authorized the use of "all necessary measures" but consciously abstained.
This decision is quite a contrast to past Chinese criticisms over Western
intervention in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere.
Like China, most other Asian governments have avoided condemning the
intervention over Libya. India's stance against the action is something of an
exception. But Asian acquiescence should not be mistaken as acceptance. It is
not principle that has guided this but pragmatic calculation, once Arab nations
supported the action over Libya. Questions continue across the region, even if
few at present vent this publicly.
Asian attitudes could yet be important, especially if the Libyan situation wears
on and the Allied bombing widens. There may also be broader implications
for the future. The Western powers who lead the intervention face economic
travails at home while Asians and others who are on the sidelines continue to
grow rapidly.
Will Western interventions be countenanced in future, when Asians and
others rise to parity? Or is what we see in Libya a last hurrah for the Western
powers? If intervention by force is unacceptable, how will Asians keep peace?
Asians distrust intervention from past instinct. Historically, Western powers
often used force to interfere, with humanitarian or other just cause, to justify
the building of their empires. The Libyan case does not help by being led by
France and the UK, the old colonisers.
Asians look sceptically for double standards and self-interest. Some regional
comments consider the cases of Libya and Bahrain, where the military is
also putting down resistance, albeit with less force, and accuse the West of
a double standard. Nor has it escaped attention that the West was pursuing
commercial relations to secure oil and gas and economic gain from the
Gadhafi regime.
Most Asians also look at the practice of intervention, rather than being
swayed by rhetoric and principle. Some now champion intervention as
stemming from the responsibility to protect. But many will look to see
whether the West is able and has the will to ensure a sustainable and stable
outcome or will quite irresponsibly leave things in a mess.
A fourth reason is that many Asians have their own sensitivities, close to
home. China has Tibet and minorities that trigger concern in some Western
quarters, while India is sensitive over the Kashmiri question, and Koreans will
worry about possible intervention in neighbouring North Korea.
Inequality is an underlying reason for Asian disquiet about intervention.
Currently, Asian militaries do not have the ability to intervene as the Western
powers can, with aerial firepower that largely shields them from commiting
lives in large numbers. Expect that in the wake of Libya, those who can afford
it - like China - will seek to ramp up their military capabilities.
For others without such means or ambitions, they will continue to champion
principles like sovereignty and be wary of "humanitarian intervention" and
other ideas that make sovereignty conditional. But while Asians do not license
interventions by force, this does not mean they will simply stand by in the
face of unacceptable violence and a disregard for civilian life.
A normative community is emerging in Asia and especially Asean. Led
by Indonesia, Asean has this year agreed to send observers to the Thai-
Cambodian border, where territorial disputes and armed skirmishes have
already cost lives. In Timor Leste, Asean has played a role in the past to keep
peace in tandem with Australia, and, with elections again coming to the new
state, efforts should again be made to try to pre-empt any violence.
Asians remain shy about the use of force even when humanitarian protection
is the reason. Preventative efforts that use diplomatic means will be
preferred. This is understandable for societies that have been on the receiving
end of such interventions and remain unable to intervene. But attitudes can
change as regional communities coalesce and, if force is taboo, then other
tools must be made to work.
What happens in Libya will be watched closely by Asians. Some will remain
sceptical and snipe at Western power and policy. But others will wrestle with
the issues knowing that, in a future perhaps not so far away, the region may
no longer have the luxury of simply standing on the sidelines. Asians will need
to prepare their own ways to maintain peace.
Simon Tay is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs.
++++++++++++++++++++++
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น