Moreover, the call for the development of new mechanisms to address emerging challenges is met with skepticism by some who argue that ASEAN has historically been slow to adapt and implement such mechanisms. Critics point to the organization’s track record in responding to crises like the Rohingya refugee crisis and its perceived lack of a unified and rapid response.
In light of these criticisms, Indonesia’s role in pushing for institutional reforms becomes even more critical. It must not only advocate for modernization but also address the underlying concerns and suspicions among member states. The success of these reforms will depend on Indonesia’s ability to bridge these divisions and demonstrate the concrete benefits of a revitalized ASEAN institution, one that can effectively address the challenges of the 21st century.
Is Air Pollution not part of the Agenda?
The ASEAN meeting in Jakarta was supposed to be a pivotal gathering of Southeast Asian nations to address pressing regional issues. However, one glaring omission stands out like a smoggy cloud over the entire event: the complete absence of discussion on the critical issue of air pollution. This oversight not only represents a missed opportunity but also undermines the very essence of ASEAN’s mission to promote regional cooperation and address shared challenges.
Let’s start with the facts. Air pollution is a pressing problem in Southeast Asia, with devastating consequences for the environment, public health, and the overall quality of life for millions of people in the region. According to the World Air Quality Report 2021, several ASEAN member states, including Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam, consistently rank among the countries with the worst air quality in the world. The annual economic cost of air pollution in Southeast Asia is estimated to be in the billions of dollars, affecting industries, agriculture and healthcare systems.
Furthermore, air pollution respects no national borders. It is a regional issue that requires collective action and cooperation among ASEAN member states. The transboundary nature of the problem demands a coordinated approach to effectively mitigate its impacts.
Indonesia should be able to take advantage during this pivotal gathering, but then why was air pollution conspicuously absent from the agenda of the ASEAN meeting in Jakarta? One possibility is that political considerations may have taken precedence over environmental concerns. Governments may be hesitant to discuss air pollution, which often involves scrutinizing industries and regulatory practices that could be politically sensitive. However, failing to address air pollution will only exacerbate these issues in the long run, as the environmental and health consequences become increasingly severe.
Moreover, ASEAN does indeed have a history of discussing environmental issues at its meetings. The ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution, signed in 2002, was a positive step in addressing the problem of forest fires and haze pollution. However, it has not been sufficient to tackle the broader issue of air pollution caused by various sources, including industrial emissions, transportation, and agriculture.
To truly fulfill its mission, today’s 43rd ASEAN Summit must seriously consider the air pollution issue that has affected human living and take concrete steps toward a cleaner, healthier, and greener sustainable future for its member states. This should include the development of region-wide air quality standards, improved monitoring and data sharing, and joint efforts to reduce emissions from major pollution sources.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Indonesia’s leadership in ASEAN during the pivotal year of 2023 raises significant concerns, both for the region and the global stage. The challenges confronting ASEAN are undoubtedly complex, and there are doubts about whether the leadership can effectively address them and turn them into opportunities for the organization’s growth and relevance. Indonesia’s role as chair provides a platform, but there are questions about its ability to tackle these multifaceted challenges headon and adapt to the rapidly changing dynamics of our world.
Read: Expanding BRICS Into A Multipolar World Order: A Strategic Alternative To G7?
Indonesia’s approach to addressing critical issues, such as the legitimacy crisis, economic empowerment, adaptability to evolving norms and institutional modernization may fall short of providing the necessary leadership to steer ASEAN toward a more responsive, effective, and influential future. There are concerns that Indonesia’s tenure may not leave a lasting positive legacy within ASEAN, and that the organization’s role as a cornerstone of regional stability, cooperation, and progress could be compromised.
As the world’s attention is focused on ASEAN, there is skepticism about how Indonesia’s leadership will shape the region’s trajectory. There are doubts about whether the decisions made and initiatives championed in 2023 will truly have the potential to impact Southeast Asia and the broader international community positively. Many are waiting with a critical eye to see how Indonesia’s stewardship will navigate ASEAN through a world marked by unprecedented challenges and opportunities. (M. Raihan Ronodipuro)