The slogan of the Chairmanship is “Cohesive and responsive”, which, along with even greater solidarity of ASEAN member countries, also implies an increase of resistance to the regional and global challenges, and the ability to capitalize on the emerging opportunities.
In this context, the Vietnamese Chairmanship identified the following priorities:
1. Increasing the Association’s contribution to maintaining peace, security and stability in the region by strengthening intra-ASEAN solidarity and unity, mutual support, coordination of positions on regional and international issues.
2. Deepening interconnectivity and economic integration – both within the Association and with external partners. Enhancing the ability to adapt to the changes brought about by the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
3. Strengthening the ASEAN identity through the formation of common values, increasing the awareness of the population about ASEAN, promoting the image of the ASEAN Community.
4. Development of the Association’s global ties in the interests of peace, stability and sustainable development. Increasing contribution to the formation of a new regional and global architecture, as well as rules of conduct.
5. Expanding the institutional capacities and effectiveness of ASEAN through appropriate reforms, improvement of existing and creation of new standards56.
Considering the present-day international milieu in Southeast Asia and beyond, Vietnam is not interested in increasing tensions in the South China Sea, which means it is unlikely to initiate any new anti-Chinese step (which, however, does not mean that Hanoi will not respond to possible provocations of Beijing). An ideal option for Hanoi is to maintain the balance achieved earlier, to avoid new contradictions, and to complete the second reading of the draft Code of Conduct. In a similar vein, the Vietnamese presidency will apparently adhere to a cautious approach to other regional issues, in particular the Rohingya problem in Myanmar.
In the context of the promotion of diverse Indo-Pacific strategies by non-regional countries, as well as the actual consolidation of “Indo-Pacific” terms in the regional political vocabulary, it is unlikely that the Vietnamese chairmanship will be free from these geographical neologisms. Consequently, Hanoi will probably continue to promote the ASEAN’s “Indo-Pacific Outlook”. This allows the association, on the one hand, not to go against the present-day political mainstream, and on the other, to defend its own agenda.
Importantly, from the multilateral perspective Hanoi has ample chances to repeat its ten-year old success story. This can be achieved both by inviting new non-regional partners into ASEAN-led discussions in various statuses, and by intensifying contacts with ASEAN’s existing dialogue partners.
Vietnam also plans to make the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) one of the main achievements of its chairmanship – with or without India. This was repeatedly stated by the leadership of the Ministry of Industry and Trade responsible for this project, emphasizing that it would do everything possible to sign the document in 202057.
Finally, Vietnam will increase ASEAN’s capacity to grasp the demands of the “Fourth Industrial Revolution”. Specifically, the emphasis will be placed on introducing the smart cities technologies and bridging the gaps between the digital development of ASEAN member states. Problems like the aftereffects of climate change, the salinization of soils in the Mekong Delta, plastic garbage, etc., will also be reflected.
In general, Hanoi will focus on decreasing the seriousness of challenges the Association is currently encountering. Among them, the most important are the remaining lack of ASEAN unity and prospects for rivalry in the regional and global international milieu. At the same time, Vietnam expects to receive serious reputation benefits, both through demonstrating its increased influence, and through finalizing ASEAN’s long-standing mega-projects, first and foremost, the RCEP.
Conclusion
Over the past decade, the regional and the global milieu have seen an increased competition between the great powers with troublesome aftereffects on Southeast Asia. This incentivizes the Association and Vietnam as its present chairman, to implement a smart and nuanced policy in order to balance interests of all the parties on the regional chessboard.
For Vietnam, ASEAN is and will possibly remain the key foreign policy direction as the association plays an indispensable role in promoting Vietnam’s interests from the substantial, institutional and reputational perspective. If so, Hanoi will make every effort to strengthen ASEAN solidarity and central role in the Asia-Pacific multilateralism.
So far, Vietnam has chaired ASEAN three times, and each chairmanship fell to the critical period for the history of the association. The 1998 chairmanship was amid ASEAN’s policy to cope with the aftereffects of the Asian financial and economic crisis, while the 2010 and 2020 chairmanships marked ASEAN’s attempts to keep the South China Sea issue and the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemics in a manageable state. Among other tasks, for the association it presupposed strengthening ASEAN’s internal unity and ASEAN’s positions in the Asia-Pacific multilateral dialogue platforms. The extent of Hanoi’s ability to deal with these tasks during its present chairmanship will largely shape the future evolution of the association.
Вьетнам между США и Китаем58
МОСЯКОВ ДМИТРИЙ ВАЛЕНТИНОВИЧ
доктор исторических наук, профессор, руководитель центра изучения Юго-Восточной Азии, Австралии и Океании Федерального государственного бюджетного учреждения науки «Институт востоковедения РАН»
ШПАКОВСКАЯ МАРИНА АНАТОЛЬЕВНА
доктор исторических наук, профессор, профессор кафедры теории и истории международных отношений Федерального государственного автономного образовательного учреждения высшего образования «Российский университет дружбы народов»
Данная статья посвящена анализу проблем выбора пути политического развития и геополитической ориентации стран Юго-Восточной Азии в условиях глобальной трансформации международных отношений. Этот вопрос выбора стоит сегодня перед странами региона в целом и отдельными государствами в частности.
В этом отношении, современный Вьетнам, учитывая его выгодное геополитическое положение, поступательное экономическое развитие, наличие одной из сильнейших армий в Азии, занимающий прочные позиции среди стран АСЕАН и в регионе в целом, оказался в поле столкновения интересов США и Китая. В этом отношении борьба за влияние во Вьетнаме может иметь судьбоносный характер для расстановки сил в регионе в целом.
Свое влияние США наращивают сразу по нескольким направлениям, в том числе это и работа с молодежью (прежде всего программы в области высшего образования), попытки проникновения во все сферы общественной жизни, в первую очередь политической. Одновременно и Китай поддерживает тесные связи между компартиями двух стран, активно наращивая экономическое сотрудничество. Особенно активно торговля ведется в приграничных районах, реализуя тем самым инициативу «Два экономических коридора – один пояс», принятую еще в 2004 г. Авторы отмечают, что развитие отношений с Россией во всех областях приобретает особо важное значение, главным образом, за счет развития доверия и партнерства, которые исторически сложились между двумя странами.