Opción, Año 33, No. 85 (2018): 152-169
ISSN 1012-1587 / ISSNe: 2477-9385
Can Central Asia be integrated
as ASEAN?
Zhainara Iskakova
iskakovaj@gmail.com
Marat Sarsembayev
daneker@mail.ru
Academy of public administration under the President of the Republic of
Kazakhstan, Kazakhstan, 010000 Astana city, 33 Abai St.
Zarina Kakenova
L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Kazakhstan, 010000
Astana city, 2 Satpayev Str.
z_kakenova@mail.ru
Abstract
This article examines
the
role of the one of the most influential
contemporary regional
political and economic organization of the Association
of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as an example
for further integration of
Central Asian countries: Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and
Uzbekistan. The role
of
security
organizations
in the
context of integration
also has been used. Based on the findings of this paper, Asian countries have sufficient resources and motivation
to prepare for sustainable
continental convergence by establishing a meaningful relationship between the experiences of different regionalism
in Asia.
Keywords: ASEAN, integration, Central Asia, regionalism
Recibido: 10-01-2018 Aceptado: 09-03-2018
153
Zhainara Iskakova et al.
Opción, Año 34, No. 85 (2018): 152-169
¿Puede Asia
Central ser integrada como ASEAN?
Resumen
Este artículo examina el papel de la más influyente
organización
política y económica regional contemporánea de la Asociación de
Naciones del Sudeste Asiático (ASEAN por sus siglas en inglés) como un ejemplo para una mayor integración de los países de Asia Central: Kazajstán, Kirguistán, Tayikistán, Turkmenistán y Uzbekistán. También
se
ha utilizado el papel de las organizaciones de seguridad en el contexto de la integración. Con base en los hallazgos de este documento, los países asiáticos cuentan con suficientes recursos y motivación para prepararse
para una convergencia continental sostenible, estableciendo una relación
significativa entre las experiencias de diferente regionalismo en
Asia.
Palabras clave: ASEAN, integración, Asia Central, regionalism.
1. INTRODUCTION
In 1993 the leaders
of Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan agreed to call the region encompassing their individual nations “Central Asia”. However,
this initial enthusiasm
for
regionalism soon
dissipated
as the five former
Soviet republics grew gradually isolated from one another. Due to the region’s
strategic position and abundance
in natural resources such as natural gas and oil, several excessive powers have tried to promote regional organizations
to foster
cooperation between them and the region. As the Central Asian states ponder whether they should form their own regional grouping, ASEAN
could well be a model for them to seriously consider (LENT, 1958). The countries of the Central Asian Region (CAR) have a century-long history
of coexistence,
which is rooted in the distant past (OLCOTT, 1996). With
the collapse of Soviet Union in
1991, the
Central Asian states
faced
various challenges as economic, social, ecological and security issues. The signing in 1994 of the Treaty on the Creation of a common economic space between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan marked the beginning of the
creation of an integration association in the Central Asian
Rregion. On the
other
hand, these efforts on integration were not
successful as CA republics due to various reasons became progressively separated from one another. (ROY, 2007) argues that indeed, the integration
of Central Asia
is necessary in
the name of maintaining
stability and peace in the region, ensuring national security, enhancing
its role in resolving the problems in the world arena. The social stability of
Central
Asia
is guaranteed by the
cultural and political union of the Turkic, Iranian-Tajik
and Slavic peoples,
their ability
to get along
together, which has become part of the Eurasian culture. In addition,
Uzbek
researcher (SADRI, 1997) writes, "interests
of many world and regional powers are crossed in Central Asia. Accordingly, Central Asia
can
play an active role in the global geopolitical restructuring
that should
occur in the 21st century". Economic
integration as a form of government
plays an important role in the world. This issue is also topical for the
countries of Central Asia, for which ASEAN's regional integration can be
considered as an example (BOBOKULOV, 2006, ROY, 2007).
In general, ASEAN has demonstrated
itself as a successful regional
integration.
Currently, regional integration
is also necessary for the
countries of Central Asia. The transition to the integration process in
Central Asia needs implying
a gradual transition from simplified to more complicated relationships, while the interests of each member state needs to be taken into account. The economies of the Central Asian countries are
joint users of energy, transport and irrigation networks, gas and water
supply systems. Due
to this, it will be expedient to form a single economic space with a single trade and customs
zone, strategy
and
security. Countries
in Central Asia have a multi-level
economy. Integration will be
the
impetus for development
both
for developed countries and for less
develop (KUSHKUMBAYEV, 2013). Given the existing positive aspects and problems of regional cooperation in Central Asia, it is necessary
to develop a clear strategy for interstate interaction
between the countries, taking into account current and future interests, both single integration and individually all participants. Hence, the aim of this research is to analyze
in depth regional cooperation
in Central Asia and to define the role of the ASEAN particularly ASEAN WAY as a
vivid example of successful integration union in Asia.
2. METHODOLOGY
The key component of the proposed research is a method of system
analysis.
International
integration
processes are
complex phenomena
which require detailed
investigation of international relationships. Thus, it
seems that to define the role and place of the Central Asia’s
integration
prospects using the example of ASEAN’s way within a method of system analysis is the most appropriate,
which will allow detailed and intensive
analysis of this issue. The chosen method will provide comprehensive
study of international
relations and foreign policy of the states of Central Asia, revealing their interdependence with internal and external processes.
Due
to the nature of this paper, the best way to find answers to the research questions
is to
collect
qualitative empirical data.
As (HIRSJÄRVI, et al., 1997) mention, the basis for qualitative research is to gain holistic understanding about the phenomena. Also, the qualitative research emphasizes
the research
context,
interpretation
and understanding of the viewpoints of the participants of the
study. One important source of information about the companies operating in ASEAN region was Finland- ASEAN Trade Association, which members
are
the companies and private persons who do business with ASEAN member
countries.
3. WHAT IS ASEAN WAY?
The ASEAN Way is the official anthem of the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations. In 1967 members
of ASEAN came to a concept
which is defined as ASEAN WAY and includes norms of “informality,
non-interference, musyarawah
(consultation) and muafakah (consensus-
building)”. ACHARYA (2003)argues that there are three directives that ASEAN based on: closed door affairs, consensus decision making and non-interference in internal affairs. ASEAN WAY according to ACHARYA (2003) “a process of regional interactions and cooperation
based on discreteness, informality, consensus building and non-
confrontational
bargaining styles”. Also (ACHARYA, 2003) states that
ASEAN WAY consists of two norms: legal rational and social-cultural
norms, where legal norms means strict stickiness to the doctrine of non- interference.
In
terms of social norms it means special attitude to dispute
solve processes and cooperation. According to (BRESNAN, 2002) the key
factor that united ASEAN countries was a fear of communism
due to political
context of this organization when it emerged in 1960s. Second factor according to Bresnan that led to integration
of
the ASEAN was a will of political leaders. The most prominent heads of states like President Suharto of Indonesia, Prime Minister of Singapore
Lee
Kuan Yew and Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir Bresnan (BRESNAN,
2002)
facilitated smooth integration processes
that took place in 1980 in the
South East Asia. Taking into account religious diversity
in the region the
leaders of states could unite Muslim
Malaysia and Indonesia,
Buddhist
Thailand,
Christian Philippines
and secular
Singapore. Also
KHOO (2004) refers
to the third factor that brought ASEAN
together
is geopolitical luck. Indeed in 1980 during the Cold War ASEAN was lucky
to be on a winning edge. The strong US support to ASEAN gave
opportunity to cooperate with its allies like European Union, Japan,
South Korea, Canada, Australia
and New Zealand. These countries
since 1974 to
1991 became ASEAN dialogue partners.
KHOO (2004) argues that market-oriented
economic policies of ASEAN was fourth factor to ASEAN’s creation. Thus, he states that the
main reason of success was learning best practices from leading East
Asian economies like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Last
factor by Khoo
(2004) is
ASEAN –
Based
Regional Networks that became dialogue platforms to prevent conflicts in the region. Among them the most successful
projects are ASEAN Regional Forum, ASEM (Asia- Europe Meeting), ASEAN plus three (China, Japan and South Korea),
APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation). To wrap it all up ASEAN’s
successful activities influenced the whole region by bringing peace and
led to the creation of
new
institutions and
dialogue platforms within Southeast Asia. In general it can be claimed
that ASEAN WAY is
characterized by compromise
and
consultation,
consensus building,
ambiguity, avoidance
of strict reciprocity, and
rejection of
hard legalization (BOWLE, 1958). Based on this norm,
the ASEAN Way plays a role in
both
the decision-making process and conflict management
mechanism.
4. CENTRAL ASIA: ON THE WAY TO INTEGRATION
There are a number of definitions of integration given by various scientists investigating this
phenomenon. Some of them have become
classical and generally
accepted. Thus, Ernst Haas (1958), one of the
founders of the theory of integration,
defines it as a process in which
political actors in several separate national
entities
decide to transfer their
loyalty, expectations
and political activity to a new center whose
institutions possess or
require jurisdiction over
the preceding national
states. The end result of the process of political integration is a new political community
superimposed on previous communities. DEUTSCH
(2015) believed that it occurs through growing
cross-border communication and interaction. In addition, he introduced the term "security community", which is formed in the course of such interaction.
Integration is a completely new phenomenon in the practice of
international relations, which arose in the second half of the twentieth
century, is the process of economic interaction between countries,
leading
to a
convergence of mechanisms, taking the form of interstate agreements and coordinately regulated by interstate bodies
(THOMPSON, 1958).
The specific features of the integration
trends in the Central Asia include the lack of free access to maritime transport communications in all
countries of the region. The polyconfessional
nature of the Central Asia states is pushing for rivalry a number of Muslim countries
in order to
expand their influence on the region. Regional cooperation in this area can
have a stabilizing
effect and limit potential threats emanating from
politically radical forms. These regional characteristics determine the
importance
of
studying the geopolitical
determinants of integration. Successful development of integration processes in
various forms can become an important part of the strategy of tightening and controlling
the geostrategic space. Even before the disintegration
of
the USSR, attempts were made to unite the states
in the Central Asia. So, in 1990 the heads of
five republics held their first meeting in Almaty. In Tashkent,
a Protocol was signed between
the five Central Asian states on the creation
of a
common market. The signing in 1994 of the Treaty
on the creation of a
common economic
space
between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan
and
Uzbekistan marked the beginning
of the creation of an integration
association in the CAR. Since 1998, Tajikistan
became a full party to the
Treaty. The contract envisaged the free movement of goods, services, capitals, and labor and provided the conditions for carrying out the agreed credit, budgetary, tax, customs and currency
policies. According to the
Treaty, the Interstate Council was created, which included presidents and
prime ministers of the participating countries, and its main institutions - the Council of Prime Ministers, the Council of Foreign Ministers, the
Council of Ministers of Defense and the Executive Committee.
At the same time, the Agreement on the Establishment of the Central Asian Bank
for Cooperation and Development was signed, the capital of which is formed by the contributions of the participating states.
The question arose:
Are the CA countries really ready for integration? Has Central Asia really become a single region in the sense that is necessary
for the success of integration?
5. ARE THE CA COUNTRIES REALLY READY FOR INTEGRATION?
There are certain problems in the way of the integration process. First, the volume of trade and economic cooperation between CAR countries
is much lower than that of each of them with partners outside the
region. Secondly,
the economic structure of the Central Asian republics that developed in the Soviet period is mainly of a raw material nature. Hence the weakly expressed complementarity of economies, which does not facilitate integration. Third, economic and technological backwardness
and
an acute shortage of financial resources
compel the Central Asian states to stake on developed countries,
but
not on each other. Fourth, the
intra-regional
integration of the CAR states is hindered by the existing
differences
in the foreign policy and foreign economic strategy. In
addition, the deepening of the integration process in the CARs is hindered by fundamental differences in the strategy of economic development,
the
directions
and rates of transition from a planned economy
to a
market economy, and also significant differences in the currency, tax
and
customs
policies. The competition
between the Central Asian states in many spheres, including in the struggle for attracting foreign investments, also makes itself felt (LAUMULIN, 2017).
The severity of domestic economic problems in the CAR countries (production decline, agrarian crisis, unemployment,
instability of national
currencies) contribute not to integration, but, on the contrary, to isolation. Further, the large-scale penetration of foreign capital into the economy of
the
CAR states can have a deterrent effect on the process of intra-regional integration, especially when enterprises
and even whole industries are
under full control or transferred
to the ownership of foreign owners. The integration
process in the CARs can be jeopardized in the event of the emergence and aggravation of intraregional
interstate and interethnic
conflicts. Especially
the probability of conflicts is high because of the
scarcity of water resources in the region. Until now, mechanisms for the
implementation
of
agreements have not been regulated; there is no
coordination of customs, credit, tax and budgetary policies.
The legislative
base
has not been created. The republics
of
the Central Asia continues to face economic
difficulties, the states do not define regional relations as priority. To strengthen integration, it is necessary to intensify not only the
dialogues of top-level managers, but also the relationships
at all levels,
especially in medium and small businesses. With the exception
of the common
threats that have now turned into the most powerful factor in activating the integration processes in the CAR, everything else is either in its infancy or outside the
integration process. The reason for this, according to a number of Western scholars, is the objective circumstances and contradictions existing between the states of the region:
- The problem of territories, water, energy resources;
- The problem
of leadership in Central Asia and the relationship between the leaders of states;
- The difference in approaches to economic reform and views on the ways and extent of integration both within the CAR and the CIS as a whole;
- The problem of internal political and socio-economic
stability in the states of the region and the associated problem
of
the "Islamic threat";
- The actual destruction of
the regional
system
of
collective security, the diversity of foreign policy preferences
of the states of
the
region;
- Misunderstanding by
the leaders of states of the need
for unification;
- The
effectiveness and feasibility of the signed agreements is at an extremely low level;
- There is an economic
pressure of the states on each other in the form of unilateral cessation of deliveries of those or other goods
that should not be within the limits of one union;
- There is no single political, economic, information space.
From
the point of view of modern political science, according to scientists, not
every national
or ethnic entity
with a
single
territory, external borders and unified administrative power can be called a state. The state should become, develop effective forms of functioning of
administrative bodies, a bureaucratic apparatus, create
a single socio- cultural space
and
achieve
general
civil
self-identification, develop
a single legal consciousness among the population. In the CAR states there
is a patriarchal social
organization,
a sociocultural space divided according to the clan and community characteristics; there is no civil self- identification, a single legal consciousness,
political relations are
authoritarian.
This state of the states is the main brake on the integration processes in the region, it negates the effectiveness of the decisions
taken, because while the integrationist state itself - the state - is in the stage of
formation, the integration union cannot be perfect.
6. CENTRAL ASIAN SECURITY: CIS, CSTO AND SCO
Security issues are the main ones for such organizations operating in the post-Soviet space, such as the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States), CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) and the SCO (Shanghai cooperation organization). These associations for Moscow are a mechanism for coordination and cooperation in the implementation of
jointly adopted decisions, and despite the fact that organizations
formally
pursue different goals, in fact, their functions often coincide. Attention is
drawn to the fact that the management
bodies of organizations are also
similar. It seems that the division
of the "zones of responsibility" between
the CSTO, the CIS and the SCO contributes to a more effective solution of security problems in Central Asia (LAUMULIN,
2017). The Shanghai organization reflects the security strategy in Central Asia not only of
Russia,
but also China’s
attitude. This was the reason for the internal
contradictions existing in the SCO. Initially, the organization
had
as its goal the fight against "three kinds of evil": separatism, extremism and terrorism.
Gradually,
these
problems have
lost relevance
for most countries
in Central Asia. Common to all members of the "Shanghai Five"
is only the problem
of
religious extremism. However, the organization responds promptly to new security challenges and demonstrates
its readiness to assume responsibility for ensuring security in Central Asia and
for the overall development of the
region. The organization also makes active efforts to combat drug trafficking
and drug smuggling from
Afghanistan. However,
the
solution of such
a large-scale
problem is hardly possible with the efforts of one organization.
The Shanghai organization, which is not yet fully consolidated, as
a whole is achieving
certain successes in the field of ensuring security in
the
region. At this stage, it needs to strengthen, resolve internal contradictions
and
bet on integration rather than expansion. Unlike the SCO, which combines both economic and military-political functions, the
CSTO is a
kind of security institution, which is responsible for both traditional and new threats and challenges in Central Asia. In addition to
solving border problems and preventing
foreign policy threats, the CSTO
solves such major problems as the fight against drug trafficking, for which
the
special operation
"Channel"
is carried out every year. The United
States, for which Central Asia is a strategically
important region, is also
interested in maintaining stability on its
territory. The
US security strategy
in Central
Asia
was the deployment of NATO
military forces in
the Central Asian states after September 11, 2001. Although Central Asia is
the
center of the intersection of geopolitical interests of the US, Russia and China, these states understand the danger of destabilizing the situation in the region and, albeit separately
from each other, are taking steps to address security problems in Central Asia.
7. RESULTS
One of the coordinates of the transitional period of the international system
is the establishment of
a new
relationship
between
the two
domains Regional
and global. In this context, the trend towards regionalism
and the diffusion of regional institutions and organizations is
one of the hallmarks of the transitional
era
governing international
relations. This transformation has made the
concept of the region an
indispensable role in shaping the world order of the future. If we compare the levels of conflict in the ASEAN countries and in the countries
of Central Asia, objectively,
the
Central Asian states have more chances to create an effective regional security structure. A promising option here can be
synchronization of the process of creating a
regional security
system with economic diversification and integration. It is interesting that a number of ASEAN members in the early
1990s threatened regional security with the collapse of the bipolar structure of international relations, with a sharp reduction in superpower regulation and the loss of a stable balance.
This situation also remains characteristic to
the post-Soviet space.
For
the intercontinental countries of CA, security can be carried out at a
trans boundary level, as well as ASEAN countries have begun integration at the maritime level. Thus, with the development
of Asian economies,
there
are
other horizons of
cooperation and
convergence The Asians
opened
up
with
each
other. In this
emerging space,
regionalism and Asiaticism helped to rethink intercontinental
interactions and deepen and
expand inter-Asian
ties. Almost all the ASEAN countries,
along with the
support of Moscow, also seek the support of the West, and, first of all, the United States. It is likely that the satellite development of the Central Asian states, when the attraction of larger states will change the orbit of
the
smaller ones, will lead to the fragmentation of the emerging Central
Asian geopolitical complex. ASEAN had the same situation. The initiative of creating ASEAN united small states, and managed to consolidate
the
efforts
of
small states and limit the pressure
of
larger states, thereby changing the geopolitical configuration
in the Asia-Pacific region. The situation in Central Asia is developing to a certain extent in a similar
scenario, but is at the initial stage, where the risks of destruction
of
the existing balance of power are especially high.
8. CONCLUSION
Intercountry integration is a multidimensional, multilevel and complex process in contemporary
international relations. It implies the consideration
of
the common and specific features of the unifying
countries. Objective changes related to the processes of globalization and
the internationalization
of existing
national
economic and political systems have necessitated a conceptual interpretation of the emerging phenomena in international relations. Ideas of integration, born in the
midst of politicians
and scientists, sought theoretical design and scientific
forecasting. Nevertheless, Northeast Asia has the necessary geographic,
economic and cultural infrastructure for regional integration in the form of a regional entity. Because of the high volume of economic
exchanges, cultural convergence and
the
geographical affinity
of
the
main components of regional integration are considered. The analysis of similar
models in world practice leads to the conclusion about a certain
attractiveness of the ASEAN experience for the Central Asian region.
ASEAN countries
began an integration start with not self-sufficient agrarian and resource economies. Preparation
of favorable conditions for the integration of participating countries took this organization several
decades and only in 2007 a free trade zone was opened. The tasks facing
ASEAN at the beginning of the integration path are in part similar to the
goals and problems of the participants
in the Central Asian integration.
Economic
depression in the regional context, armed conflicts, and unresolved interethnic and territorial problems, entry into the zone of rivalry
of world centers of power - most of these factors are present and growing in the Central Asian region, hence to some extent author would
like
to claim that Central Asia countries
still can be integrated as ASEAN.
Today, "Asiaticization of Asia" seems to be a purely academic and
theoretical debate as a kind of Asian consciousness and regional identity,
especially in the civil, international, and economic fields of trade and
energy
between the countries and regions of the ancient continent,
are gradually emerging. In addition, although Asia faces
challenges and crises
and historic competition on security and Asia's economy and politics, this is not considered to be the destiny of this continent. Even as Europe, in
spite
of Historical
militancy in this direction has been
taken
up
and
doping. Hence the way Asian confrontation with its historical issues will determine the future of this continent. Given that Asian economies both in Asia and in the world have a role to play
Convergence of continental economics can also provide a basis for political and cultural cooperation among Asian countries, as well as having the most important
emerging powers on the continent. The logic of the hegemonic
experience suggests
that, without any international
unifying
factors, there
is
no
regional identity
or
cooperative means of intentions. There is no doubt that the
common concerns of Asian countries lead to regional convergence, but the
idea
of Asian commonality, as long as it is not associated with concrete structures, is more in the stage Abstract will remain.
REFERENCES
ACHARYA, Amitav, 2003. Constructing a security community in
Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order, Routledge, Abingdon (United Kingdom).
BOBOKULOV, Inomjon, 2006. "Central Asia: is there an alternative to regional integration?".
Central Asian Survey, Vol. 25, No.1-2:
75-91.
BOWLE, John, 1958. Political Community and the
North Atlantic
Area: International
Organization
in the light of Historical
Experience, Oxford University Press, Abingdon (United Kingdom).
BRESNAN, John, 2002. Constructing a Security Community in
Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order, Routledge, Abingdon (United Kingdom).
DEUTSCH,
Karl
Wolfgang, 2015. Political Community
and
the North American Area, Princeton University
Press, New Jersey (United
States).
HIRSJÄRVI, Sirkka, Remes, Pirkko and Sajavaara, Paula, 1997. Tutki ja
kirjoita, Tammi, Pennsylvania (United States).
KHOO, Nicholas,
2004.
"Deconstructing
the
ASEAN
security
community: a review
essay". International Relations of the Asia- Pacific, Vol. 4,
No.1: 35-46.
KUSHKUMBAYEV, Sanat, 2013. "The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation: Its
Potential
Influence
on
Regional Security
in Central Asia". Voices from Central Asia, Vol. 10, No.3: 1-5.
LAUMULIN,
MT,
2017. "Central Asia within Foreign Political Science
and
World Geopolitics". Opt cit, Vol. 14, No.3: 56-85.
LENT, Ernest S, 1958. Political Community and the North Atlantic Area:
International Organization in
the
Light of
Historical Experience, Elmer Ellsworth Brown, New York (United States).
OLCOTT, Martha Brill, 1996. Central Asia's new states: independence, foreign policy, and regional security, United States Inst of Peace
Press, New York (United States).
ROY, Olivier, 2007. The new Central Asia: Geopolitics and the birth of nations,
NYU Press, New York (United States).
SADRI, Houman A, 1997. "Integration in Central Asia: From theory to policy". Central Asian Survey,
Vol. 16, No.4: 573-586.
THOMPSON, Kenneth W, 1958. Political Community and the North
Atlantic Area: International
Organization
in the Light of Historical Experience, Nauka, Mossko (Russia).