ASEAN Human Rights Declaration Provokes Controversy
Since its inception in 1967, the ten-member Southeast Asian alliance,
ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) has focused on
promoting regional co-operation, regional identity and trade links. For
the most part, the human rights of its 600 million inhabitants have
failed to attract the Association’s attention.
The ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights announced recently at the ASEAN
leaders’ 21st summit held in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, would, therefore,
ostensibly appear to be a positive new direction for the organisation.
However, rather than welcoming this development, civil society and
grassroots groups across the region and globally have united in
criticising the document. The U.S.
Department of State has announced that “we are deeply concerned that
many of the ASEAN Declaration’s principles and articles could weaken
and erode universal human rights and fundamental freedoms as contained
in the UDHR [UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights]”.
That such opposing views have developed in a region that is increasingly
regarded as pivotal in International Relations should be a cause for
concern. By adopting a rigorous non-interventionist approach to human
rights violations in other member states, are the nations of ASEAN
simply recognizing the sovereignty of others or could they be
unwittingly fostering conditions that may threaten their own security?
The mutual recognition of sovereignty adopted by ASEAN members is
fundamental to its decision-making processes, encapsulated by “consultation
and consensus ” and an enduring principle of non-interference in
the internal affairs of member states. Thus while espousing the rhetoric
of human rights, the Declaration firmly maintains that it is the
responsibility of individual sovereign member states to establish and
maintain freedom and rights for their national citizens, a principle to
which several appear reluctant to commit.
As a result the Declaration has been denounced as “culturally
relativist” with domestic laws superseding universal principles of
freedoms and basic rights. While such external critiques may be
dismissed by the members of ASEAN, they cannot ignore the more immediate
internal consequences of their adopted position and the very real
possibility that human rights violations in one member state will have
potential repercussions for the security of others.
To Interfere or Not to Interfere: The Rohingya Question
One example of the unintended consequences of the communal silence that
ASEAN has adopted on human rights violations by member states is
demonstrated by the spill-over effects of the ethnic tensions that have
erupted and the resultant state-sponsored repression in the Rakhine
district of Western Myanmar.
The ethnic and religious tensions currently engulfing Rakhine state, a
strip of land on Myanmar’s western coast are a legacy of British
colonialism. Under British rule, thousands of Bengalis from the
neighbouring region that today is Bangladesh were encouraged to migrate
to the Rakhine area largely as indentured labour. This predominantly
Muslim community who have lived in the area for generations and those
that have followed them more recently, the Rohingya, are currently
caught in a cycle of violence of lethal intensity with the indigenous,
largely Buddhist majority.
While tensions have existed historically between the communities and
violence has occurred previously, the government has been firm in
resisting international demands for a peaceful resolution to the current
situation and has deflected criticism by portraying the situation as a
domestic issue.
The Myanmar government only recognizes as citizens those who were
settled in the country prior to independence in 1948. Those unable to
meet these stringent criteria are denied citizenship and are effectively
stateless, condemned as illegal immigrants and denied basic human
rights.
Following the rape and murder of a young Buddhist woman in the
region in May 2012 , a humanitarian crisis has developed in which
both Rohingya and Buddhist communities have acted with lethal mutual
animosity. Inter-communal violence has led to the killing of hundreds;
thousands of homes and many villages have been destroyed. The UN
estimates that over 100,000 Rohingya have been forcibly displaced to
camps and villages along the Bangladeshi border, where conditions have
been described
by the UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, Baroness
Amos as “dire” .
So what has been ASEAN’s response to this humanitarian crisis in its own
back yard given its recent Declaration of Human Rights?
Following the Phnom Penh summit, the ASEAN Chairman’s statement of
November 18, 2012 offered support for the “humanitarian
challenges” arising from the violence in Rakhine state but fell
short of overt criticism of the Myanmar government. Indeed, in a joint
statement following a subsequent meeting two days later with US
President, Barack Obama, ASEAN leaders “welcomed positive steps being
taken in Myanmar that could facilitate national reconciliation, and
encouraged further progress towards a democratic and open political and
economic system ”, thereby
heaping praise on the Myanmar regime for its apparent move towards
democratization whilst ignoring the systematic human rights abuses that
continue within the state.
However, the impact of the situation in the Rakhine district has
repercussions beyond Myanmar’s national borders and affects other ASEAN
members.
Shooting Yourself in the Foot ASEAN–style
While, as noted above, many Rohingya have sought refuge in neighbouring
Bangladesh, others have fled further afield for sanctuary in Malaysia,
another ASEAN member also predominantly Muslim, which has become a
preferred destination for those seeking a safe haven from the violence.
The UNHCR in Malaysia estimates that there are approximately 25,000
Rohingya in Malaysia, but other estimates put the numbers much higher at
around 90,000.
While Malaysian Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, has expressed
concern about the plight of the Rohingya community in Myanmar and called
for the “violence committed against them to be stopped immediately” in
a speech to the UMNO General Assembly on 29th November, 2012, his
country faces the predicament of having to receive sudden large inflows
of displaced Rohingya into the community.
Moreover, as Malaysia is not a signatory to the UN Convention for
Refugees, the Rohingya in Malaysia are denied official access to
temporary employment, medical and health services and education, thereby
further undermining their human security. Furthermore, concerns have
been expressed that the desperate conditions facing the Rohingya could
lead to radicalization.
While criticism has been targeted at the recent ASEAN Declaration of
Human Rights for apparently privileging domestic laws over universal
principles, it could also be argued that the Declaration is myopic and
self-defeating. While upholding the inviolability of state jurisdiction
on human rights issues, it fails to recognize that the effects of human
rights violations cannot necessarily be confined within national borders
and may have ramifications that affect other members, as the current
situation emanating in Myanmar all too sadly demonstrates. If the
members of ASEAN are really dedicated to human rights for all the
peoples of the region then a more critical stance may be called for.
Caryl Thompson is a researcher with the Institute of
Asia-Pacific Studies at the University of Nottingham.
No comments:
Post a Comment