Recalibrating Intervention in Southeast Asia

Abstract

Southeast Asia is home to many diverse cultures across and within national borders. The vast majority of these borders evolved out of those created during the colonial period in the region. While the Westphalian state system was imposed in the region, the post-independence period has illustrated traditional understandings of sovereignty are rhetorically prevalent in Southeast Asia. This is noticeable in the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, which was a founding document of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This treaty bound its signatories not to interfere in another’s domestic affairs yet there remain several high profile interventions which have trumped the noninterference norm – what explains this? Examples range from the 1975 Indonesian invasion of East Timor to the 1978 Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia, and to a more contemporary example of ASEAN member states’ participation in United Nations peace operations in East Timor from the early 2000s onwards. As a result there is a dichotomy between these two policy positions. On the one hand, formal legal agreements bind signatories to respect traditional sovereignty norms, yet in practice there are several cases when military intervention was used within the region by other states in the region. The historical military interventions during the 1970s are illustrative of pre-emptive military interventions to stave off the communist threat whereas more recently interventions have taken place under the guise of UN mandated peace operations. This noticeable shift can also illustrate the level of legitimacy attached to the interventions with those unilateral interventions taking place in the 1970s lacking the legitimacy bestowed upon UN peace operations either at the UN Security Council or through the UN General Assembly