Jul 22, 2022 | DFF, Opinion Articles
Speech pronounced on 19 July 2022 by ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) Board Member, Teddy Baguilat, on the occasion of “Martyrs’ Day” in Myanmar, at an online event organized by the Committee Representing the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH), a group founded after the coup d’état of 1 February 2022 by elected lawmakers. “Martyrs’ Day,” also known as “Arzani Day,” commemorates the assassination in 1947 of Aung San, the hero of Myanmar’s independence, and several other members of his cabinet.
By Teddy Baguilat.
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, friends, I am Teddy Baguilat, Board Member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, and overseeing our advocacy work on Myanmar. Thank you to the National Unity Government and the CRPH for inviting me to speak today. It is a great honour to stand here before the courageous people of Myanmar to express our solidarity and support on a day of such significance to your people.
It has been the hardest of times for Myanmar since the illegal coup more than a year ago. Martyrs Day was established to honour the heroes of the fight for independence who paid the ultimate price for their courage to act on their beliefs and their faith in the Myanmar people.
It is one of the most grotesque outcomes of Myanmar’s history that the military terrorists, who were supposed to carry the legacy of those heroes of independence, are now carrying out atrocities against the brave Myanmar people. Aung San, whose assassination is remembered today and who founded the modern Myanmar military, was adamant that soldiers should be put under the authority of the civilian government. When he founded the Myanmar military to free the Myanmar people from the yoke of imperialism, he surely did not foresee what it would become: the enemy of this very same Myanmar people.
Indeed, his daughter is languishing in jail, charged as a criminal. She and more than 90 other elected parliamentarians are being kept in jail just for being elected.
The military that is supposed to protect the people of Myanmar have instead been committing atrocities of the most brutal and cruel kind on a daily basis all because of the ambitions of a small clique led by Min Aung Hlaing. His military and security forces have shown flagrant disregard for human life, bombarding populated areas with airstrikes and heavy weapons, and deliberately targeting civilians.
The international community including ASEAN has not done enough to prevent these and other atrocities and bring the junta to account for their crimes. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights herself has said: “the military has engaged in systematic and widespread human rights violations and abuses – some of which may amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.” But still the atrocities, the torture, the detentions, destruction of homes and livelihoods continue. The world is standing idly by. Even the UN has said the appalling breadth and scale of violations of international law suffered by the people of Myanmar demand a firm, unified, and resolute international response.
While we mourn for the loss of the lives of thousands of Myanmar people under the jackboot of the military, we believe that we must also take action to alleviate the suffering of the Myanmar people so that the sacrifices made by these martyrs are not for nothing. That is why APHR has undertaken an International Parliamentary Inquiry into the international failures to respond to the Myanmar crisis. Our findings will result in recommendations which will be the basis for advocacy for urgent and effective action by governments throughout the world, ASEAN and the United Nations.
We, at APHR, want the people of Myanmar to know you are not alone. We stand with you in your grief today, we too recognise your suffering. All through the extreme violence and turmoil since the coup, it is clear that the will of the Myanmar people has not been broken. You remain committed to seeing a return to the path of democracy and to institutions that truly reflect the diversity, will and aspirations of your beautiful country. We support and stand in solidarity with your courage to take up the fight of the martyrs of Myanmar. For today, we recognise the new martyrs who fight for a new Myanmar that is at peace, inclusive, democratic and prosperous.
Teddy Baguilat is a board member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR), and a former member of the House of Representatives in the Philippines.
Jun 29, 2022 | DFF, FoRB, Opinion Articles
By Eva Kusuma Sundari.
Almost a quarter of a century after the Indonesian people put an end to the dictatorship of General Suharto and embarked on a democratic transition uniquely successful in Southeast Asia, the country now finds itself at risk of taking major steps backwards on fundamental freedoms with the proposed overhaul of its Criminal Code.
If approved, some of the proposed changes would severely curtail the right to privacy and freedom of expression for Indonesians, and religious and sexual minorities would be vulnerable to legal abuses. According to the local human rights organization Aliansi Nasional Reformasi KUHP, the Draft Criminal Code contains 24 problematic provisions, ranging from the crime of insulting the president or the vice president and the criminalization of extramarital sex and cohabitation to crimes against religion.
The updating of the Indonesian Criminal Code, which dates back to the era when the country was a Dutch colony, is long overdue. But it is more important for lawmakers to get it right than do it hastily, and end up with another code reminiscent of colonial times, detrimental to democracy and good governance. They also need to be fully open with the citizenry about the process and the contents of the new draft, and allow more participation from civil society and the Indonesian public at large. Once adopted, the new Criminal Code will not be easy to amend, so any change adopted now is bound to have a long-term impact.
The process has been enormously tortuous so far. Initiated more than two decades ago, the overhaul has gone through several bumps and reversals. The draft was eventually finished in September 2019, and it was expected to be approved that year. But a huge popular movement opposed it, holding mass protests across the country that sometimes turned violent and resulted in five deaths. The bill was sent to parliament that year for deliberation and has been stuck there ever since.
But in late May this year, the government and the parliament discussed the modification of problematic provisions contained in the draft, and agreed to follow up the process without reopening discussions on the proposed legislation. The committee tasked with drafting the changes in the Criminal Code has done so behind closed doors, without consulting civil society or even new MPs, arguing that the draft “has already been agreed by the committee.”
The government and parliament argue that it is a carry-over bill, a law that has gone through deliberations and is slated to be voted in the next parliamentary session, suddenly showing a haste that, after so many years, is uncalled for. These maneuverings have been described by Muhammad Isnur, head of Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), as “symptoms of authoritarianism.”
Despite claims by the government that 14 unpopular provisions have been amended, the draft Criminal Code remains potentially discriminatory on certain points, excessively punitive on others, and generally detrimental to democratic principles.
One of the most problematic aspects of the draft is its blasphemy article. Human Rights Watch has denounced the fact that it expands the 1965 Blasphemy Law and increases the number of “elements of the crime” to include, for instance, the defamation of religious artifacts.
This is particularly worrying given that blasphemy cases have skyrocketed in recent years. According to the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), there were 38 cases between January and May 2020, whereas SETARA Institute recorded a total of only six cases in 2014. Religious minority groups like the Shia, Ahmadi, Baha’i, or Jehovah’s Witnesses are usually the main victims of blasphemy laws, with legal processes often initiated by public pressure. And some of the people charged with blasphemy are minors.
As Islamists are gaining ground amid what some scholars have termed a “conservative turn” in Indonesia, the last thing that the country needs now is to widen the scope of its Blasphemy Law. If the Indonesian government is serious about protecting freedom of religion or belief for its people, it should scrap the law.
The LGBTIQ community will fare no better. The punishment of extramarital sex and cohabitation can potentially be used against homosexual couples, who do not have the right to marry, while the criminalization of “obscene acts” in public can also be used to target LGBTIQ people.
Also, some of the new provisions could drastically restrict the space for political debate. One of the articles would make it punishable to “attack the honor and dignity of the President and the Vice-President.” Other problematic articles include jail sentences for “spreading Marxist-Leninist teachings” or for association with Marxist organizations “with the intent of changing the policy of the government.”
The revision of the Criminal Code is a major legal project that will affect all Indonesians one way or another. And it should not be aimed at strengthening the government’s authority, but at protecting the rights of all Indonesians. If the government wishes to keep to the democratic path that Indonesia chose 24 years ago, it should reopen the debate on the draft with civil society, and listen with special attention those who would be most negatively affected by the proposed laws, including religious and sexual minorities, in order to make sure that laws are designed to protect them, not to persecute them.
Eva Kusuma Sundari is a board member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR), and a former member of Indonesian House of Representatives.
This article first appeared in The Diplomat.
Jun 8, 2022 | CCHR, DFF, Internet Freedoms, Opinion Articles
By Eva Kusuma Sundari.
Indonesia has made a long journey since the fall of president Soeharto in 1998, from military dictatorship to a vibrant democracy in which most of its citizens enjoy greater political freedoms. This accomplishment has been accompanied by an impressive economic growth that has placed the vast archipelago in the Group of 20, where it is the only country representing ASEAN.
By holding the G20 presidency this year, and hosting the group’s summit in November, Indonesia has a unique position to give a voice to the often-sidelined aspirations of the Global South.
The Indonesian government should use that position to promote a form of inclusive collaboration among nations to address challenges that affect humanity as a whole. Among them are the need for stronger and more creative global responses to issues like the devastation caused by armed conflicts such as in Myanmar or Ukraine, the need to increase financial support for a sustainable energy transition, or the impact of the world’s digital transformation on human rights and democracy.
Indonesia has succeeded in sending its military back to the barracks. The country’s recent history of dictatorship, turmoil, and democratization has given it an invaluable wealth of experience that can provide a distinct advantage in its perspective on conflicts and their consequences.
Alongside other countries like Malaysia, Indonesia is already leading efforts within ASEAN to find peaceful solutions to the crisis in Myanmar, acting on the belief that only democracy and stability can foster economic development.
Now Indonesia could use the experience gained by its own history and propose a new working group at the G20 to discuss judicious responses from the largest economies in the world to crises like the one in Myanmar or those plunging countries such as Ukraine, Syria or Yemen into chaos. And, as the third biggest democracy in the world and the country with the largest Muslim population, Indonesia is particularly suited to play a role as peacemaker in the Muslim world.
Wars throughout the world are having devastating consequences that are not confined within national borders: from rising commodity prices, shortages of food and energy supplies, to increases in human trafficking and the production and trade of illicit drugs and weapons. In Myanmar, poverty has skyrocketed to rates not seen in 20 years.
The community of nations is in dire need of alternative platforms to explore new ways to tackle such crises. These platforms would work as complementary channels to global organizations like the United Nations, or regional groups like ASEAN, that have often failed to prevent atrocities, or alleviate the worst consequences of these wars. The G20 could be one of them and Indonesia is uniquely suited to initiate the discussion.
Meanwhile, the need for a sustainable energy transition is already in the G20 agenda, and Indonesia should be commended for acknowledging the importance of taking collective action to phase out fossil fuels and adopt renewable sources of energy.
The stakes have never been higher. The latest study from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has confirmed that current pledges to reduce carbon emissions will not be sufficient to slow global warming.
All countries must cut global emissions by 43 percent and reach net-zero carbon emissions by the early 2050s to avoid a climate catastrophe. Implementing a sustainable energy transition that takes into account the needs and perspectives of all the people involved is both the most efficient and cost-effective way to do so.
As a vital step, Indonesia must lead the G20 to agree to accelerate the phasing out from coal and fossil fuels, and to ensure there is sufficient financial support to do so. With its presidency, the country finds itself in the position to push for G20 countries to increase their financial commitments and assistance to those facing major barriers in their energy transition.
Last, but by no means least, as economies and societies at large increasingly move toward digitalization, it is no longer possible to ignore the powerful role played by “tech giants”, or big technological companies, in particular Google, Amazon, Meta, and Apple, in shaping not only the world economy, but the state of democracy and human rights globally.
The services these tech giants offer come at a huge cost. By harvesting and selling our personal data in order to predict and shape consumers’ behavior, they track our online behavior in every view, click, purchase, and interaction, in order to analyze and monetize it. The profits obtained by these enormous companies on the back of people’s personal data are bigger than some rich countries’ gross domestic product.
Their unregulated money-making model is also allowing them to profit from the spread of disinformation, divisiveness, and hate. And these phenomena are undermining democracy, stability, and social cohesion in many countries, from the United States, where conspiracy theories like Qanon are spreading like fire, to the Philippines, where online disinformation is rampant.
Indonesia leads the streamlining of digital issues in the various working groups of the G20, and rallies for an inclusive, empowering and sustainable digital transformation aimed at a resilient recovery from the pandemic. But it must also ensure that these discussions do not take place without addressing the damage that the Big Tech’s business models are having on people’s individual rights and democracy worldwide.
Indonesia is not new to playing a central role in world affairs. In 1955, it organized the Bandung Conference, a watershed moment that led to the creation of the Non-Aligned Movement. The world has changed enormously since then, but Indonesia finds itself now in a position where it can once again represent the interests and aspirations of the Global South and help to find solutions to problems that deeply affect all the inhabitants of this planet.
Eva Kusuma Sundari is a board member of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR), and a former member of Indonesian House of Representatives.
This article first appeared in The Jakarta Post.
Jun 5, 2022 | DFF, Opinion Articles
By Kasit Piromya.
At first sight, the upcoming commune and sangkat elections in Cambodia may resemble a democratic exercise, as 17 parties will be allowed to run, but one has only to scratch the surface to realize that the polls are prepared in a climate of intimidation against the opposition. The elections will yet again be an instrument for the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) to attempt to legitimize its increasingly dictatorial rule and maintain its hold on power in what has become de facto a one-party state.
This does not bode well for democracy in Cambodia as the country prepares for a legislative election next year. And there are many reasons why the international community should not be fooled by the electoral charade that will take place on June 5.
The main challenger to the CPP’s hegemony is the Candlelight Party, which has been allowed to present candidates for most of Cambodia’s 1,652 communes. But the National Election Committee (NEC), has removed more than 100 candidates from the party, leaving the CPP with no major competitors in some of the most important constituencies, including the capital, Phnom Penh.
According to the Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (NICFEC), an independent election watchdog, the candidate disqualifications were made after an unfair process in which the NEC failed to present evidence or witnesses. The NEC is hardly an independent body, as it is mainly made up of loyalists to the CPP and the prime minister, Hun Sen, who has been in power since 1985. There are no opposition members on the body, even if by law they should have equal representation.
Moreover, the Candlelight Party has suffered harassment throughout the campaign, often reportedly at the hands of local officials. Most recently, the party’s campaign signs were vandalized and removed in the province of Siem Reap; in March, two candidates were arrested on allegations of forging documents, in a case which the party maintains was an example of the political harassment to which it is constantly subjected. In Kompong Cham, several candidates risk being disqualified after being accused by the CPP of buying votes.
In these circumstances, free competition and safe campaigning, necessary in any democratic process, are utterly absent. As the Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL) argued in a recent report, “undemocratic elements in the current legal framework continue to allow room for abuse, leading to a repressed civic space and a hindrance to a free and fair election environment.”
All this is part of a long and systematic pattern. Hun Sen and the CPP have controlled Cambodia for over three decades. To do so, they have dealt with any dissent with harassment, violence and political persecution. Draconian measures have been imposed to prevent the opposition from exercising its freedom of expression, association, and assembly. The most common method is judicial persecution; political disagreements with the ruling party are routinely taken to courts utterly lacking in any independence.
The culmination of this harassment came in November 2017 with the arbitrary dissolution of the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), the most serious challenger to Hun Sen at the time. The elimination of the party, which had won 43.8 percent of the popular vote in commune elections that year, paved the way for the CPP to win all 125 seats in parliament at national elections the following year.
Ever since, and to give the political coup de grâce to the opposition, dozens of members of the CNRP have faced judicial harassment, including the party’s president, Kem Sokha, who remains banned from political activities and is on trial for treason. In March of this year, 19 opposition politicians and activists were sentenced to between five and 10 years in prison. Among them there are seven leaders in exile who were tried in absentia, including the former leader of the CNRP, Sam Rainsy, and its deputy, Mu Sochua.
The Candlelight Party, the current iteration of the opposition party founded by Sam Rainsy in 1995, may be allowed to take part in the electoral process, but only on a blatantly uneven playing field designed to assure victory for the CPP.
This unevenness is compounded by the muzzling of the independent media, and a tight control and harassment of civil society. And, to further limit the civic space in the country, in 2021 the government passed the Sub-Decree on the Establishment of the National Internet Gateway, through which all internet traffic would be routed through a single “gateway,” enabling the government to monitor any online activity. The gateway plan has been put on hold, but it has raised serious concerns among human rights organizations.
If it stays in its current path, Cambodia will continue to be a one-party state for the foreseeable future. And that has repercussions for the whole of Southeast Asia, which has recently taken a worrying authoritarian turn, most dramatically exemplified in the coup in Myanmar last year. As the current chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) this year, the Hun Sen regime broke from the group’s consensus and lent legitimacy to the Myanmar junta by meeting its leader, Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, thus further undermining democracy in the region.
And authoritarianism is not only a dire threat to human rights and democracy, it is also detrimental to economic growth, as it fosters instability and undermines social cohesion. This is a lesson that democratic countries should take to heart when dealing with Cambodia and other authoritarian regimes.
There remain sections in Cambodian civil society that are committed to the promotion of human rights and democracy, despite the overwhelming odds stacked against them, and the international community should continue supporting them.
Pressure should be applied to the regime while keeping in mind the needs and vulnerabilities of an already impoverished population. For instance, the European Parliament justifiably condemned the arbitrary dissolution of CNRP earlier this month while also calling on the government to put an end to the persecution of political opposition, journalists, and human rights defenders.
Cambodia needs democracy for its own sake, but also for an ASEAN that faces continued economic, public health, human rights, and environmental challenges. It is incumbent on its democratically-minded neighbors and partners to send a clear message that these faux elections will not result in legitimacy for the CPP – especially while fundamental freedoms and human rights are trampled over on a daily basis.
Kasit Piromya is a former Foreign Minister of Thailand, and a Board Member of Asean Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).
This article first appeared in The Diplomat.
May 16, 2022 | DFF, Opinion Articles
By Charles Santiago and Ed Markey.
This Friday, while United States President Joe Biden hosts a special summit with leaders of ASEAN to mark 45 years of partnership, a crisis rages on in Myanmar.
Myanmar, one of ASEAN’s 10 members, has spiraled into a state of chaos and violence since the Myanmar military overthrew the country’s democratically elected government in February 2021. The coup d’état abruptly ended a decade of democratic reforms that had brought a democratically-elected government to power, reflecting the will of the people of Myanmar.
As elected representatives from the US and Southeast Asia, we are appalled by the abuses perpetrated by the Myanmar military and are joining together on the occasion of the US-ASEAN summit – in the true spirit of US and ASEAN partnership – to demand a strong, coordinated, and global response to the devastation wrought at the hands of military leaders in Myanmar.
Since the 2021 coup, the Myanmar military has been engaged in an all-out assault against political opponents, journalists, health workers, and civilians, killing at least 1,800 people, including children, and arresting more than 10,000 people. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees counts nearly 300,000 internally displaced people inside the country since the coup, with 25,000 having fled across borders to neighboring countries.
Yet, the response of the international community has been clearly insufficient. The UN Security Council has failed to adopt a global arms embargo, a coordinated sanctions regime, or to successfully negotiate the delivery of humanitarian aid. The military government continues its campaign of repression against its own citizens with impunity. This inertia is likely to persist, given that the junta is protected by the Russian and Chinese governments.
That is why it is imperative for ASEAN and the US to come together on a course of action that will alleviate the suffering of Myanmar’s people and restore their democracy.
Some positive steps have been taken in that direction. On March 21, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken declared the crimes, beginning in 2017, committed against the Rohingya people by the Burmese military as genocide and crimes against humanity. This is an important step on the path to accountability and justice but alone will not be enough.
Over the last year, the US government has imposed targeted sanctions on Commander-in-Chief of the Myanmar military Min Aung Hlaing and his henchmen, and has blocked the junta from withdrawing US$1 billion dollars held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The European Union, the United Kingdom, and Canada have also imposed their own sanctions and arms embargoes.
Meanwhile, ASEAN has taken the unprecedented measure of refusing to invite Min Aung Hlaing to its annual leader’s summit, and agreed in April 2021 to a five-point consensus that includes demands for an end to the violence and dialogue between all parties, the appointment of a Special Envoy to Myanmar, and the provision of humanitarian aid.
None of that, however, has deterred the junta. As the situation in Myanmar continues to deteriorate, the international and regional response must be escalated. Here’s what we recommend:
The US should take a page from the smart playbook it has deployed against Russia for its war of aggression in Ukraine by doubling down on punishing sanctions, and include the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE), a state conglomerate that the junta seized shortly after the coup. The military has seized an estimated $1.5 billion in gas revenues and is using these funds to tighten its undemocratic grip on power.
While the US can play an important role, ASEAN should lead the way in resolving the Myanmar crisis and restoring the democratically-elected government of Myanmar.
It is evident that the junta has totally failed to comply with the Five-Point Consensus, and this should come with consequences. Now is the time for ASEAN to adopt much stronger measures, including the suspension of Myanmar’s ASEAN membership, travel bans in the region, and targeted sanctions against the leaders of the coup.
Both ASEAN member states and the US should bolster the legitimacy of the National Unity Government of Myanmar (NUG). It represents the democratically-elected government and receives support from the majority of the Myanmar people. Senior Biden administration officials have met with NUG officials, and recently the foreign minister of Malaysia announced that he had held informal conversations with NUG officials. These are encouraging steps, but more engagement with the NUG is needed.
Finally, the US and ASEAN must work together on delivering urgent humanitarian aid. International NGOs estimate that over 14 million people in Myanmar are in need of assistance. This aid should be channeled through locally trusted community-based and civil society organizations to effectively reach those that need it the most.
The US, ASEAN member states, and neighboring countries like Thailand should open their doors to refugees fleeing persecution and violence in Myanmar.
We have joined together, parliamentarians from opposite sides of the globe, because we share the same concern with the crisis that has unfolded in Myanmar. The people of Myanmar are victims of crimes against humanity so severe that they are a stain on our common humanity. They concern us all. The US, ASEAN, and partners like the EU, the UK, Japan, Australia, and India, have a responsibility to act in the face of such atrocities.
ASEAN should lead the way in these global efforts to stop the crimes being perpetrated by the military junta in neighboring Myanmar, hold leaders accountable, and protect the Myanmar people who are suffering so grievously under their yoke.
The US should use its position as a global leader for good by backing these efforts. This is what the next chapter of a strong US-ASEAN partnership can accomplish.
Charles Santiago is a Malaysian member of parliament and chair of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights.
Ed Markey is a United States senator (Democrats-Massachusetts).
This article first appeared in The Jakarta Post.
May 11, 2022 | CCHR, Opinion Articles
By Kasit Piromya.
As US President Joe Biden is due to meet with leaders from Southeast Asian countries this week at the US-Asean Summit in Washington from May 12-13, one issue on which Washington bears an enormous responsibility — and from which Asean countries suffer enormous consequences — will be high on the agenda: climate change.
As the biggest economy in the world and the country responsible for more emissions than any other over the past three centuries, the United States ranks as the biggest single contributor to climate change, a dubious honour that China may be now chasing.
Meanwhile, Southeast Asia is among the regions where the climate crisis is the most destructive, as it threatens the livelihoods, security and rights of the more than 680 million people who live in areas prone to natural disasters, including typhoons, floods and droughts.
This kind of destruction is to a large extent caused by advanced economies like the United States and, to put it bluntly, they have an obligation to pay for the damage their model of development has inflicted on the planet. It is America’s responsibility to financially assist Asean, as well as poorer regions, in moving towards a just, sustainable and resilient green economy.
While our region has committed to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, the commitments of Asean members under the Paris Agreement are far from sufficient to halt global warming.
One of the main obstacles to speedier and stronger climate action in the region is not just the lack of political will, but also the costs involved. Transitioning from fossil fuels to clean and renewable energy sources requires enormous financial investments up-front. This is all the more difficult at a time when the region already needs to mitigate its debt crisis after having borrowed money to support the post-pandemic economic recovery. And here is precisely where the United States can and should help Southeast Asia, by making sure that Asean members get access to international climate funds and by financially contributing to support their energy transitions.
Sadly, the US government’s financial support for the bloc on this matter falls way short of the mark. At last year’s US-Asean Summit, President Biden pledged to double the climate finance contributed by his predecessor Barack Obama, raising the figure from US$3 billion (103.8 billion baht) to $5.7 billion, with the stated intention to “make the US a leader in international climate finance”.
However, that pledge does not reflect the US’s fair share of the $100 billion climate finance goal, promised by rich nations to less wealthy countries to help them mitigate and adapt to climate change. According to an analysis by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), the United States should contribute between $43 billion and $50 billion each year to climate finance, based on its gross national income and cumulative emissions.
If Washington wants to protect its long-term strategic interests in Southeast Asia, particularly now that China is becoming increasingly assertive in the region, it should step up its commitment to climate finance at this week’s US-Asean Summit to help members of the bloc further reduce their carbon emissions.
Moreover, the US could use its preeminent position at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to ensure a more equitable distribution to developing countries of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). SDRs are international reserve assets that can be traded between the central banks of IMF member countries to support the global recovery process from Covid-19 and address the climate crisis in the Global South — Latin America, Asia, Africa and Oceania.
A test of Washington’s willingness to cooperate with Asean in ensuring the region’s economic stability and tackling the climate change crisis would be to use its influence at the IMF to support a reallocation for developing countries of the SDRs’ funds as non-repayable grants instead of loans.
By doing so, Asean would be able to accelerate its energy transition and commitment to the global climate change objective of reducing emissions.
The challenges posed by climate change cannot wait. Asean members should join forces at the summit this week to secure a meaningful and stronger commitment from the US for climate finance in the region, at a time when more ambitious climate-related improvements are urgently needed.
Kasit Piromya is a former Foreign Minister of Thailand, and a Board Member of Asean Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).
This article first appeared in The Bangkok Post.
