Regionalizing Global Human Rights Norms in Southeast Asia by Dwi Ardhanariswari Sundrijo

Author:Dwi Ardhanariswari Sundrijo
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9783030547981
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Securitisation of Human Rights Issues in ASEAN

The Network—particularly AICOHR, whose parent institution, ASEAN-ISIS, had a long history in the development of strategic and security issues in the region—considering one strategy of gaining both ASEAN and the member-states ’ appropriate attention on the issue of human rights: presenting the issue as a part of national/regional security concern. Securitising14 this issue would place human rights at the core of member-states ’ national interests, as well as ASEAN’s key strategic interests.

In their attempt to win ASEAN and member-states ’ support for the establishment of a regional human rights body, the Network focussed on shifting their perspective on the matter. Specifically: shifting the perspective of human rights from a very narrow view, i.e. limited only as a threat to collective rights (as suggested by Asian Values), to being viewed as an integral part of national security, since, quoting Anwar (2003), ‘there can be no real security for the state if its people are not secure’ (p. 565). For this reason, AICOHR introduced to ASEAN a new discourse of ‘human security’—a soft, non-traditional security approach, which also served as an ‘umbrella’ for other non-traditional security issues at both the national and regional level.15 The Network believed that, as an advocacy tool, the term human security had greater political acceptability in the region—than the term human rights. It offered a comfortable shelter for member-states that were constrained when discussing human rights in traditional terms. Highlighting the security aspect would ‘gradually pave the way for a more congenial assessment of human rights … [as] human security and human rights are two sides of the same coin’ (Anwar 2003: 537).

This securitisation strategy facilitated greater shifts in member-states’ perception of human rights as a norm—or, referring to Compston (2009), it altered how they perceived the nature of problems and, hence, their solutions. This shift is noticeable in at least three ways. First, the member-states were now capable of viewing the norms as they existed, not as vis-a-vis state security. Second, member-states had greater willingness to enhance regional understanding and to generate a regional consensus on human rights issues. Third, and most importantly, by expanding the scope of their national security to include the security of the individual, member-states were made aware of how a comprehensive approach, rather than hard politics, was necessary to safeguard regional security and stability (Tan 2011).

By early 2000, some member-states had displayed greater interest in the concept of human rights. However, ASEAN, as a regional institution, still showed no interest in including the concept within their security agenda. Under these circumstances, AICOHR maximised their personal communication and dialogue forum in persuading ASEAN to adopt the term in any regional security documents possible. In 2004, the outcome of this strategy was apparent: although neither the term human rights nor human security was mentioned in the ASEAN Security Community Action Plan (ASC Plan) agreed upon in April 2004, the document adopted the term ‘comprehensive security’ (which referred to human security as the referent object of security) as the principle behind the ASEAN Security Community’s establishment.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.