The recent series of ASEAN foreign ministers’ meetings, including the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) held in Bali last month, proved that ASEAN’s talk shop function is still of some value. Three factors highlighted this.

First, the meetings were held in the midst of growing tensions between China and some ASEAN members, such as Vietnam and the Philippines, over maritime territorial disputes in the South China Sea. And although China is yet to show any intention of making a compromise — insisting on bilateral negotiations with other claimants as the only way to resolve the disputes rather than utilising multilateral meetings such as the ARF to broker a resolution — the ASEAN meetings this year have confronted the issue in a more serious manner.

Second, the US’s increased engagement in Southeast Asia, including President Obama’s scheduled participation in the East Asian Summit (EAS) later this year, has given renewed significance to the ASEAN ministerial meetings. The Obama administration’s commitment to the region, epitomised by the slogan ‘The US is back in Asia’, is in sharp contrast to the apathetic attitude of the Bush administration as evinced by former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s two absences from the ARF in just four years. Through the Obama Administration and its participation in the ASEAN meetings we are seeing the first serious US engagement in Southeast Asia since the end of the Vietnam War.

Finally, the ‘talk shop’ provides an opportunity for Southeast Asian states to display leadership. This year Indonesia has assumed the chairmanship of ASEAN, and has been under pressure to host meetings successfully after failure to find a solution to the border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia undermined confidence in its leadership. That leadership will continue to be tested as Indonesia is set to host more meetings, including the EAS.

Prior to the Bali meetings, ASEAN had never successfully acted as an effective shield to protect the interests of its members in territorial disputes. However, the US, playing a key role in placing the disputes on the recent ARF agenda, has confronted China over the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Of significance was the US claim that both parties should provide ‘legal evidence’ to support their territorial claims. This legal-based approach to the territorial disputes, initially promoted by the Philippines, is something China has previously not paid serious attention to.

The US engagement in Southeast Asia and its planned participation in the EAS this year have also helped settle another debate over Asian regionalism: arguments over the most effective framework for regional cooperation.

The options available include ASEAN+3, the EAS, and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Finding an answer does require clarification as to what ‘cooperation’ implies; but US engagement in ASEAN regionalism has contributed to reducing competition and clarifying the division of labour. The US push for the development of a Free Trade Agreement in the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), and initiatives for the negotiation of a Trans-Pacific Partnership as a first step towards the formation of FTAAP, has given APEC its status as the most advanced institution for market integration. The global financial crisis has resulted in increased calls for regional financial cooperation. In this area, ASEAN+3, which has developed the Chiang Mai Initiative (CMI) since 2000, is considered the most effective regional financial cooperation mechanism. With regard to regional security issues, the EAS — whose stature has been boosted as the US and Russia are set to join this year — has emerged as the most useful framework.

The value of this framework is underscored by the comments of Kevin Rudd, former Australian Prime Minister and currently Foreign Minister, who called for an Asia Pacific Community a few years ago. A major rationale behind his proposal was a belief that there was no Asian regional institution that had ‘the ability to deal comprehensively with all of the economic, political and security issues’. None of the existing institutions brought together all of what he called essential participants, which includes the US, China, Japan, India, Russia and Indonesia.

However, the EAS is now going a long way toward fulfilling this role, having emerged as a comprehensive regional institution with 18 participants, including all those essential nations. One of the key agenda items at the upcoming EAS in Jakarta will be the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, as President Obama declared during his visit to Indonesia last year.

The US engagement remains a key factor for maintaining and enhancing ASEAN’s talk shop function. But, to continue enhancing ASEAN’s function, the traditional anxiety that ASEAN’s institutional significance would be diminished if a larger arrangement such as the EAS or APEC developed should be abandoned. The first EAS with 18 leaders to be held in November in Jakarta will act as a litmus test of ASEAN’s determination to challenge this mindset.

Takashi Terada is Professor of International Relations at the Organization for Asian Studies, Waseda University.