effect of regional co-operation is being viewed as an important cause of economic growth. However, the impact of trading blocs also has a trade diversion effect. Question then arises; do such arrangements benefit regional trade and increase overall welfare? The answer depends upon the difference between the trade creation effect and trade diversion effects.

The trade creation effect is caused by the extra output produced by the member countries. This extra output is generated due to the freeing up of trade between them.

Increased specialization and economies of scale should increase productive efficiency within member countries.

The trade diversion effect exists because countries within trading blocs, protected by trade barriers, will now find they can produce goods more cheaply than

countries outside the trade bloc. Production will be diverted away from those countries outside the trade bloc that have a natural comparative advantage to those within the trading bloc. From the point of view of developing countries, i.e. ASEAN4 the existence of trading blocs depends rather on firstly whether the country is in the trading bloc and secondly which other countries are also members. Forming a trade bloc with other developing countries may result in only a small trade creation effect as the share of world trade involving developing countries is relatively small, that the trade bloc has limited influence on the market price and quantity. If the country joins a trade bloc with developed countries, i.e. CJK then there may be real advantages to the developing countries as resources flow within the bloc to the countries where there are cost advantages and the potential market for exports is significantly expanded.

By building trade liberalization on the foundation of discrimination, PTAs create a fundamental conflict with multilateralism. The ill effects of this key difference become manifest when one examines the recent proliferation of PTAs. This proliferation has led to a crisscrossing of trade preferences assigned to countries, hence the term "spaghetti bowl," where products in many important markets today enjoy access on varying terms depending on where they supposedly originate.

Owing to the globalization of production, the ability to identify the country of origin for products is increasingly problematic. Since the spaghetti bowl’s inefficiencies are increasingly magnified by unbundling and the rich/poor asymmetry, the region must find a solution.

Since regionalism is here to stay, the solution must work with existing regionalism, not against it. The solution must be in the form of multilateralizing regionalism. The

task should be concluded by WTO.

(10)

AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSE IN AN INTEGRATED ASEAN|

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

8

Indonesia is blessed with abundance mineral commodities, oil and gas resources that has been fuelling the economic development since the independence. As natural resources such as oil, gas, metallic and non-metallic mineral become more strategic and significant in modern economy, the country faces the daunting challenges in ensuring that the extraction of its natural resources, especially the non-renewable ones, could contribute to the country’s equitable development for present and future generation. Rosser (2006) highlighted that Indonesia along with some other resource rich developing countries have done well in terms of achieving high rates of economic growth, reducing the poverty number and maintaining the democratic government.

However, as a developing country in economic transition with abundant of natural resources Indonesia also experience latent threat of corruption over its natural resources. As Leite and Weidmann (1999) explains that resources wealth tends to stimulate corruption and that corruption in turn negatively impacts on economic

growth. Sala-i-Martin and Subramanian (2003) concluded that export of fuel and mineral have negative impacts on governance: corruption, government ineffectiveness, or political instability. Study done by Indonesia Corruption Eradication Commission on non- tax revenue from coal and mineral sector concluded that between 2002-2011 potential loss from payment for royalties and land-rent was nearly $600 million.

The failure of state in transforming natural resources into economic growth and wealth in a number of resources rich region in Indonesia have created tension and conflict of dissatisfied local people in those areas (Tadjoeddin, 2007). At the extreme level, the extractive industries have also been portrayed as the cause of secession movement. Indonesian government from time to time has also faced criticism of the failure in controlling the rate phase of resource exploitation, which has lead to faster rate of resource depletion.

This paper thus aimed in explaining the overall description of the challenges in managing natural resources in Indonesia, the latest initiative to improve

Avoiding Resource Curse in an Integrated ASEAN:

A Proposal from Indonesia

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

(11)

AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSE IN AN INTEGRATED ASEAN|

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

9

1 Terry Lynn Karl, an expert in the resource cruse studies has strongly related this issues in her writings, one of them Karl, Terry Lynn. 2005.

Understanding the Resource Curse.

good governance on the management of natural resources. As the Southeast Asia region shares some common challenges in managing the resources, the paper also captures the recent initiative of civil society and the government of Indonesia in bringing this issue to the ASEAN level and promoting the initiative to improve good governance over extractive industries in the regional level.

Natural Resources Extraction in Indonesia: An Overview

Critical linkage between economic growth and the presence of natural resources have been subject to many resource economics studies. In the last decades, social scientist and economist discovered unique phenomenon where countries with large endowment of natural resources such as oil and gas, often perform worse in terms of economic development compare to the countries with less natural resources. The phenomenon called as resource curse. The notion of resource curse suggests that countries with high dependence from natural resources often perform worse in terms of economic growth, social development, and good governance compare to other countries whose economic slightly rely their income from the natural resources. The resource curse theory states that countries depending on oil or other extractive industries for their livelihood are among the most economically troubled, socially unstable, authoritarian, and conflict- ridden in the world (Karl, 2005)1.

Kaufmann (2012) summarized an important statistical note on the ironical situation of resource rich countries.

He wrote“in 1990, almost 600 million people lived on less than $5 a day in resource-rich countries. Today, it is estimated that poverty has increased to about 700 million people. Among this population, close to 300 million live in dire poverty, surviving on $2 a day or less. The majority of the poor in resource-rich countries live in Africa, where 80 percent of citizens in extractive-intensive countries live on under $5 a day, and over 50 percent live on under $2 a day.”

Concern over resource curse threat overshadows the resource rich Indonesia is justifiable. The presence extractive sector is vital for the Indonesia economy. Oil and gas extraction contribute around 23% of the country’s GDP (ESDM, 2013) and will remain vital for next decade. Indonesia’s hydrocarbon commodities such as coal and Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) play significant role in international market where Indonesia was the world’s largest exporter of coal in 2012 and the fourth-largest exporter of LNG in 2013 (EIA, 2014). As for mineral,

Indonesia is a leading mineral producer. It is ranked as second world’s tin producer, it also the leading producers of gold, copper and nickel (Kuo, 2012).

Although the national level contribution of mining industries relatively low -compared to the oil and gas industries- those commodities represent a larger share of the regional economies of many provinces, such as Papua, Bangka-Belitung, West Nusa Tenggara and East Kalimantan (PWC, 2012).

The excessive extraction of oil, gas and minerals without strong accountability mechanism opens up opportunities for corrupt practices. In early 2014, Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) detained former deputy energy minister and the Chairman of the powerful Oil and Gas Upstream Regulatory Agency (BP- Migas) for a bribery case. This arrest escalated public demand to reform the oil and gas sector in Indonesia.

In the oil industries, many believe that corruption is the main cause of Indonesian inability in maximum utilization of revenues from the oil boom in 1970s and 1980s. In the past, Pertamina had the privilege to award some of the biggest and the most profitable oil blocs in Indonesia. Rampant nepotism and corruption practices turned this privilege into the loss of the country, as it would eventually hinder Pertamina’s efforts to increase production capacity and output (Seda, 2005). In the end, it took years for Pertamina to gain trust from public and to build its capacity in competing with other world’s class oil companies.

The economic crises in 1997/1998 pave the way to reform oil and gas sector of Indonesia. The Oil and Gas reform took place in 2001 after the enactment of controversial Law No. 22/2001 on Oil and Gas. With this new law, the structural and organizational of various institutions dealing with oil and gas sector was unbundled. Pertamina’s power in representing the state over oil and gas exploration and production was stripped. The law established a quasi-government body, Upstream Regulatory Body (BP Migas) to supervise oil and gas exploration, production, and selling of oil and gas owned by the states. However, this reform has not yet fully addressed the basic demand to havea transparent and accountable, and highly efficient oil and gas sector. BP Migas is seen as powerful yet lack of supervise from outside. In 2013, as the result of Constitutional Court decision over unconstitutionality of the Law No. 22/2001, BP Migas was removed and replaced by SKK Migas.

(12)

AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSE IN AN INTEGRATED ASEAN|

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

10

Indonesia mining sector has different dynamics and complexity. In 2001, Indonesia passed a national law on decentralization. As the result of new political structure, local governments (municipal and district) have authority over natural resources in their administrative regions, including issue licensing for mining to investors and companies. It has resulted in the booming of mining exploration license issued by local chiefs, which then followed by the tremendous production of mining permit issued. The massive licensing for production led to the increasing of raw material production and export.

ESDM (2012) reported that since 2009 nickel ore exports increased by 800%, while iron ore export increased by 700%, and bauxite ore export increased by 500%. Coal production reaches 460 million ton in 2012 and increased by 600% since 2000 (BPS, 2014) in which 80 to 85% of it annual production is for export.

This extreme increase did not come with the improvement of capacity of both local and central government in overseeing the whole extraction process, from the exploration of mines to the trading of commodities, and transparency in revenue collection and management.

KPK argued that thousands of mining permits owner were linked to corrupt practices as thousands of them are not listed as taxpayer (Widyasari, 2014). In addition to the loss of revenues, weak control over the issuance of permits makes it common in Indonesia to see mining concession areas overlap with forestry areas -either a protected, productive forest or concession forest area (Devi and Prayogo, 2013).

The Rise of Transparency Agenda by the Implementation of Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) in Indonesia

Various actors, consisted of global and national civil society, some oil, gas and mining companies, and some champions in the government of Indonesia collaborate to push the government of Indonesia to take a serious step by implementing the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative or EITI (Kirana and Brown, 2009).

EITI is a voluntary based standard to promote transparency in extractive sector that has been acknowledged internationally as a tool to improve good governance and manage the extractive sector in many countries.

Indonesia seeks to implement the EITIas a tool in improving its extractive governance. In 2010, the Government of Indonesia issued the Presidential Regulation on The Transparency of State and Regional Income Generated from Extractive Industries, which

started the process of EITI implementation in Indonesia.

The EITI itself was introduced officially by former Britain Prime Minister, Tony Blair, at the World Summit for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, September 2002. For the countries that rely on large national revenue from the extractive industry sector, the EITI will be a very useful ‘revenue flow information source’ for the public. The involvement of the public is crucial so that they can be as the watchdog of the revenue.

Without the public scrutinizing on the revenue flow, the possibility of corruption will be higher.

The adopting country also would gain both tangible and intangible benefit. The tangible benefits are: improved extractive revenue regulations; as a tool for public education on quite unfamiliar subject; improved public resources management; access to capital; decreased corruption; etc. While the intangible benefits are:

establishing Indonesian economy in the world economy (as stated by President Yudhoyono, “Leading by example.”); building trust between state, business, and civil society; improved investment climate; etc.

Apart from the EITI implementation, the Indonesian government has repeatedly stated its commitment to the principles of good governance. This is an opportunity in which civil society can build on to oversee the extractive industries. With the government’s consent, civil society can participate in important meetings and even get invited by the related government body, so the issue is more about the way civil society exchanges information and gets involved in decision making processes. In various ministries, such as the ministries of economic affairs, finance, and energy, there are different attitudes towards civil society, but at least at some level there is a willingness to engage with civil society. The presence of a democratic environment in Indonesia also supports the growth of the media, which allows civil society to collaborate with the press/media in raising relevant issues to the public through news reports, opinions, talk shows etc. With the support of the media mobilizing public opinion, civil society is able to pressure the government.

An integrated ASEAN and the agenda of transparency: taking EITI at the regional level

In the context of ASEAN Economic Cooperation, fostering trade and investment is one of the major agenda. This is consistent with the effort to make ASEAN as competitive region and basis of production of goods and services. To achieve this, availability of energy, minerals and raw materials become important factor to achieve the objective. These demands however

(13)

AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSE IN AN INTEGRATED ASEAN|

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

11

meet with the many, if not all, of national interest on extracting the hydrocarbon and mineral as source of income and revenue for the country through trade and investment

In this respect, ensuring the energy supply and utilization of mineral resources without squandering the needs to observe the sustainable principles is in line with many of ASEAN policy framework and initiatives, such as the ASEAN Charter, the ASEAN Community Blueprints, as well as the Manila Declaration in 2008, that emphasized the need to enhance the sustainability of the resources and maximize the benefits to community and the national economy.

This concern has captured the attention of Indonesian government in 2011. During Indonesia Chairmanship in ASEAN, Indonesia has taken further step to promote EITI to the region. The active role of Indonesia in taking this step further based on the consideration that foreign investment, among other forms of investment such as intra-ASEAN investment, plays a key role in exploration and exploitation of oil, gas and mineral sources in the region.

The EITI will serve as a harmonization tool for good extractive revenues transparency as ASEAN moves toward an economic community. As the ASEAN Charter was issued in 2007, more intensive agreements and cooperation’s were produced, which indicate a deeper integration was taking place, including the mining and energy sector. EITI plays a vital role in promoting the investment that is needed to ensure energy security by addressing some of the underlying causes of political instability in many resource rich countries, by ensuring greater transparency of revenues. (Tumiwa, 2012) In June 2011, ASEAN Senior Official Meeting on Energy (SOME) in Brunei, Indonesia delegation proposed to organize a regional workshop to discuss about EITI and its relation to the energy security in Southeast Asia. The proposal thus received by the member of SOME meeting. To follow up the previous meeting result, in August 2011, the government of Indonesia conducts the EITI Regional Workshop. The workshop was supported by the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affair and the Ministry of Foreign Affair. The theme of the workshop is

“Securing ASEAN Energy Supply: Learning from Best Practices on Policy Framework and Global Standard to Improve Investment Climate.” The workshop was attended by representatives from Cambodia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Laos, and Indonesia. The workshop result then brought to the ASEAN Energy Ministerial Meeting (AMEM).

The similar process also takes place in the mineral cooperation between ASEAN member states. During the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Mineral (AMMin) which was conducted in Hanoi, Vietnam in December 2011, Indonesian government stated their eagerness to introduce EITI in the ASEAN level. At the AMMin meeting, Indonesia again proposed a statement mentioning EITI as the result of ASOMM, and stated in Joint Press Statement ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Minerals as the summary of the 3rd AMMin Outcomes published to the public. Having a ministerial discussion, the draft was approved as “The Ministers noted the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) that is knows as international quality standard on revenue collection in mineral sector and agreed to the proposal to include capacity building on revenue collection in mineral sector, and agreed to the proposal to include capacity building on EITI in ASEAN Mineral Cooperation Action Plan (AMCAP) 2011-2015.”

In the national level, at least five ASEAN member states namely Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippine, Vietnam and Cambodia already developed extensive discussion on EITI in their natural resource governance. Indonesia, the largest natural resource producer in the region, is in the stage to fully implement EITI to push bigger transformation in the revenue management from the extractive industries. Myanmar, with a very surprising way has announced their intention to implement EITI.

By implementing EITI, Myanmar has stated their commitment to improve transparency in extractive sector.

Fitriani, Hutapea and Tumiwa (2014) argue this trend could be a turning point in the ASEAN way in managing natural resources. For years, the extractive industries have grown as the most secretive sector. Public access to important data and information regarding the extraction process is limited. As EITI required an implementing country to create a multi-stakeholder group representing civil society, government body and private sector in overseeing the implement of EITI, it will provide a chance for civil society to take an equal position in addressing concerns over their natural resource extraction.

By all means, this opportunity should be utilized in a progressive manner to push better governance in the regional level. ASEAN should take a bigger role in promoting the changes and shifting in natural resource management. Such values will help Southeast Asian countries in utilizing their resource wisely.

(14)

AVOIDING RESOURCE CURSE IN AN INTEGRATED ASEAN|

Morentalisa Hutapea and Fabby Tumiwa

12

Reference

Devi, Bernadetta and Prayogo, Dodi. May, 2013. Mining and Development in Indonesia: An Overview of the Regulatory Framework and Policies.International Mining for Development Center: IM4DC Action Research Report.

Ardhyanti, Ermy and Basuki, Triyono Basuki. 2014. Regional Innovations to Avoid the Resources Curse:

Practical Cases from Indonesia and the Philippines to Improve Governance in Extractive Industries. In Fitriani, Evi, (ed). 2014. Governance On Extractive Industries Assessing National Experiences to Inform Regional Cooperation in Southeast Asia. Indonesia: UI Press (upcoming) ESDM. 2013. Kinerja Sektor ESDM Tahun 2013“Mempertahankan Penerimaan Negara, Mendorong Energi Terbarukan.” Retrieved

August 15, from http://esdm.go.id/siaran-pers/55-siaran-pers/6641-kinerja-sektor-esdm-tahun-2013.html

Leite, Carlos and Jens Weidmann.1999. Does Mother Nature Corrupt? Natural Resources, Corruption, and Economic Growth, IMF, Washington D.C.

Fitriani, Evi, (ed). 2014. Governance On Extractive Industries Assessing National Experiences to Inform Regional Cooperation in Southeast Asia.

Indonesia: UIPress (upcoming)

Greenpeace. 2014. “How coal mining hurts the Indonesian economy” Retrieved August 18, 2014 from http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/id/PageFiles/595527/How%20Coal%20Mining%20Hurts%20the%20Indonesian%20Economy%2 0-%20English.pdf

EITI. 2009. Advancing the EITI in the Mining Sector: A consultation with stakeholder. EITI International Secretariat

Kaufmann, Daniel. (2012). Poverty in the Midst of Abundance: Governance Matters for Overcoming the Resource Curse. Retrieved August 15, 2014 from http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/09/13-poverty-governance-kaufmann

Oranje, Mabel van and Parham, Henry. 2009. Publishing What We Learned An Assessment of the Publish What You Pay Coalition. PWYP.

Overseas Development Indicator. Indonesia’s Progress on Governance: State Cohesion and Strategic Institutional Reform. Retrieved August 16, 2014 from http://www.developmentprogress.org/sites/developmentprogress.org/files/indonesia_report_-_master_0.pdf Pallone, Shannon. 2009. Indonesia’s Oil Crisis: How Indonesia Became a Net Oil Importer. The Journal of International Policy Solution, vol. 10 Prijosusilo, Bramantyo. (2012).Fueling the future.New York: Revenue Watch Institute.

PWC. April, 2012. Mining in Indonesia: Investment and Taxation Guide. PWC

Resosudarmo, Budy. 2005. The Politics and Economics of Indonesia’s Natural Resources. Singapore: ISEAS

Ross, Michael.L. Jan., 1999. The Political Economy of the Resource Curse. World Politics, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 297-32. Retrieved August 15, from http://www.socialsciences.manchester.ac.uk/medialibrary/economics/pg/support/IDPM60072RossM%20%281%29.pdf

Rosser, Andrew. December, 2006. Escaping the Resource Curse. New Political Economy, Vol. 11, No. 4. Retrieved August 15, from http://test.revenuewatch.org/revenuewatch_archive/training/Rosser%20-%20Escaping%20the%20Resource%20Curse.pdf

Sovacool, Benjamin. May,2010. The Political Economy of Oil and Gas in Southeast Asia. The Pacivic Review Vol.23 No.2 . Retrieved August 15,

2014 from

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228663258_The_political_economy_of_oil_and_gas_in_Southeast_Asia_heading_toward s_the_natural_resource_curse/links/00b7d526620c52b54d000000.

Tadjoeddin, Mohammad Zulfan. 2007. A future resource curse in Indonesia: The political economy of natural resources, conflict and development. Crise Working Paper No. 35.

Tumiwa, Fabby. (2011). Energy Security and Good Governance: The Role of EITI in Improving Investment Climate. AsiaViews,

U.S.Energy Information Administration. March, 2014. Countries Analysis Brief: Indonesia. Retrieved August 15, from http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysisbriefs/Indonesia/indonesia.pdf

Widyasari, Esti. March, 2014. Ribuan IUP Tak Punya NPWP. Retrieved August 16, 2014 from http://www.tambang.co.id/detail_berita.php?category=18&newsnr=9006

Tsalik, Svetlana and Anya, Schiffrin, (ed) 2005. Covering Oil A Reporter’s Guide to Energy and Development. New York: Open Society Institute.

Morentalisa Hutapea is a Researcher at the Institute for Essential Services Reform (morentalisa@iesr.or.id)

Fabby Tumiwa is a Executive Director at the Institute for Essential Services Reform, International Board (alternate) Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), (fabby@iesr.or.id)

(15)

ASEAN UPDATES 13

ASEAN

UPDATES

ASEAN Discusses Approach to Effective Competition Enforcement

Engaging Business for Competition Compliance in ASEAN

Representatives of the ASEAN Experts Group on Competition (AEGC) and the ASEAN Secretariat gathered in Singapore on August 21st for a dialogue on key issues and challenges to enhance effective business compliance of Competition Policy and Law (CPL) in the region. The one-day workshop which was held at the Grand Park City Hall Hotel and hosted by the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS), discussed issues related to the design and implementation of appropriate outreach and evidence-based advocacy measures vis-à-vis the business community.

Business compliance with competition rules is key to building an effective competition regime: companies should not only understand the benefits of CPL but will need to be familiar with the potential consequences of infringing competition rules. A company-wide compliance program can help avoid potentially anti-competitive business practices. Fostering competition compliance in ASEAN is challenged not only by a lack of a “competition culture” but also by pending competition legislations in five of the ten Member States. Members of competition agencies from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Viet Nam shared their experiences on their respective outreach and advocacy programmes aimed at promoting competition compliance. Legal counsels specialized in competition law were also invited to present on their respective compliance programs, the benefits and concerns from the perspective of the private sector. This initiative is set against the backdrop of increasing regional cooperation on CPL and ties in with ongoing deliberations of the AEGC on a strategic Action Plan beyond 2015. The imminent realization of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) increases the urgency to ensure a level playing field along with greater legal certainty for business to operate within the larger common market. .(Source: ASEAN Secretariat News)

ASEC Celebrates 47th Anniversary of ASEAN

The ASEAN Secretariat (ASEC), led by Secretary General H.E. Le Luong Minh, on August 18th hosted the celebrations of the 47th Anniversary of ASEAN with festive events in Jakarta. Members of the diplomatic community and ASEAN partners joined in the celebration. “As we gather today to celebrate another anniversary of ASEAN’s founding, we are also at the threshold of realising a dream for a ‘prosperous and peaceful community of Southeast Asian Nations’ that began 47 years ago, on 8 August 1967. That long-aspired dream is about to come true! ASEAN is poised to proclaim the realisation of the ASEAN Community by the end of next year. This will be another epic milestone signalling Southeast Asia’s irrefutable connectivity and cohesiveness – where the peoples enjoy the blessings of peace, freedom and prosperity,” said SG Minh in his remarks. H.E. Dr. R.M. Marty Natalegawa, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia joined SG Minh in congratulating the association. Minister Natalegawa paid tribute to the present and past leaders of ASEAN for their “foresight and wisdom in building the ASEAN Community”. In parting, Minister Natalegawa called on ASEAN “to be a value-adding party, a contributor and not just a recipient” to the peace and prosperity of the region and beyond. Meanwhile, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) organised the

“ASEAN Youth Competition on Arts and Human Rights.” The grand prize winners of the two competitions were announced and given prizes by SG Minh during the ceremony. The winning artworks and photos will be on display at ASEAN Secretariat lobby for a week. ASEAN was founded on August 8, 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand by the five original members namely Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Besides the founding members, ASEAN now includes Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Viet Nam.(Source: ASEAN Secretariat News)

(Source: ASEAN Secretariat News)

(16)

ASEAN UPDATES 14

The latest ASEAN statistics showed that in 2013, the region recorded real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth of 5.1%, with international merchandise trade and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), posting an increase of 1.4% and 7.1%, respectively. In terms of nominal GDP, ASEAN GDP increased from US$2.3 trillion in 2012 to US$2.4 trillion in 2013, with the per capita GDP reaching US$3,837 in 2013 from US$3,761 in 2012. Indonesia was the biggest economy in ASEAN, with US$863 billion, followed by Thailand at US$388 billion and Malaysia with US$312 billion.

In terms of per capita GDP, Singapore topped the rest of the ASEAN Member States, with US$55,183 followed by Brunei Darussalam with US$39,677. Both countries also registered lower inflation rates at 1.5% and 0.2%, respectively.

In 2013 ASEAN international merchandise trade amounted to US$2.5 trillion, with total export receipts of US$1.3 trillion and import payments of US$1.2 trillion.

Trade among ASEAN Member States represented 24.2% of the region’s total trade. China, the biggest trade partner, cornered 12% of exports and 16% of imports. Other leading trade partners include European Union, Japan, and USA.

Electrical machinery and equipment were the top export earner at US$277 billion while mineral fuels, mineral oils and product of their distillation were the highest imported commodity products at US$274 billion.

Inward flows of FDI in ASEAN rose from US$114 billion in 2012 to US$122 billion in 2013. Intra-ASEAN investments grew steadily in recent years although share to total ASEAN FDI inflows remained at around 17 percent. During the period 2011-2013, ASEAN received the highest FDI from European Union and Japan, accounting for almost 40 percent of the total ASEAN FDI inflows. In 2013, European Union’s FDI represented 22% of total ASEAN FDI inflows, followed by Japan (18.7%) and ASEAN. (Source: ASEAN Secretariat News)

ASEAN Statistics Releases Latest Economic Updates

참조

관련 문서

The index is calculated with the latest 5-year auction data of 400 selected Classic, Modern, and Contemporary Chinese painting artists from major auction houses..

The key issue is whether HTS can be defined as the 6th generation of violent extremism. That is, whether it will first safely settle as a locally embedded group

Modern Physics for Scientists and Engineers International Edition,

They also use a lot of chemicals to make the cotton into a soft and

Five days later, on 15 January 1975, the Portuguese government signed an agreement with the MPLA, FNLA and UNITA providing for Angola to receive its independence on 11

Usefulness of co-treatment with immunomodulators in patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with scheduled infliximab maintenance therapy.. Oussalah A, Chevaux JB, Fay

Inclusion and Inclusiveness: Shared Vision of Youth for Local, National, and Global Village Inclusion at large stands for embracing populations with disabilities and

웹 표준을 지원하는 플랫폼에서 큰 수정없이 실행 가능함 패키징을 통해 다양한 기기를 위한 앱을 작성할 수 있음 네이티브 앱과