ASEAN Ignores Civil Society… Again

Posted by AsiaViews | Dec 10, 2017 | 0 |

By Eduardo C. Tadem*

The Philippine Daily Inquirer-4 Dec 2017

Malacañang’s spokesperson has termed Asean’s commemoration of its 50th year a “tremendous success,” but based it mainly on the absence of any “untoward incident” rather than on the concrete and clear outcomes. There were the usual platitudes of the ASEAN 2017 chair being finally recognized “not just as President of the Philippines [and] a leader of Southeast Asia but a recognized leader in the international community.” But then the same could be said of the 2016 host, the unrecognizable Lao prime minister, or, in 2015, the scandal-plagued Malaysian prime minister. So, judging ASEAN 2017 by the fact that “no untoward incident” took place is setting the bar rather low.

A more substantial view is needed to evaluate ASEAN’s performance, and it is in this measure that the regional alliance has been found wanting. For one, the agenda of creating a single market remains a pipe dream with intra-ASEAN trade stagnating at an average below 25 percent since 1995. Inequalities between and within countries are increasing. Singapore’s per capita GDP is 50 times higher than those of Cambodia and Myanmar and 30 times that of Laos. The average Gini index for ASEAN is close to 40, indicating high levels of intra-country inequalities. The official poverty rate may have improved at 14 percent or 90 million people, but is understated as it uses the old World Bank global poverty line of $1.25 rather than the 2015 updated one of $1.90. Over 50 percent of ASEAN’s workforce suffer from poverty-level wages, with women in a more vulnerable position. At 3 percent, ASEN governments’ spending on social protection is only half the minimum recommended by the International Labor Organization.

The rise of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements leads to greater concentration of wealth and power in the hands of giant corporations. ASEAN also ignores the wholesale displacement of peoples from their lands by development and corporate projects, thus spurring labor migration. In the meantime, the majority of migrant workers are stuck in low-skilled and precarious jobs.

ASEAN leaders have allowed the region to be a flashpoint for great power rivalries threatening peace and security while opening up their economies to plunder of their natural and human resources. At the same time, universal canons of human rights are ignored and violations by member-states routinely tolerated. Even as the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights remains toothless and impotent, governments are enacting laws and issuing decrees that further constrict civil society movements and peoples’ initiatives.

The ASEAN Civil Society Conference/ Asean Peoples’ Forum (ACSC/APF), the region’s major network of peoples’ organizations, social movements, and nongovernmental organizations, has been engaging ASEAN on these issues and concerns since 2005. It has taken ASEAN to task for ignoring the plight of the region’s marginalized and excluded sectors. These include the workers, urban poor, small farmers, fishers, women, indigenous peoples, LGBTI persons, youth and students, older persons, those with disabilities, and migrant workers.

In a 13-page statement issued at the close of the 31st ASEAN Summit last month, the ACSC/APF scored ASEAN’s “dominant development narrative that has bred extreme inequalities, extensive human rights violations, situations of conflict and violence, and wanton exploitation of natural resources that are overwhelming the region’s ecosystems.”

Through the years, “issues and concerns raised by civil society … continue to be ignored.” This is reflected in the “lack of meaningful dialogue, absence of opportunities for interface with officials, and inaction over the draft terms of reference on government-nongovernment relations.” More ominous, the ACSC/APF considers these signs as “evidence [of] the shrinking space for civil society to effectively shape the agenda and policies of ASEAN and their respective governments.”

*Eduardo C. Tadem, PhD, is co-convenor of the ACSC/APF 2017 Philippine National Organizing Committee, president of the Freedom from Debt Coalition, and retired professor of Asian studies, University of the Philippines Diliman.

(http://opinion.inquirer.net/109206/asean-ignores-civil-society#ixzz50dfNtpd9)

About The Author

AsiaViews

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Neigborhood Watch

Subscribe To Newsletter

POINTS TO PONDER

EXTRICATING NDONESIAN CHILDREN FROM ISIS INFLUENCE ABROAD

Indonesia urgently needs to revisit the possibility of repatriating the neediest of its young citizens stranded abroad, whose families had earlier joined ISIS. Most of these children are in camps in northern Syria but there are also small numbers in the Philippines, Afghanistan and Iraq. “Extricating Indonesian Children from ISIS Influence Abroad”, the latest report from the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) argues that the government could begin by bringing back small groups of unaccompanied children under ten years of age, who pose minimal security risk and are most vulnerable to deteriorating conditions in the camps.“The problem is that health and security conditions are worsening by the day in the Syrian camps, and the children are growing older,” says Dyah Kartika, IPAC analyst. “They need access to schools, a nurturing environment, and medical attention. If the government waits too long, the children will be further exposed to ISIS ideology.” The new report examines a 2019 list of Indonesians in camps and prisons run by the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The Indonesian government has been trying to verify their citizenship, but with pseudonyms, misspellings and bad transliterations, it is a daunting task. At the time the data was collected, between March and June 2019, there were 555 Indonesians in SDF camps and prisons, including 367 children. Among the children, approximately 277 were under the age of ten and 34 were unaccompanied. In June 2021, there are fewer than ten children who are both unaccompanied and under the age of ten that could be prioritized for return. Bringing back children of ISIS families is no easy task. The report analyses the main challenges faced by the Indonesian government. These include definitional issues, bureaucratic competition, the difficulty of verifying nationality, evaluating the toll of exposure to conflict, assessing security risk, and finding relatives or others willing to provide care once the children are returned. In addition, COVID has meant stringent restrictions on travel, placing further obstacles in the way of repatriation. There are several models for rehabilitation of children exposed to violent extremism in Indonesia that could be modified to accommodate the needs of children repatriated from abroad. The report examines these models and argues that the government does not need to have every detail of rehabilitation programs in place before it starts extricating children from ISIS influence. It can start by bringing back the most vulnerable children and then modify programs as needed.

“It’s important that the government see these children as victims” says Dyah. “They deserve a chance to be children again.”

ASEAN Ignores Civil Society… Again