{"id":22951,"date":"2015-10-19T06:00:25","date_gmt":"2015-10-18T19:00:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=22951"},"modified":"2015-10-19T12:59:42","modified_gmt":"2015-10-19T01:59:42","slug":"the-semi-groucho-on-australian-joining-asean","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/the-semi-groucho-on-australian-joining-asean\/","title":{"rendered":"The semi-Groucho on Australia joining ASEAN"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a><\/p>\n Groucho Marx got the conundrum into one great line: \u2018I don\u2019t want to belong to any club that would accept me as one of its members.\u2019<\/p>\n My argument that Australia should join<\/a> the Association of South East Asian Nations confronts Canberra\u2019s wish to do a semi-Groucho: \u2018Love the club. Think it\u2019s a wonderful, vitally important club. But we\u2019d never want to join.\u2019<\/p>\n Excellent explanations of the semi-Groucho have been written by Rod Lyon<\/a> and Matt Davies<\/a>. And to pile it on, this column will further explore the case for the negative offered by official Canberra. To recap, the previous column<\/a> boiled down Canberra\u2019s semi-Groucho to this:<\/p>\n Base argument: ASEAN would say no.<\/p>\n Minor point: ASEAN membership would involve a lot of work for diplomats.<\/p>\n Major point: Australia would subordinate itself to ASEAN.<\/p>\n Base argument<\/strong>: If asked today, ASEAN would, indeed, say no. And Australia, on the semi-Groucho logic, would never ask. The purpose of this series, as laid out in the first post, is to argue that this is the starting point for a conversation that will take decades.<\/p>\n Much that is already happening in Asia will make this a necessary, even vital process of imagination, as much for ASEAN as for us.<\/p>\n Minor point<\/strong>: The \u2018too much work\u2019 argument is a laugh. Repurpose another Groucho line and move on: \u2018Diplomacy is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies\u2019.<\/p>\n Major point<\/strong>: The subordinate-to-ASEAN line is interesting in what it claims about the reality of ASEAN workings today and the future of the ASEAN Community.<\/p>\n Neither the proclaimed theory nor the habits of ASEAN make this a knock-out blow in the case for the negative. ASEAN is a long way from becoming the European Economic Community, much less the European Union. We pay our diplomats to know the difference between Europe and Asia.<\/p>\n The subordinate-our-values line is significant. Matt Davies argues that ASEAN norms would be \u2018a pre-emptive blanket that smothers the possibility of criticism from other member states. Australia joining ASEAN would have numerous deleterious consequences for the promotion of our values. What is the benefit of Australia being willingly mute in the realm of human rights and democracy?\u2019<\/p>\n If accepted, this is a killer semi-Groucho. Here\u2019s a rebuttal in several parts. First, Matt isn\u2019t describing an Australia I recognise. His is an Australia that sits still, shuts up, goes along and doesn\u2019t push. Not us. Australia would no more change its fundamental nature within ASEAN than Indonesia or Malaysia or the Philippines or Vietnam or any of the ten have changed their essential natures in the Association.<\/p>\n Further, on the long march to Community, ASEAN is seeking to remake its regionalism in important ways that Australia will happily embrace. The proclaimed norms are shifting\u2014we\u2019d be pushing with the tide.<\/p>\n