Twenty-two years after the end of World War II, the geographical identity known as Southeast Asia was composed of two large archipelagic nations—the Philippines and Indonesia—and the Malay Peninsula. The three countries were granted independence by their colonial masters—the US in the case of the Philippines, The Netherlands in the case of Indonesia and the United Kingdom in the case of Malaysia—as a result of the wave of decolonization that rolled over the developing world in furtherance of the United Nations-favored concept of self-determination.
It was only natural that in their new geopolitical situation, the Philippines, Malaysia (formerly the Federation of Malaysia) and Indonesia sought to establish to close ties. The peoples of the three countries were the same racial stock and the three countries shared a common Western colonial heritage and a developing-country type of economy. The first result of the three countries’ desire to form a sub-regional grouping was Maphilindo (Malaysia, Philipines, Indonesia). Maphilindo in due course morphed into ASA (Association of Southeast Asia). Amid indications of slow ASA progress, and considering the desire of other Southeast Asian nations—especially Thailand and the island city of Singapore, which in 1965 broke away from Malaysia—the decision was made by the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia to broaden the concept of Southeast Asia and to create a new grouping that would encompass Thailand, Singapore and the Bornean enclave of Brunei, which had chosen not to join Malaysia.
Thus was Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) born. The year was 1967 and the Founding Six were the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore and Brunei. With the end of the Vietnam War and the return of peace to what used to be called French Indonesia, the now-independent former French colonies—Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos—were soon knocking at Asean’s door requesting membership. Asean was now a nine-member grouping. With the rest of the Mekong River delta countries admitted into Asean, could Myanmar be denied entry? Of course not, and so the grouping that started out with three members was now a fully region-wide association with 10 member-states.
Recognizing that in the aftermath of World War II and their release from colonialism the developing countries would require the existence of an institution that would provide a steady inflow of financial assistance for development purposes, the founders of the United Nations established the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, better known as the World Bank. Until the mid-1960s the World Bank was the only non-commercial source of development finance for the developing countries of Asia. That changed in 1967, fifty years ago, with the start of operations of the Asian Development Bank. Now Developing Asia had two non-commercial sources of financing for its developmental projects.
The argument for the establishment of a mini-World Bank for Asia was made up of two parts. The first part was that Asia’s developing countries no longer had to compete so strenuously with the rest of the World Bank’s 190-odd members for loans. The second part of the argument was that, being in Asia and of Asia, ADB would be more attuned to Asia and would be familiar with the development financing needs of the continent. (ADB’s membership only covers Asia east of Iran). ADB’s 50-year record of operations, during which the Bank has given loans and made grants totaling billions of dollars to Asia’s developing countries, has fully validated the argument for establishing ADB.
Being an international institution operating in one of the most geopolitically sensitive parts of the globe, ADB has had to deal, during the last 50 years, with the tensions and rivalries between the US—one of the Bank’s two largest shareholders—and the major Asia-Pacific powers. Those tensions and rivalries have included the Vietnam War (1965-1975), and the territorial disputes involving China, Japan and host-country Philippines and the standoff between the two Korean states. More recently, it has had to deal with the entry into the development-financing picture of the China-sponsored Asian Industrial Infrastructure Bank. Through all the challenges ADB has not only survived but has emerged more experienced, stronger and wiser.
Asean, too, has had its share of travails and trials during the first half-century of its existence, At the start of its operations, it had to navigate the conflict between the members aligned with the US (the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore) and the three former Indo-Chinese colonies of France (Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos). During the following decades it had to help mitigate the effects of successive world economic downturns on the economies of its member-countries. More recently, there has been the East China Sea-West Philippine Sea problem involving an expansionist China and six Asean member-countries. And all the while maintaining an agreed policy of non-intervention by members in the domestic affairs of other Asean members.
Truly 1967 was a blessed year for the ten members of Asean; for it brought them two valuable gifts: an association that would lead their region along a path of productive unity and a source of development financing that they could call their own.
I add my small voice to the voices of Asians in felicitating Southeast Asia’s two golden institutions. Here’s to the next fifty years.
E-mail: rudyromero777@yahoo.com