Está en la página 1de 2

An Asean identity?

March 22, 2014 12:21 am


by Amado S. Tolentino Jr.

While the main goals of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) Brunei
Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand and Vietnamare described in trade terms (single market and
production base, highly competitive economic region, equitable economic development,
further integration into the global economy), the documents that have come out of
various Asean meetings talk about many other things.
On the matter of an Asean identity, the Asean Charter (2007), the Asean Declaration on
Cultural Heritage (2000) and of late, the Asean Socio-Cultural Community Blueprint
(2009-20015), specify The Asean Identity is the basis of Southeast Asias regional
interests. It is our collective personality, norms, values and beliefs as well as aspirations
as one Asean Community..The strategic objective is to create a sense of
belonging, consolidate unity in diversity and enhance deeper mutual understanding
among Asean member countries about their culture, history, religion and
civilization
There are, however, sorts of cultural war among some Asean countries related to
cultural heritage. In 2012, it was reported that riots erupted in Jakarta when Indonesian
protesters targeted the Malaysian Embassy over dance heritage, in particular, the Tortor dance. Likewise, some quarters claim Malaysias national anthem Negaraku is
based on Indonesias Terang Bulan (Bright Moon). In the area of cuisine, the Yu
Sheng/Lo Hei, a dish served during Chinese Lunar Festival and traditionally thought to
bring prosperity is separately claimed by the Chinese in Singapore and Malaysia as
theirs.
Even the Peranakan (Nonya) dishes, a fusion of Malay and Chinese recipes, did not
escape similar claims. (Ethnic tension within Malaysia between Chinese Malaysians
and ethnic Malays is still on because of the countrys economic policy of Bumiputra
which gives preferential treatment to the ethnic Malay majority.) Another example is the
Preah Vihar temple issue between Cambodia and Thailand which had to be settled by
the International Court of Justice. In April 2013, about 500 nationalists of the Patriot
Thai Group raised the flag of Thailand to assert Thai sovereignty over Preah Vihar.
The examples cited demonstrate that cultures should not be thought to have fixed
borders. Many of these cultures evolved in the course of time during Hindu, Muslim,
Buddhist or Christian periods. Meaning, practices in countries within the Asean region
continued to be shaped by various peoples and events.
Even the legal culture is not an exception. Asean countries have a mosaic of
legislations with traces of foreign influence brought about by periods of Spanish
(Philippines),

French (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Vietnam), British (Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia,


Myanmar, Singapore) AND Dutch (Indonesia) occupation.
The lack of knowledge of historical roots and evolution of particular ways of life and
practices can result in too nationalistic and divisive views. There should be space for
two or more forms of heritages, complementary but not in conflict.
In short, they should be considered shared cultures that transcend political boundaries.
In this rubric are the angklung (bamboo) orchestra as well as the gamelan (gongs)
ensemble of Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines which are like one. Also batiks
which are either Indonesian, Malaysian or Thai like the wayang kulit (shadow play).
The Philippine Bayanihan Dance Co. researched Singkil and found that it has its
equivalent in Indonesia and Malaysia, which should not be a surprise considering the
geographic proximity of the three countries collectively called Maphilindo before the
birth of Asean. In the same way, the popular Philippine folk dance Tinikling has a slow
movement version in Thailand. Truly Asean, on the other hand, is kite flying as a
pastime as well as the tube-like-wrap-around malong, a real-life practical garment for
men still evident all over Southeast Asia from Brunei Darussalam to Myanmar to
Vietnam.
The case of the Preah Vihar temple between Cambodia and Thailand, however, should
be viewed in another light. Involved is sovereignty but a way out is recognition of
functional sovereignty as distinguished from territorial sovereignty. Functional
sovereignty refers to specific uses of a resource rather than absolute and unlimited
jurisdiction within a geographic space. It means interdependence in the sustainable use
of a resource emphasizing that states are dutybound to cooperate with each other to
promote development sustainability of the common environment.
Preah Vihar ought to be enjoyed as an Asean tourism resource, a cultural heritage of
both Cambodia and Thailand aside from a religious destination in the Asean jurisdiction.
Or, in different words, the change of perception of the role of sovereignty in relations
between states regarding their environment should be characterized by equitable
utilization ultimately redounding to the benefit of the Asean region.
A good model for an Asean identity is the Asean Heritage Parks system which
continues to focus on cooperation among member countries to develop a regional
conservation and management plan for the current string of over 40 heritage parks in
the region. The criteria to determine if the region qualifies as an Asean heritage park
include high ethno-biological significance, uniqueness and respresentativeness.
Designation as a heritage park strengthens cooperation, awareness and appreciation
among Asean countries.
Together with the other aspects of the Asean cultural heritage, the designation
promotes the twin objectives of community building and identity. Best of all, the concept

of an Asean heritage parks system advances protected area goals expressed in the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands Conservation
as well as the World Heritage Convention.
All this will help forge an Asean identity which is important for the future implementation
of Asean policies. It is a complementary to the principles of sovereignty and nonintervention (Asean Way) which can, without the recognition of a cultural bridge, hinder
the implementation of Asean legal instruments and tools including environmental laws.
After all, what society chooses to preserve of the past defines who we are today,
creates our collective memory and hastens our new development as Asean

Community bound by a common regional identity. In the words of Asean law expert Koh
Kheng Lian, an Asean identity is crucial to bringing about enhanced cooperation to
supplement the Asean Way and make it more meaningful, to encourage all to THINK
Asean instead of only Think National.
Before joining the Philippine Foreign Service, the author was the first Director of the
Environmental Management Bureau (DENR) and served as Coordinator, Asean
Experts Group on the Environment.

También podría gustarte