INTRODUCTION professor of international politics at
the University of Western
The Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) is a regional
grouping that promotes economic,
political, and security cooperation
among its ten members: Brunei,
Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos,
Malaysia, Myanmar, the
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand,
and Vietnam. ASEAN countries
have a population of nearly 640
million people [PDF] and a
combined GDP of $2.57 trillion.
The group has spurred economic
integration, signing six free-trade
agreements with other regional
economies. Yet experts say
ASEAN’s impact is limited by a
lack of strategic vision, diverging
national priorities, and weak
leadership. The bloc’s biggest
challenge is negotiating a unified
approach to China, particularly in
response to its widespread maritime
claims in the South China Sea.
ASEAN is chaired by an annually
rotating presidency assisted by
a secretariat based in Jakarta,
Indonesia. Decisions are reached
through consultation and consensus
guided by the principles of
noninterference in internal affairs
and the peaceful resolution of
conflicts. Some experts see this
approach to decision-making as a
chief drawback for the
organization. “The emphasis on
consensus, not losing face, and
voluntarism has meant that
the politics of the lowest common
denominator [PDF] has tended to
prevail, and difficult problems have
been avoided rather than
confronted,” writes Mark Beeson,
Australia, Perth, in a 2016 journal
article.
Other experts say ASEAN has
contributed to regional stability by
building much-needed norms and
fostering a neutral environment to
address shared challenges. “In
Asia, talking and relationship
building is half the challenge to
solving problems,” says Murray
Hiebert, senior advisor and deputy
director of the Southeast Asia
Program at the Washington-based
Center for Strategic and
International Studies.
Formed in 1967, ASEAN united
Indonesia, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Singapore, and
Thailand to try to reduce regional
hostilities and to fight the potential
threat of communist-led
insurgencies at the height of the
U.S. war in Vietnam. The five
founding members sought a
community to promote political and
social stability amid rising tensions
among the Asia-Pacific’s post-
colonial states. In 1976, the
members signed the Treaty of
Amity and Cooperation,
emphasizing ASEAN’s promotion
of peace, friendship, and
cooperation to build solidarity.
Membership doubled by the early
1990s, boosted in part by changing
conditions following the end of the
Vietnam War in 1975 and the Cold
War in 1991. With the addition of
Brunei (1984), Vietnam (1995),
Laos and Myanmar (1997), and
Cambodia (1999), the group started
to launch initiatives to boost
regionalism. The members signed a
deal in 1995 to create a nuclear-free
zone in Southeast Asia, committing
to refrain from the use of nuclear
weapons, including on land and in
maritime territories.
Faced with the 1997 Asian
financial crisis, ASEAN members
moved to integrate their economies
to mitigate future economic
turmoil. The Chiang Mai
Initiative [PDF], for example, was
an agreement among ASEAN and
China, Japan, and South Korea to
provide financial support through
currency swaps. ASEAN states also
signed a declaration on joint action
to counter terrorism in the
aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in the
United States to bolster national
and regional mechanisms and
increase information sharing.
In 2007, the ten members adopted
the ASEAN Charter [PDF], a
constitutional document, providing
the grouping with legal status and
revamping its institutions. The
charter enshrines core ASEAN
principles and delineates
requirements for membership. (East
Timor first submitted its
application for ASEAN
membership in 2011 but not all
members back its addition to the
block.) The charter also originally
included provisions for sanctions
and a system to monitor
compliance of ASEAN agreements,
but those were dropped amid
internal objections.
In Asia, talking and relationship
building is half the challenge to
solving problems.
Murray Hiebert, Senior Advisor and Deputy
Director of the Southeast Asia Program,
Center for Strategic and International
Studies
The charter set out a blueprint for a
community built on three branches:
the ASEAN Economic
Community (AEC), the
ASEAN Political-Security
Community, and the
ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community. Developments on the
economic front have born the most
fruit; in 2017 and 2018, the bloc’s
economy is expected to grow by
5.7 percent, according to the Asian
Development Bank. The
AEC’s four pillars [PDF] are: the
creation of a single market with the
free flow of goods, services,
investment, and skilled labor; fair
economic competition; sustainable
and equitable economic
development; and further
integrating ASEAN into the global
economy. Yet some of the region’s
most important industries are not
covered by preferential trade
measures, and the income
inequality gap among ASEAN
members could make economic
integration more costly.
Still, some experts see the AEC as
a potential catalyst for intensifying
economic integration. “The
ASEAN economic community is a
major project. Its realization will
radically change the region’s
economic and political landscape.
The challenges are equally great,”
said Hadi Soesastro, executive
director of the Centre for Strategic
and International Studies, Jakarta,
in 2007 when plans for the
economic community were
adopted.
Since the start of the ASEAN free
trade area in 1993, intra-ASEAN
trade has grown from 19.2
percent [PDF] to 25.9
percent [PDF] in 2016. Across the
grouping, more than 90 percent of
goods are traded with no
tariffs [PDF]. The grouping has
also prioritized eleven sectors in
goods and services for integration,
including electronics, automotives,
rubber-based products, textiles and
apparels, agro-based products, and
tourism. ASEAN members have
made strong efforts to facilitate
trade, says Hiebert, but challenges
remain.
ASEAN and Regional Security
ASEAN security challenges
include border disputes, human
trafficking, natural and manmade
disasters, food security, and cross-
border terrorism and insurgencies.
The vast majority of regional
security issues are dealt with
through ASEAN or the following
ASEAN-led forums:
ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF):
Launched in 1993, the twenty-
seven-member multilateral
grouping was developed to
facilitate cooperation on political
and security issues to contribute to
regional confidence-building and
preventive diplomacy. The forum
represents a wide array of voices—
including ASEAN, its dialogue
partners, North Korea, and
Pakistan, among others—yet it is
often mired in geopolitical disputes
that limit its effectiveness.
ASEAN Plus
Three: The consultative
group initiated in 1997 brings
together ASEAN’s ten members,
China, Japan, and South Korea.
The grouping was characterized as
“the most coherent and
substantive pan-Asian grouping”
by Evan A. Feigenbaum and Robert
A. Manning in a CFR report.
East Asia Summit (EAS): First held
in 2005, the summit seeks to
promote security and prosperity in
the region and is usually attended
by the heads of state from ASEAN,
Australia, China, India, Japan, New
Zealand, Russia, South Korea, and
the United States. ASEAN plays a
central role as the agenda-
setter. “The summit remains the
only opportunity for the president
of the United States to sit down and
collectively engage his Asia-Pacific
counterparts on the main political
and security issues of the day,”
write Vikram Singh of the Center
for American Progress and Lindsey
Ford of the Asia Society Policy
Institute.
Despite the prevalence of
diplomatic forums, disagreements
on security issues haunt ASEAN
unity. Its most glaring challenge is
finding a joint response to the rise
of China. “China’s re-emergence as
the major power in the East Asia
region is not only likely to
transform Southeast Asia’s
relations with China, but also
perhaps the internal relations of
ASEAN itself” [PDF], writes
Beeson, of the University of
Western Australia.
The emphasis on consensus,
not losing face, and
voluntarism has meant that
difficult problems have been
avoided.
Mark Beeson, Professor of International
Politics, University of Western Australia,
Perth
Maritime disputes in the South China
Sea have been the biggest irritant
among ASEAN members. Brunei,
Malaysia, the Philippines, and
Vietnam share overlapping claims to
features in contested waters with
China. For them, China’s moves to
reclaim land and to build artificial
islands are threatening and seen as
violations of national sovereignty. For
other members, like Cambodia, the
tension in the South China Sea is
geographically distant and not as
relevant. In the absence of consensus,
efforts to make the Declaration of
Conduct of Parties in the South China
Sea between ASEAN and Beijing into
a binding code of conduct have been
futile. In response, a number of
claimants have appealed for greater
U.S. support. The United States has
responded by stepping up military
cooperation with ASEAN members
like the Philippines and Vietnam, and
heightening its maritime presence to
enforce freedom of navigation in
international waters. At the same
time, Southeast Asian nations have
also invested in modernizing their
militaries.
ASEAN members have been divided
by their ties with China and the
United States. The region overall is in
need of investment, trade, and
particularly infrastructure
development and China has moved to
fill these needs. But ASEAN
members are anxious of becoming
over reliant and dependent on China;
in turn, these nations “look to the
United States to hedge,” says CSIS’
Hiebert.
Boosting U.S.-ASEAN Ties
The United States is ASEAN’s fourth-
largest trading partner, after China
($346 billion), Japan ($239 billion),
and the European Union ($228
billion), with trade between the two
sides reaching more than $212
billion [PDF] in 2015. This accounts
for 9.4 percent of ASEAN’s total
trade. The United States also has
launched subregional and bilateral
initiatives to boost ties with Southeast
Asia, including the Lower Mekong
Initiative to deepen cooperation
between the United States and
ASEAN members Cambodia, Laos,
Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam on
issues related to the environment,
health, education, and infrastructure
development. Four ASEAN members
(Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and
Vietnam) also joined the initially
U.S.-led Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP), a free trade
agreement among twelve nations.
However, Washington’s withdrawal
from the TPP shortly after Donald J.
Trump’s inauguration in January 2017
could set back broader U.S. efforts to
demonstrate commitment to the
region.
The Barack Obama administration, as
part of its rebalance, also increased
U.S. participation in ASEAN
activities, including sending top-level
officials to regional summits, naming
a resident ambassador to ASEAN,
joining the Treaty of Amity and
Cooperation, and establishing a U.S.-
ASEAN annual summit. U.S. and
ASEAN leaders elevated their
relationship to a strategic partnership
in November 2015, followed by the
first standalone summit between
heads of state and government from
the United States and ASEAN
members in February 2016 in
Sunnylands, California. The Trump
administration has continued to send a
steady stream of high-ranking
officials to Southeast Asia, including
Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson, and Secretary
of Defense Jim Mattis. Though
Trump will make stops in Vietnam
and the Philippines on his upcoming
Asia visit, he will not attend the East
Asia Summit.
Disunity and Relevance
ASEAN brings together neighbors
with varying economic, political, and
social systems. Singapore boasts the
highest GDP per capita—nearly
$53,000 based on 2016 World Bank
figures—while Cambodia’s per capita
GDP is the lowest at less than $1,300.
The members’ political systems are
equally mixed with democracies,
communist, and authoritarian states.
Demographics vary across the region,
too; some countries are sparsely
populated, others are densely
populated with range of dominant
religious groups. Geographically,
ASEAN is a grouping of archipelago
nations, as well as continental land
masses with low plains and
mountainous terrain. Such diversity
means that full agreement on any
single issue can seem insurmountable.
While the South China Sea is the
main issue exposing the
organization’s rifts, progress has also
faltered on other important fronts,
like human rights. For example,
ASEAN has been divided over
addressing repression in member
states like Cambodia, and mass
migration triggered by harsh
crackdowns in Myanmar against
the Rohingya minority and
widespread charges of ethnic
cleansing.
Some experts have suggested that
ASEAN reimagine its framework and
decision-making practices. In 2012,
CFR’s Joshua Kurlantzick
recommended substantive changes to
enable the organization to lead
integration efforts in Asia. These
included strengthening its secretariat
and empowering a high-profile
secretary-general to speak on its
behalf; abandoning consensus
decision-making, and demonstrating
that ASEAN can build its own free
trade area. Others, like CSIS’s
Hiebert, see the organization taking
on a coalition-of-the-willing format in
which some of the group’s members
decide to act on certain issues,
like joint maritime patrol
initiatives currently underway, while
others will join later once they are
ready.
https://www.cfr.org/
backgrounder/asean-
association-
southeast-asian-
nations

History
The Founding of ASEAN
On 8 August 1967, five leaders – the Foreign
Ministers of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines,
Singapore and Thailand – sat down together in
the main hall of the Department of Foreign
Affairs building in Bangkok, Thailand and signed
a document. By virtue of that document, the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) was born. The five Foreign Ministers
who signed it – Adam Malik of Indonesia,
Narciso R. Ramos of the Philippines, Tun Abdul
Razak of Malaysia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore,
and Thanat Khoman of Thailand – would
subsequently be hailed as the Founding Fathers
of probably the most successful inter-
governmental organization in the developing
world today. And the document that they signed
would be known as the ASEAN Declaration.
It was a short, simply-worded document
containing just five articles. It declared the
establishment of an Association for Regional
Cooperation among the Countries of Southeast
Asia to be known as the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and spelled
out the aims and purposes of that Association.
These aims and purposes were about
cooperation in the economic, social, cultural,
technical, educational and other fields, and in
the promotion of regional peace and stability
through abiding respect for justice and the rule
of law and adherence to the principles of the
United Nations Charter. It stipulated that the
Association would be open for participation by
all States in the Southeast Asian region
subscribing to its aims, principles and purposes.
It proclaimed ASEAN as representing “the
collective will of the nations of Southeast Asia to
bind themselves together in friendship and
cooperation and, through joint efforts and
sacrifices, secure for their peoples and for
posterity the blessings of peace, freedom and
prosperity.”
It was while Thailand was brokering
reconciliation among Indonesia, the Philippines
and Malaysia over certain disputes that it
dawned on the four countries that the moment
for regional cooperation had come or the future
of the region would remain uncertain. Recalls
one of the two surviving protagonists of that
historic process, Thanat Khoman of Thailand:
“At the banquet marking the reconciliation
between the three disputants, I broached the
idea of forming another organization for regional
cooperation with Adam Malik. Malik agreed
without hesitation but asked for time to talk with
his government and also to normalize relations
with Malaysia now that the confrontation was
over. Meanwhile, the Thai Foreign Office
prepared a draft charter of the new institution.
Within a few months, everything was ready. I
therefore invited the two former members of the
Association for Southeast Asia (ASA), Malaysia
and the Philippines, and Indonesia, a key
member, to a meeting in Bangkok. In addition,
Singapore sent S. Rajaratnam, then Foreign
Minister, to see me about joining the new set-up.
Although the new organization was planned to
comprise only the ASA members plus Indonesia,
Singapore’s request was favorably considered.”
And so in early August 1967, the five Foreign
Ministers spent four days in the relative isolation
of a beach resort in Bang Saen, a coastal town
less than a hundred kilometers southeast of
Bangkok. There they negotiated over that
document in a decidedly informal manner which
they would later delight in describing as “sports-
shirt diplomacy.” Yet it was by no means an
easy process: each man brought into the
deliberations a historical and political
perspective that had no resemblance to that of
any of the others. But with goodwill and good
humor, as often as they huddled at the
negotiating table, they finessed their way
through their differences as they lined up their
shots on the golf course and traded wisecracks
on one another’s game, a style of deliberation
which would eventually become the ASEAN
ministerial tradition.
Now, with the rigors of negotiations and the
informalities of Bang Saen behind them, with
their signatures neatly attached to the ASEAN
Declaration, also known as the Bangkok
Declaration, it was time for some formalities.
The first to speak was the Philippine Secretary
of Foreign Affairs, Narciso Ramos, a one-time
journalist and long-time legislator who had given
up a chance to be Speaker of the Philippine
Congress to serve as one of his country’s first
diplomats. He was then 66 years old and his
only son, the future President Fidel V. Ramos,
was serving with the Philippine Civic Action
Group in embattled Vietnam. He recalled the
tediousness of the negotiations that preceded
the signing of the Declaration that “truly taxed
the goodwill, the imagination, the patience and
understanding of the five participating Ministers.”
That ASEAN was established at all in spite of
these difficulties, he said, meant that its
foundations had been solidly laid. And he
impressed it on the audience of diplomats,
officials and media people who had witnessed
the signing ceremony that a great sense of
urgency had prompted the Ministers to go
through all that trouble. He spoke darkly of the
forces that were arrayed against the survival of
the countries of Southeast Asia in those
uncertain and critical times.
“The fragmented economies of Southeast Asia,”
he said, “(with) each country pursuing its own
limited objectives and dissipating its meager
resources in the overlapping or even conflicting
endeavors of sister states carry the seeds of
weakness in their incapacity for growth and their
self-perpetuating dependence on the advanced,
industrial nations. ASEAN, therefore, could
marshal the still untapped potentials of this rich
region through more substantial united action.”
When it was his turn to speak, Adam Malik,
Presidium Minister for Political Affairs and
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, recalled
that about a year before, in Bangkok, at the
conclusion of the peace talks between Indonesia
and Malaysia, he had explored the idea of an
organization such as ASEAN with his Malaysian
and Thai counterparts. One of the “angry young
men” in his country’s struggle for independence
two decades earlier, Adam Malik was then 50
years old and one of a Presidium of five led by
then General Soeharto that was steering
Indonesia from the verge of economic and
political chaos. He was the Presidium’s point
man in Indonesia’s efforts to mend fences with
its neighbors in the wake of an unfortunate
policy of confrontation. During the past year, he
said, the Ministers had all worked together
toward the realization of the ASEAN idea,
“making haste slowly, in order to build a new
association for regional cooperation.”
Adam Malik went on to describe Indonesia’s
vision of a Southeast Asia developing into “a
region which can stand on its own feet, strong
enough to defend itself against any negative
influence from outside the region.” Such a
vision, he stressed, was not wishful thinking, if
the countries of the region effectively cooperated
with each other, considering their combined
natural resources and manpower. He referred to
differences of outlook among the member
countries, but those differences, he said, would
be overcome through a maximum of goodwill
and understanding, faith and realism. Hard work,
patience and perseverance, he added, would
also be necessary.
The countries of Southeast Asia should also be
willing to take responsibility for whatever
happens to them, according to Tun Abdul
Razak, the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia,
who spoke next. In his speech, he conjured a
vision of an ASEAN that would include all the
countries of Southeast Asia. Tun Abdul Razak
was then concurrently his country’s Minister of
Defence and Minister of National Development.
It was a time when national survival was the
overriding thrust of Malaysia’s relations with
other nations and so as Minister of Defence, he
was in charge of his country’s foreign affairs. He
stressed that the countries of the region should
recognize that unless they assumed their
common responsibility to shape their own
destiny and to prevent external intervention and
interference, Southeast Asia would remain
fraught with danger and tension. And unless
they took decisive and collective action to
prevent the eruption of intra-regional conflicts,
the nations of Southeast Asia would remain
susceptible to manipulation, one against
another.
“We the nations and peoples of Southeast Asia,”
Tun Abdul Razak said, “must get together and
form by ourselves a new perspective and a new
framework for our region. It is important that
individually and jointly we should create a deep
awareness that we cannot survive for long as
independent but isolated peoples unless we also
think and act together and unless we prove by
deeds that we belong to a family of Southeast
Asian nations bound together by ties of
friendship and goodwill and imbued with our own
ideals and aspirations and determined to shape
our own destiny”. He added that, “with the
establishment of ASEAN, we have taken a firm
and a bold step on that road”.
For his part, S. Rajaratnam, a former Minister of
Culture of multi-cultural Singapore who, at that
time, served as its first Foreign Minister, noted
that two decades of nationalist fervor had not
fulfilled the expectations of the people of
Southeast Asia for better living standards. If
ASEAN would succeed, he said, then its
members would have to marry national thinking
with regional thinking.
“We must now think at two levels,” Rajaratnam
said. “We must think not only of our national
interests but posit them against regional
interests: that is a new way of thinking about our
problems. And these are two different things and
sometimes they can conflict. Secondly, we must
also accept the fact, if we are really serious
about it, that regional existence means painful
adjustments to those practices and thinking in
our respective countries. We must make these
painful and difficult adjustments. If we are not
going to do that, then regionalism remains a
utopia.”
S. Rajaratnam expressed the fear, however, that
ASEAN would be misunderstood. “We are not
against anything”, he said, “not against
anybody”. And here he used a term that would
have an ominous ring even today: balkanization.
In Southeast Asia, as in Europe and any part of
the world, he said, outside powers had a vested
interest in the balkanization of the region. “We
want to ensure,” he said, “a stable Southeast
Asia, not a balkanized Southeast Asia. And
those countries who are interested, genuinely
interested, in the stability of Southeast Asia, the
prosperity of Southeast Asia, and better
economic and social conditions, will welcome
small countries getting together to pool their
collective resources and their collective wisdom
to contribute to the peace of the world.”
The goal of ASEAN, then, is to create, not to
destroy. This, the Foreign Minister of Thailand,
Thanat Khoman, stressed when it was his turn
to speak. At a time when the Vietnam conflict
was raging and American forces seemed forever
entrenched in Indochina, he had foreseen their
eventual withdrawal from the area and had
accordingly applied himself to adjusting
Thailand’s foreign policy to a reality that would
only become apparent more than half a decade
later. He must have had that in mind when, on
that occasion, he said that the countries of
Southeast Asia had no choice but to adjust to
the exigencies of the time, to move toward
closer cooperation and even integration.
Elaborating on ASEAN objectives, he spoke of
“building a new society that will be responsive to
the needs of our time and efficiently equipped to
bring about, for the enjoyment and the material
as well as spiritual advancement of our peoples,
conditions of stability and progress. Particularly
what millions of men and women in our part of
the world want is to erase the old and obsolete
concept of domination and subjection of the past
and replace it with the new spirit of give and
take, of equality and partnership. More than
anything else, they want to be master of their
own house and to enjoy the inherent right to
decide their own destiny …”
While the nations of Southeast Asia prevent
attempts to deprive them of their freedom and
sovereignty, he said, they must first free
themselves from the material impediments of
ignorance, disease and hunger. Each of these
nations cannot accomplish that alone, but by
joining together and cooperating with those who
have the same aspirations, these objectives
become easier to attain. Then Thanat Khoman
concluded: “What we have decided today is only
a small beginning of what we hope will be a long
and continuous sequence of accomplishments
of which we ourselves, those who will join us
later and the generations to come, can be proud.
Let it be for Southeast Asia, a potentially rich
region, rich in history, in spiritual as well as
material resources and indeed for the whole
ancient continent of Asia, the light of happiness
and well-being that will shine over the uncounted
millions of our struggling peoples.”
The Foreign Minister of Thailand closed the
inaugural session of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations by presenting each of
his colleagues with a memento. Inscribed on the
memento presented to the Foreign Minister of
Indonesia, was the citation, “In recognition of
services rendered by His Excellency Adam Malik
to the ASEAN organization, the name of which
was suggested by him.”
And that was how ASEAN was conceived, given
a name, and born. It had been barely 14 months
since Thanat Khoman brought up the ASEAN
idea in his conversations with his Malaysian and
Indonesian colleagues. In about three more
weeks, Indonesia would fully restore diplomatic
relations with Malaysia, and soon after that with
Singapore. That was by no means the end to
intra-ASEAN disputes, for soon the Philippines
and Malaysia would have a falling out on the
issue of sovereignty over Sabah. Many disputes
between ASEAN countries persist to this day.
But all Member Countries are deeply committed
to resolving their differences through peaceful
means and in the spirit of mutual
accommodation. Every dispute would have its
proper season but it would not be allowed to get
in the way of the task at hand. And at that time,
the essential task was to lay the framework of
regional dialogue and cooperation.
The two-page Bangkok Declaration not only
contains the rationale for the establishment of
ASEAN and its specific objectives. It represents
the organization’s modus operandi of building on
small steps, voluntary, and informal
arrangements towards more binding and
institutionalized agreements. All the founding
member states and the newer members have
stood fast to the spirit of the Bangkok
Declaration. Over the years, ASEAN has
progressively entered into several formal and
legally-binding instruments, such as the 1976
Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast
Asia and the 1995 Treaty on the Southeast Asia
Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone.
Against the backdrop of conflict in the then
Indochina, the Founding Fathers had the
foresight of building a community of and for all
Southeast Asian states. Thus the Bangkok
Declaration promulgated that “the Association is
open for participation to all States in the
Southeast Asian region subscribing to the
aforementioned aims, principles and purposes.”
ASEAN’s inclusive outlook has paved the way
for community-building not only in Southeast
Asia, but also in the broader Asia Pacific region
where several other inter-governmental
organizations now co-exist.
The original ASEAN logo presented five brown
sheaves of rice stalks, one for each founding
member. Beneath the sheaves is the legend
“ASEAN” in blue. These are set on a field of
yellow encircled by a blue border. Brown stands
for strength and stability, yellow for prosperity
and blue for the spirit of cordiality in which
ASEAN affairs are conducted. When ASEAN
celebrated its 30th Anniversary in 1997, the
sheaves on the logo had increased to ten –
representing all ten countries of Southeast Asia
and reflecting the colors of the flags of all of
them. In a very real sense, ASEAN and
Southeast Asia would then be one and the
same, just as the Founding Fathers had
envisioned.
This article is based on the first chapter
of ASEAN at 30, a publication of the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations in commemoration
of its 30th Anniversary on 8 August 1997, written
by Jamil Maidan Flores and Jun Abad.
Further readings in ASEAN History:
Thanat Khoman, “ASEAN Conception and
Evolution”, in the ASEAN Reader, Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, 1992.
S. Rajaratnam, “ASEAN: The Way Ahead”, in
The ASEAN Reader, Institute of Southeast
Asian Studies, Singapore, 1992.
The motto of ASEAN is “One
Vision, One Identity, One
Community”.
GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF THE ASEAN
FLAG
1. The ASEAN Flag is a symbol of Member
States’ unity and support for the
principles and endeavours of ASEAN
and is a means to promote greater
ASEAN awareness and solidarity.
2. The ASEAN Flag represents a stable,
peaceful, united and dynamic ASEAN.
The colours of the Flag – blue, red,
white and yellow – represent the main
colours of the flags of all the ASEAN
Member States.
3. The blue represents peace and stability.
Red depicts courage and dynamism,
white shows purity and yellow
symbolises prosperity.
4. The stalks of padi in the centre of the
Emblem represent the dream of
ASEAN’s Founding Fathers for an
ASEAN comprising all the countries in
Southeast Asia, bound together in
friendship and solidarity.
5. The circle represents the unity of
ASEAN.
6. The ASEAN Flag is the reserved
copyright of ASEAN.
7. The specifications of the ASEAN Flag
are annexed.
A. Dignity of the ASEAN Flag
8. The ASEAN Flag shall be treated with
respect and shall not be subjected to
any indignity.
B. Use of the ASEAN Flag
B.1. Use of the ASEAN Flag by ASEAN
Member States
9. ASEAN Member States shall use the
ASEAN Flag in the manner specified
under these guidelines that include the
following:
a. The ASEAN Flag shall be
displayed at all ASEAN National
Secretariats.
b. The ASEAN Flag shall be
displayed on a permanent basis
at Diplomatic and Consular
Missions of ASEAN Member
States alongside the national
flag. The ASEAN Flag shall be
displayed by the ASEAN
Member States in third countries
which are recognised by all
ASEAN Member States.
c. The ASEAN Flag shall be
displayed alongside the national
flag in the following manner:
d. The ASEAN Flag shall be displayed
during ASEAN meetings, ASEAN Day
Celebrations, ceremonies and
functions held in Member States.
e. The display of the ASEAN Flag
shall be in accordance with national
laws and regulations of the respective
countries and the provisions under
these Guidelines.
B.2. Use of the ASEAN Flag by the ASEAN
Secretariat
10. The ASEAN Secretariat shall use the
ASEAN Flag in the manner specified
under these guidelines that include the
following:
 a. Display at the Secretariat
buildings and residence of the
Secretary-General;
b. During ASEAN meetings
c. On the official vehicle of the
Secretary-General of ASEAN
during official functions; and
d. During ASEAN Day
celebrations, official functions,
ceremonies, exhibitions,
gatherings or any other
occasions organised by the
ASEAN Secretariat in its effort
to promote the interest of
ASEAN.
B.3. Use of the ASEAN Flag by ASEAN
Committees in Third Countries
11. ASEAN Committees in Third Countries
shall also display the ASEAN Flag
during ASEAN Day celebrations, official
functions, ceremonies, exhibitions,
gatherings or any other occasions in its
effort to promote the interest of ASEAN.
B.4. Use of the ASEAN Flag by ASEAN
institutions
the funeral. Under exceptional
circumstances, it may be flown at half-
mast for a period of three days
immediately after the death and during
the period of the funeral.
16. When the ASEAN Flag is flown at half-
mast at the ASEAN Secretariat building
and other ASEAN institutional buildings,
no other flag will be displayed.
17. Member States will decide if the ASEAN
Flag should be flown at half-mast in their
respective countries as well as the
period of mourning.
C. Position of ASEAN Flag in the Flag
Arrangements for ASEAN Meetings
18. The ASEAN outdoor/venue and room
flag shall be displayed together with the
flags of ASEAN Member States in
alphabetical order, based on the names
of Member States, starting from Brunei
Darussalam on the extreme left and with
the ASEAN Flag always on the extreme
right after the national flag of Viet Nam,
in the following manner:
Diagram 1: Outdoor Flags Diagram

12. ASEAN institutions shall display the

ASEAN Flag at their premises as well as
during ASEAN meetings, ASEAN Day
celebrations, official functions,
ceremonies, exhibitions, gatherings or
any other occasions in its effort to
promote the interest of ASEAN.

B.5. Use of the ASEAN Flag by Countries,

International Organisations and Entities 19. When placed with the flag of a Dialogue
Associated with ASEAN Partner, the ASEAN Flag along with the
flags of ASEAN Member States shall be
displayed in the following manner:
13. Countries which have relations with
Diagram 2: Venue Flags
ASEAN, International Organisations
(Outdoor/Indoor)
which work closely with ASEAN and
entities associated with ASEAN may
display the ASEAN Flag in support of
activities related to ASEAN.

B.6. Use of the ASEAN Flag in Mourning

14. Upon the passing of a Head of State or

Government of a Member State, the
ASEAN Flag will be flown at half-mast at
the ASEAN Secretariat building and
other ASEAN institutional buildings for a
period of three days. The ASEAN Flag
may also be flown at half-mast in special
circumstances including natural
calamities in ASEAN Member States, 20. The ASEAN table flag shall be displayed
upon the approval of all ASEAN at the left side of the name plaque of the
Member States. ASEAN Secretariat, in the following
15. Should the procedure in paragraph 14 manner:
prove not be practical due to weather
conditions or other reasons, the ASEAN
Flag may be flown at half-mast for a
period of three days during the period of
D. Disposal of Worn Flag
21. When the ASEAN Flag has become
worn or torn or frayed, it shall not be
displayed, and shall be properly
disposed of.
E. Approval of and Amendments to the
Guidelines
22. The Guidelines shall be approved by the
ASEAN Coordinating Council (ACC).
23. Any Member State may propose
amendments to the Guidelines, which
shall be submitted to the Committee of
Permanent Representatives (CPR) for
its consideration and agreed upon by
consensus. The agreed amendments
shall be submitted to the ASEAN
Coordinating Council (ACC) for notation,
and thereafter come into immediate
effect.
Guidelines on the Use of the ASEAN Emblem
1. The ASEAN Emblem shall be the official
emblem of ASEAN.
2. The ASEAN Emblem represents a
stable, peaceful, united and dynamic
ASEAN. The colours of the Emblem —
blue, red, white and yellow — represent
the main colours of the state crests of all
the ASEAN Member States.
3. The blue represents peace and stability.
Red depicts courage and dynamism,
white shows purity and yellow
symbolises prosperity.
4. The stalks of padi in the centre of the
Emblem represent the dream of
ASEAN’s Founding Fathers for an
ASEAN comprising all the countries in
Southeast Asia, bound together in
friendship and solidarity
5. The circle represents the unity of
ASEAN.
6. The ASEAN Emblem is the reserved
copyright of ASEAN.
A. Use of the ASEAN Emblem
7. The ASEAN Emblem shall be used in a
manner that promotes ASEAN and its
purposes and principles. It shall not be
used for political purposes or for
activities that harm the dignity of
ASEAN.
8. The ASEAN Emblem shall not be used
for commercial purposes unless the
entities concerned obtain official
approval through the procedures
stipulated in Article A.4.
A.1. Use of the ASEAN Emblem by ASEAN
Member States
9. ASEAN Member States are encouraged
to use the ASEAN Emblem in official
functions relating to ASEAN.
10. The ASEAN Emblem shall be placed to
the right of the ASEAN Member States’
National Symbols, as seen by the
viewer.
A.2. Use of the ASEAN Emblem by the
ASEAN Secretariat
11. The ASEAN Secretariat shall use the
ASEAN Emblem in the manner
considered appropriate by the
Secretary-General which may include
the following:
a. Display at the Secretariat
buildings and residence of the
Secretary-General;
b. Use in its official
correspondence as letterhead;
c. Use as the official seal for the
ASEAN Secretariat;
d. Use in its official publications,
stationery and souvenirs;
 e. Mark or engrave on properties
belonging to the ASEAN
Secretariat; and
f. Display at ASEAN official
functions.
A.3. Use of the ASEAN Emblem by Entities
Associated with ASEAN
12. Entities officially associated with ASEAN
as in Annex 2 of the ASEAN Charter
may use the ASEAN Emblem in their
official correspondences and meetings.
A.4. Use of the ASEAN Emblem by Other
Entities
13. Other entities based in an ASEAN
Member State shall submit their request
for the use of the ASEAN Emblem to the
ASEAN National Secretariat concerned.
14. Other entities based inside the ASEAN
region that also have
regional/international characteristics
and/or operations, shall submit their
request for the use of the ASEAN
Emblem to the Community Relations
Division of the ASEAN Secretariat, who
will subsequently refer their request to
the Committee of Permanent
Representatives to ASEAN for
consideration and approval.
18. Authorisation to use the ASEAN
Emblem does not confer on those to
whom it is granted any right of exclusive
use, nor does it allow them to
appropriate the Emblem or any similar
trademark or logo, either by registration
or any other means.
B. Reproduction of the ASEAN Emblem
19. The ASEAN Emblem shall be
reproduced in accordance with the
Specifications and Colours indicated in
the Annex.
C. Approval of and Amendments to the
Guidelines
20. The Guidelines shall be approved by the
ASEAN Coordinating Council (ACC).
21. Any Member State may propose
amendments to the Guidelines, which
shall be submitted to the Committee of
Permanent Representatives (CPR) for
its consideration and agreed upon by
consensus. The agreed amendments
shall be submitted to the ASEAN
Coordinating Council (ACC) for notation,
and thereafter come into immediate
effect.

Community Relations Division

The ASEAN Secretariat
70 A, Jl. Sisingamangaraja
Jakarta 12110
Indonesia
E-mail: public@asean.org

15. Other entities based outside the ASEAN

region shall submit their request for the
use of the ASEAN Emblem to the
Community Relations Division of the
ASEAN Secretariat.
16. Requests for the use of the ASEAN
Emblem shall be submitted in writing,
and accompanied with the following
information:
o organisational profile;
o nature and purpose of the
proposed activity;
o duration of the use of the
ASEAN Emblem; and
o prototype of the proposed use of
the ASEAN Emblem.
17. The ASEAN National Secretariats, the
Committee of Permanent
Representatives to ASEAN, and the
ASEAN Secretariat shall consider all Brunei Darussalam
requests under their specific jurisdiction
in accordance with paragraphs 13, 14
and 15, respectively. The approval
granted shall be exclusive to the
proposed activity. Such approval shall
not be extended to third parties.
Head of State : His Majesty Sultan Haji Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia
Hassanal Bolkiah Mu’izzaddin Waddaulah Website: www.kemlu.go.id

Capital : Bandar Seri Begawan

Lao PDR
National Flag : Click Here for detail
Specification.

Language(s) : Malay, English

Currency : B$ (Brunei Dollar)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade of Brunei Head of State : President Bounnhang Vorachith
Darussalam Website: www.mfa.gov.bn
Head of Government : Prime Minister Thongloun
Cambodia Sisoulith

Capital : Vientiane

National Flag : Click Here for detail

Specification.

Language : Lao

Head of State : His Majesty King Norodom Currency : Kip

Sihamoni
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lao PDR
Head of Government : Prime Minister Hun Sen Website: www.mofa.gov.la

Capital : Phnom Penh

Malaysia
National Flag : Click Here for detail
Specification.

Language : Khmer

Currency : Riel
Head of State : His Majesty Seri Paduka
Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong XV Sultan
Cooperation of Cambodia Muhammad V
Website: www.mfaic.gov.kh
Head of Government : The Honourable Tun Dr.
Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister
Indonesia
Capital : Kuala Lumpur

National Flag : Click Here for detail

Specification.

Language(s) : Malay, English, Chinese, Tamil

Currency : Ringgit
Head of State : President Joko Widodo
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Malaysia
Capital : Jakarta
Website: www.kln.gov.my

Language : Indonesian
ASEAN-Malaysia National Secretariat
Website: www.kln.gov.my/myasean
Currency : Rupiah
 National Flag : Click Here for detail
Myanmar Specification.

Language(s) : English, Malay, Mandarin, Tamil

Currency : S$ (Singapore Dollar)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Singapore

Website: www.mfa.gov.sg
Head of State : U Win Myint
Thailand
Capital : Nay Pyi Taw

National Flag : Click Here for detail

Specification.

Language : Myanmar

Currency : Kyat
Head of State : His Majesty King Maha
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Myanmar Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun
Website: www.mofa.gov.mm
Head of Government : Prime Minister General
Prayut Chan-o-cha
Philippines
Capital : Bangkok

National Flag : Click Here for detail

Specification.

Language : Thai
Head of State : President Rodrigo Roa Duterte
Currency : Baht
Capital : Manila
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand
National Flag : Click Here for detail Website: www.mfa.go.th
Specification.
Viet Nam
Language(s) : Filipino, English, Spanish

Currency : Peso

Department of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines

Website: www.dfa.gov.ph

Singapore
Head of State : Nguyen Phu Trong

Head of Government : Prime Minister Nguyen

Xuan Phuc

Capital : Ha Noi

National Flag : Click Here for detail

Head of State : President Halimah Yacob Specification.

Head of Government : Prime Minister Lee Hsien Language : Vietnamese

Loong
Currency : Dong
Capital : Singapore
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam
Website: www.mofa.gov.vn
According to Article 31 of the ASEAN Charter,
the Chairmanship of ASEAN shall rotate
annually, based on the alphabetical order of the
English names of Member States. A Member
State assuming the Chairmanship shall chair the
ASEAN Summit and related summits, the
ASEAN Coordinating Council, the three ASEAN
Community Councils, relevant ASEAN Sectoral
Ministerial Bodies and senior officials, and the
Committee of Permanent Representatives.
Thailand is the Chair of ASEAN for 2019 and the
theme of its ASEAN Chairmanship is “Advancing
Partnership for Sustainability”. For more
information
on Thailand chairmanship: https://www.asean20
19.go.th/en/
Previous and current Chairs of ASEAN over the
years:
Year Chair
Q1. What have been the recent significant
decisions made by the ASEAN Member
Countries regarding CEPT for AFTA?
The 26th Meeting of the ASEAN Economic
Ministers (AEM) in Chiang Mai, Thailand on 22-
23 September 1994 had agreed to accelerate
the implementation of CEPT for AFTA. The main
decisions were:
a. time frame for the implementation of
AFTA be shortened from 15 to 10 years
so that by 2003, all CEPT products will
have a tariff of 0-5%;
b. Unprocessed Agricultural Products be
included into the CEPT Scheme;
c. The Temporary Exclusion List be
phased out by 1 January 2000.
Q2. How will the time frame affect the
present ‘Fast’ and ‘Normal’ Track?
Given the decision to accelerate CEPT for
AFTA, the following are the revised guidelines to
reduce tariffs in the Fast and Normal Tracks:

2019 Thailand Normal Track

2018 Singapore
2017 Philippines  products with tariff rates above 20% will
2016 Lao PDR have their rates reduced to 20% by 1
2015 Malaysia January 1998 and subsequently from
2014 Myanmar 20% to 0-5% by 1 January 2003;
2013 Brunei  products with tariff rates at or below
20% will have their rates reduced to 0-
2012 Cambodia
5% by 1 January 2000.
2011 Indonesia
2010 Viet Nam
Fast Track
2009 Thailand
2008 Thailand
2007 Singapore  products with tariff rates above 20% will
2006 Philippines have their rates reduced to 0-5% by 1
January 2000:
2005 Malaysia
 Products with tariff rates at or below
2004 Lao PDR
20% will have their rates reduced to 0-
2003 Indonesia 5% by 1 January 1998.
2002 Cambodia
2001 Brunei Darussalam
New tariff reduction schedules are currently
2000 Singapore being drawn up for individual products by
1999 Philippines Member Countries and will be published in
1998 Viet Nam October 1995 by the ASEAN Secretariat in the
1997 Malaysia revised Products and Tariff Reduction
1996 Indonesia Programmes under the Common Effective
1995 Thailand Preferential Tariff Scheme (CEPT).
1992 Singapore
1987 Philippines Q3. How will the Temporary Exclusion List
1977 Malaysia be eliminated?
1976 Indonesia
Products, from the Temporary Exclusion List will
be phased into the Inclusion List in five equal
Questions and Answer installments annually. The first installment will be
effected on 1 January 1996. The last installment
will be effected on 1 January 2000.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
Q4. What tariff reduction schedules will
products transferred from the Temporary
Exclusion List have?
Products, once transferred into the Inclusion list,
are guided by the following:
a. Products with tariffs above 20% must
have tariffs of 20% by 1 January 1998.
Products above 20% and brought into
the Inclusion List after 1/1/98 must have
a tariff of 20% or less upon transferring.
Tariffs should be subsequently reduced
to 0-5% by 1 January 2003.
b. Products with tariff rates at or below
20%, the tariff rate should be reduced to
0-5% by 1 January 2003.
Q5. How will Unprocessed Agricultural
Products be phased into the CEPT Scheme?
Unprocessed Agricultural Products will be
divided into three separate lists i.e. those for
immediate inclusion, temporary exclusion and
those considered sensitive. Products brought
into the Inclusion and Exclusion Lists will be
subjected to the same conditions as other
Products in the lists respectively, these
conditions reflecting the latest decision by the
26th AEM. For products in the sensitive list,
appropriate mechanisms will be established to
phase them in.
Q6. What are sensitive agricultural products?
Sensitive agricultural products refer to
Unprocessed Agricultural Products submitted by
Member Countries which are considered
sensitive to them. These products need not be
the same for each country.
Q7. When will these new decisions, viz. new
time frame, inclusion of Unprocessed
Agricultural Products and elimination of
Temporary Exclusion List, be effected?
These new decisions will be effected by 1
January 1996.
Q8. Can products in the Temporary
Exclusion and Sensitive Lists enjoy
concessions?
Products in the Temporary Exclusion list cannot
enjoy concessions since only products in the
Inclusion List (i.e. with a tariff reductions
schedule) are eligible. Products in the Sensitive
List can enjoy concessions but will be subjected
to the CEPT rule for the exchange of
concessions.
Q9. Can Member Countries accelerate the
liberalisation process under the CEPT for
AFTA?
Yes, Member Countries can accelerate their
tariff reduction and/or include more than 20% of
their products in the Temporary Exclusion List
into the Inclusion List. The private sector,
through ASEAN-CCI, can propose an
acceleration to the Senior Economic Officials
Meeting (SEOM) via the AFTA Unit or the
National AFTA Units.
Q10. How will these decisions affect the
various ASEAN economic agreements?
These new decisions will affect both the ASEAN
Framework Agreement on Enhancing Economic
Cooperation of 1992 and the Agreement on the
Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT)
Scheme for the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA)
of 1992. These Agreements will be amended.
All past decisions by the ASEAN Member
Governments after 1992 which may affect the
Agreements will also be accounted for in the
amendment exercise.
Q11. What other decisions have been made
by the 26th AEM to support the acceleration
of CEPT for AFTA?
The 26th AEM had also agreed that:
a. the harmonisation of tariff
nomenclature, customs procedures and
valuation systems in ASEAN be
completed by the end of 1995;
b. an AFTA Unit in the ASEAN Secretariat
and National AFTA Units in the Member
Governments be established as
institutional infrastructure to support the
implementation of CEPT for AFTA.
ON-GOING IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Q12. When Member Countries effect
unilateral reductions in their tariffs, can they
enjoy CEPT concessions?
Assuming the product fulfills all the requirements
for CEPT concessions (i.e. the product is in the
Inclusion List with a tariff reduction schedule and
has a 40% ASEAN content), the product will be
eligible for CEPT concessions, subject to the
CEPT rule for the exchange of concessions.
Q13. When Most Favoured Nation (MFN) tariff
rates are revised by Member Countries
during the course of the year, when will
exporters/ importers be eligible to enjoy the
changes in concessions?
When tariff reduction schedules or MFN tariff
rates are changed, the eligibility of concessions
accorded under the CEPT will be affected.
Importers/exporters can claim concessions as
and when the new tariff rates are effected as
long as the products fulfills the conditions for the
enjoyment of concessions (see Q12). There is a
need for updating of the CEPT Concessions
Exchange Manual (CCEM) to reflect these latest
changes. The CCEM of each country depicts the
CEPT rate for each product and the ASEAN
Member Countries eligible for that rate (i.e.
concessions). If such revisions in the reduction
schedules or MFN tariff rates are effected during
the course of the year, modifications in the
eligibility of concessions can only be reflected in
the CCEM when they prepared at the end of
each calendar year.
Q14. is the ASEAN Preferential Trading
Arrangements (PTA) still effective?
The country with tariff rate reduced to 20% or
below has the option of imposing either the MFN
rate or the previous CEPT rate of above 20%. In
this case, the Sixth AFTA Council decided that
the country must revert to the previous CEPT
rate of above 20% (which is lower than the MFN
rate).
Q19. Can products in the Inclusion List be
transferred out into the Temporary Exclusion
or Sensitive Lists?

Yes, at the moment the PTA is still in force and
Countries can enjoy the margin of preference
(MOP) granted under that scheme. This is
because not all PTA products have been
included in the CEPT. The PTA will be phased-
out by 1 January 1996. The mechanism to
phase-out the PTA is currently being discussed.
Q15. Is the ‘CEPT Base Rate’ in the Products
and Tariff Reduction Programmes under the
Common Effective Preferential Tariff Scheme
(CEPT) (or Product List) the MFN rate?
Yes. However, there are certain qualifications to
this. First, for some PTA products in CEPT
Scheme, the base rate is the MFN rate after
accounting for the margin of preference (MOP).
Second, countries may have effected MFN
reductions after the publication of the Product
List. Therefore, the base rate may not be
reflective of the latest MFN rates of Member
Countries. In any case, traders are allowed to
choose the lowest rate applicable.
No. However, Article 6 on Emergency
Measures” of the CEPT Agreement provides
that member Countries can suspend
preferences provisionally and without
discrimination if a particular sector faces injury
or the threat of injury. The suspension of
privileges must however only be temporary.
Furthermore, the CEPT Agreement provides that
notification will have to be made to the AFTA
Council when Emergency Measures are taken,
and such action may be subject to consultations
between the affected parties. In the event when
the obligations of the CEPT Agreement are not
complied with by others, Member Countries can
also make proposals for consultations with the
other Member Countries, as provided for by
Article 8 on “Consultations” in the CEPT
Agreement, with the view to achieving
satisfactory adjustment of the matter
https://asean.org/asean/asean-chair/

Q16. Is the information contained in the

CEPT Products List up-to- date?

Not always for some products. However, the

ASEAN Secretariat makes periodic amendments
to the Products List. These amendments usually
embody modifications to tariff reduction
schedules, addition of products into the Inclusion
list or corrections to the previous Products List.
These amendments will be sent to the Product
List subscribers periodically.

Q17. Where can one obtain clarifications and

amplifications to the information contained
in the CEPT Products List?

One can either enquire at the respective

National AFTA Units in respective Member
Governments or the AFTA Unit at the ASEAN
Secretariat (the list of addresses and telephone
numbers appear in the “AFTA Unit and National
AFTA Units” section).

Q18. If the tariff rate of a country for a

particular product were to be reduced from
above 20% to 20% or below, what tariff rate
should be applied by that country if the
product was traded with another country
with tariff rates of above 20%?