THE recently held 38th and 39th Asean summits and those related signalled a new path in the convoluted spectrum of regional affairs, in the context of post pandemic recovery and security.

Topping the agenda are the two main issues of the Myanmar debacle and the hotly contested trilateral security pact of the United Kingdom, United States and Australia (Aukus), which was recently formed.

Asean was formed in the midst of worsening regional security during the Cold War, with the primary aim of preventing a domino effect of the expansion of communism that would engulf the entire region.

Since its first inception, Asean has been juggling to redefine and realign its purpose, relevance and critical role in adapting to the changing geopolitical and economic landscape.

Socio-economic and humanistic progress have been taking the centre stage in enhancing intra-region economic connectedness and inclusivity.

In this journey of economic cohesion and revitalisation, member states have been navigating through a treacherous path of securing national interests and survival, while balancing obligations to the Asean principles, all while pandering to the influence and adjustments of external rival states.

It is an open secret that – while member states continue to rely heavily on the benefits of the group to project common regional interests and goals – in individual capacity, conflicting arguments and policy directions, particularly in the security landscape, and alignment to competing powers contributed further to the worsening security climate.

The Aukus alliance has further exposed the gravity of the situation where, on one side, common projected reactions and stands are opposing in tone and express great concerns on Aukus’s immediate and protracted negative impact.

Whereas, on the other, defence and security policymakers are welcoming the prospect of a stabilising counterbalance assurance to the threat from China.

It remains ironic or counter productive for Asean to remain trapped in the chessboard of great powers – which is imploding right in the centre of the region – with its hands tied by the external pressures and the cards held by those powers, given its historical nature in warding off risks and threats of conflict.

The zone of peace, freedom and neutrality (Zopfan), the centrality of Asean, and its uniqueness have brought decades of relative peace and stability.

However, the nature of threats with the return of traditional high intensity conflicts and their convergence with non-conventional warfare have put the archaic model of strategic patience and non-binding centrality at serious risk of subjugation and degradation.

Lacking the inner resilience and capacity as a region, the region remains at the forefront of the next global flashpoint, either triggered by the evolving security dilemma within, or as the victim of the domino effect of neighbouring hotspots, the Taiwan Strait in particular.

In the age of state-led competition for power projection and expansion of economic interests and dominance, led by pursuit of resources and technology, the Indo-Pacific and the southeast Asian region remain the most vulnerable with increasing risks of deadly miscalculation.

Intensifying sabre-rattling, show of force and deterrence, covert testing of reactions, and readiness of rival states with dangerous military incursions are all the triggering factors for an eventual misstep that will lead to conflict, dragging in external powers and further destabilising the region with brinkmanship and a zero-sum game approach.

Already, the immediate repercussions and chain effects are magnified by the shift of focus to bolstering national defence and starting a new arms race, spiralling into an abyss of a never-ending security dilemma.

This is in part due to a deteriorating trust issue, and the lack of effort and investment in enhancing confidence-building measures and non-military co-operation, such as people to people ties and strengthening the other tracks of diplomacy.

Prospects of peace and the future stability of the region will continue to be dominated by the US-China rivalry.

The true impact of the scramble of formations to contain the threat of China – in the form of the Quad, Aukus and the regional bilateral arrangements – remains to be seen.

Whether they will be detrimental to the stability and peace, or utilised as the tool of deterrence in preventing further conflicts, the landscape and domain of the region will be altered along the lines of this new reality.

This is where Asean, as a resilient regional grouping with significant historical legacy, must step up in its reorientation and reimagination of its role.

It needs conviction and foresight to chart a new strategic path in providing a holistic, inclusive and peaceful means of diplomacy and dialogue in the engagement of its internal members and the external powers.

Deep-rooted systemic weaknesses and hindering factors cannot be solved with the reliance on old concepts and models of workings.

It will have to remain agile, adaptive, strategic and effective in anticipating risks and providing solutions based on the realities on the ground and the core elements of the needs, demands and interests of states.

National survival and sovereignty and the protection of national interests remain the paramount pursuit.

This is the first platform of conflict management that will need further recalibration and readjustment of understanding, trust, respect and acceptance, and the protection of the sanctity of each state’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty. – October 28, 2021.

* Collins Chong reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.