ASEAN—navigating shifting geopolitics
The ASEAN and its role as a foremost regional group in the changing global geopolitics is an unquestionable reality which cannot be overlooked in Indo-Pacific—the term from maritime outlook—or Asia-Pacific—the term from a land border perspective. World War II and the contestation for supremacy over Southeast Asia between the British and Japan brought strategic importance to the region, first through the Cold War geopolitics and subsequently resulting in the American alliance system (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO)), establishing bases of United States (US) forces in the region.1 Through this, importantly, the US replaced the UK as a security guarantor.2
While the prominence of the region caught the attention of the external players who were weighing to establish influence, it forced the regional countries to take sides for their own security needs. In this setting, a regional grouping, ASEAN, was formed 53 years ago. According to Kishore Mahbubani,3 fear of communism and its expansion brought Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines together, spearheaded by strong leaders such as President Suharto of Indonesia, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad of Malaysia, who he thinks were able to rise above short-term interests and focus on the long-term value of regional cooperation.4
Since then, ASEAN has navigated the shifting regional geopolitics of Southeast and East Asia amidst the Vietnam War,5 Cambodia crisis6 and the rise of an aggressive and strong China. Particularly, the existence and relevance of ASEAN through the tense Cold War geopolitics and the ensuing post–Cold War period are significant.
While American supremacy in the post–World War period brought a sea of change in the region and its stability, the situation following China’s communist revolutionary ideas, its involvement in the Vietnam conflict and present activities in the South China Sea (SCS) has brought ripples of uneasiness among the countries in the region. Amidst this, since the end of World War II some Southeast Asian countries have sought to form a regional grouping in order to address the internal challenges arising from ethnic problems, the growing communist rebellions and the increasing role of external actors, as well as aiming to strengthen the economic cooperation in Southeast Asia.7 The formation of the Association of Southeast Asia (ASA) on 31 July 1961 made up of Malaya, the Philippines and Thailand and of MAPHILINDO with Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia were the first attempts by the countries in the region to have their own mechanism for cooperation and for resolving conflict. While many viewed the ASA as subordinate to the American interests in the Southeast Asian region, the ASA members were intending to build an independent association, free from any external influence, with the single focus of economic cooperation among the member states as a way to counter the communist subversion activities in the region.8
The formation of ASEAN during the Cold War and its existence as a relevant and powerful regional grouping at the moment is indeed the result of an endeavour for regional resilience in spite of many crises. While ASEAN kept its focus on economic integration and avoided taking stands on political issues like the Cambodian crisis, it, in fact, put pressure on the regional groupings. Notably, the post–Cold War geopolitical scenario saw the rise of Chinese assertiveness in the SCS, where Beijing ventured into the waters of neighbouring countries of the SCS region. Chinese occupation of the Mischief Reef in 1996 not only exposed the powerlessness of ASEAN but also gradually brought fissure in the grouping. Hence, the constant changing geopolitical dynamics in Southeast Asia required ASEAN to adapt to the contemporary conditions and engage most of the external powers, including the US, China and India, in the regional affairs. Since the 1992 Singapore–ASEAN Summit,9 it has become the strategy of ASEAN to embrace as many outsiders as possible to balance any threat arising from one single power. Through this cooperative security mechanism, ASEAN has managed to stay a relevant regional group, thereby offering mutual economic benefits for ASEAN countries.
ASEAN and India–ASEAN relations amidst changing geopolitics
Historically and culturally, Southeast Asia, now known as the ASEAN region—comprising Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and Brunei—has remained part of India’s external outreach for over 2,000 years, with trade having been carried out since ancient times between India and ASEAN countries such as Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia in the region. Also, the strategic location of the ASEAN region has made it a crucial region, with which both ancient Indian kingdoms and subsequent colonial powers have maintained ties from time to time. Historical sites such as the Angkor Temple Complex near Siem Reap in Cambodia, the ancient candis in Kedah in Malaysia and the Borobudur and Prambanan temples near Yogyakarta in Indonesia are, in fact, evidence of India’s early linkages and its influence on Southeast Asian cultures, traditions and languages.
Buddhism, indeed, remains a strong connection, and today in Southeast Asia it is the state religion in Cambodia, with 96.9% of the total population practising the religion,10 93.2% in Thailand, 80.1% in Myanmar, 33.9% in Singapore, 17.7% in Malaysia and 16.4% in Vietnam.11 Other than Buddhism, Indonesia and Malaysia have 87% and 61% of Muslim population, respectively, with cultural roots in Indian traditions.
Tamil language inscriptions as well Sanskrit inscriptions found on the eastern borderlines of the Indian Ocean, from Myanmar to Sumatra, are bilingual inscriptions that were either donations or gifts made to religious centres such as monasteries and Vishnu and Siva temples in the region, a description of ancient Indian trade links.12 Particularly, the Tamil language inscriptions on a potsherd found at Phu Khao Thong in south Thailand bearing the word turavon, meaning ascetic, is considered to be one of the oldest inscriptions in the Tamil language in Southeast Asia, dating back to the 2nd or 3rd century AD,13 and another inscription at the Khau Pra Narai hill on the Takuapa river on the west coast of Thailand, as Nilakanta Sastri suggests that the Pallava king Nandivarman III, who ruled at Kanchipuram in South India commended the digging of the tank during the mid-9th century.14 Furthermore, the Nalanda inscription of ad 860 shows a Buddhist foundation was funded by a Sumatran ruler, a king of Suvarnadvipa (Sumatra),15 evidence of ancient Indian connection with Southeast Asia.
In addition, the Hindu religious remains found at Angkor, near Siem Riep, Cambodia, and at Borobodur, Java, Indonesia,16 and the spread of Buddhism from India to Southeast Asia are proof of India’s ancient connection to the region. Further, the influence of Hinduism can still be found in the region, as great Indian literary epics like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata have been adopted into many local Southeast Asian cultures. For instance, in the Philippines, the Maranao version called Maharadia lawana or Maharaja Ravana is the local rendition of the Indian epic Ramayana17 and some verses of Hudhud chants of the Ifugao community are the local adoption of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.18
Also, evidence of Indian emigration to and trade with the Indonesian archipelago and other surrounding islands through the Bay of Bengal is documented by maritime historians like R. C. Majumdar19 and George Coedes.20 For instance, there is proof of close contact existing between the Sailendras, the Kingdoms of the Andhra and Odisha coasts and the Palas of Bengal, who had active links with the Hindu rulers of Malaya Peninsula and the Indonesian Archipelago, as early as ad 75. The Kalinga dynasty too had an important role in promoting people-to-people contact with the region, particularly to Java. Historian Fernand Braudel refers to India and East Asia as the “greatest talks of all world economies”21 of the pre-industrial, pre-capitalist era. Notably, the 7th and the 8th century ad witnessed an increase in the volume of sea trade from the Javanese State of Ho-ling and Malacca Straits to the eastern coast of India, including the Pallava States in South India,22 and subsequently, the expanding Chola Empire in the early 10th and early 13th centuries saw a boom in maritime voyages and trade with Southeast Asia.23
Later, British India, with the expansion of their authority till Malaya, i.e. present-day Malaysia, strengthened these historical and cultural networks by bringing the regions under colonial rule, thanks to the intense trade and commerce opportunities they presented. Also, with the British expansion and the Indian National Army (INA) campaign under its leader Subhas Chandra Bose in Malaya,24 Indian migration and settlement in the Malay Peninsula thrived, which led to the large Indian diaspora in the region. Today, according to the Ministry of External Affairs of the Government of India, there are 7,600 Indians in Brunei, 55,000 in Indonesia, 1.67 million in Malaysia, about 2.9 million in Myanmar, 38,500 in the Philippines, 307,000 in Singapore and 85,000 in Thailand and a smaller number in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.25
Following independence, India under its first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, revitalised its relations with Southeast Asia through the First Asian Relations Conference at New Delhi in 1947, and subsequently the First Asian African Conference at Bandung in 1955. These conferences were undoubtedly significant landmarks in redefining post-Independence India’s relations with Southeast Asia or the ASEAN countries. Particularly, under the Nonalignment Movement (NAM), Indonesia took centre-stage in India’s foreign policy. India’s public support to the Indonesian struggle for independence in the 1950s and then its involvement in the Indochina crisis in the 1960s are cases in point. Gradually, the signing of friendship treaties with Indonesia, Myanmar and the Philippines aided India in consolidating its bilateral and diplomatic relations with the regional littorals.
But despite these, bonding between India and Southeast Asia began to fade in the 1960s, when Southeast Asian states, one after another on attaining independence, began drifting from their own foreign policy priorities under the Cold War politics. Some of the countries became members of the newly formed Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), forming an alliance with America to address their security needs. India, on the other hand, distanced itself from American undersigned treaties and instead formed close ties with the Soviet Union.
The formation of ASEAN on 8 August 1967 in Bangkok, Thailand, with the signing of the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration) by Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand,26 took place while India was focused on its bilateral problems with Pakistan and China. Meanwhile, in August 1971, India signed the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation, and pro-American countries of ASEAN like Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore were apprehensive of India’s drift towards the Soviet Union as they felt this would aid Moscow in advancing its interest beyond South Asia,27 given the Cold War geopolitics. Incidentally, they were also worried about communist Vietnam and its potential threat to the region.
On the other hand, the general pro-Western orientation of the members of ASEAN compelled India to distance itself from the US. Yet, India was not hostile to ASEAN unlike China and some other powers. As a result, India–Southeast Asia relations experienced a straight break off, with both travelling in different directions with differing strategic interests. Consequently, India’s diplomatic interaction was limited to individual countries in the bloc rather than with ASEAN as a whole. Even India stayed away from the Kuala Lumpur meeting of the ASEAN foreign ministers in June 1980 when ASEAN suspe...
