In this week’s training on Parliamentary Diplomacy under the RFPPD, the Program which I mentioned in my previous blogs, the recent Shangri-La Dialogue was the focus. It is the venue where policy pronouncements from key leaders and defense ministers of Asia and the Pacific were articulated on the issue of ensuring security and stability in the region.
The fellows were asked to make a memorandum for the members of our parliaments through a narration of facts on the discussions during the Dialogue on a particular topic. We were also asked to do research on the background of the talks in terms of diplomacy, political and regional context. This is so because as we learned in Parliamentary Diplomacy in the Regional Context under Prof. Xavier Nuttin, inorder to prevent Parliament to disapprove later on the recommendations of the Executive, information and facts should have been freely given to them and deliberated upon. Informing them of relevant information and data will empower and enable them to fulfill their role of influencing policies of their respective governments.
I chose the topic on peace and security in the region as this is a timely issue particularly for the Philippines right now. In this regard, the policy statements declared by the world leaders in their speeches and expounded during the Q&A are very important. They provide context and laid down the foundation of future actions to be taken by any country in that forum.
In the Dialogue, the defense ministers particularly the US Defense Minister used the term “Indo-Pacific” instead of “Asia-Pacific” as this region is referred to in the past. Base on my research, I learned an important principle (albeit my knowledge is still raw) on how to ease tensions over a specific geography: expand the base and tilt the balance of power to the new center or in this case a new regional order. That’s what the US did when it pivoted to Asia and reimagined Asia from “Asia-Pacific” to “Indo-Pacific”. “The scale of the Indo-Pacific dilutes the ability of any one country unilaterally to shape the regional order” (Medcalf, 2017).
The US also did this when they shifted the center of global economic discussions from the G8 to G20. This happened during the Bush Administration during the financial crisis based on the premise that the “US should always be on the lookout for openings or potential paradigm-shifting events that could lead to a breakthrough in their relations” (Paulson Jr., pp. 395-396).
I first heard about this pivot to Asia by the US in the Geopolitics class of Former Ambassador Michel Foucher under the RFPPD. Amb. Foucher is a very learned political geographer and diplomat.
So how should the ASEAN deal with the US-China conflict in the Indo-Pacific region? Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong gave a very clear and wise answer to this during the Shangri-La Dialogue. In addition, the Philippines own president, His Excellency Rodrigo Roa Duterte himself during the recent ASEAN Summit in Bangkok, called on ASEAN “to be the voice of reason and moderation in the region, protecting time-honored principles of international law” .
Sunflower's Blog 