I WAS with an international group of journalists as we were hurried along by our handlers in Beijing one chilly, smoggy October evening last year.
Among them was a diminutive man who seemed happy to take life as it came.
“Where are you from?” I enquired.
“Laos,” he said, “you?”
I told him I was from Malaysia.
His cheery face cracked into a smile as he replied: “Ah, Asean brother.”
As the excursion got under way, other “Asean brothers and sisters” from Indonesia, Myanmar, Malaysia, Cambodia and Vietnam gravitated towards each other — eager for some companionship among burly Eastern Europeans and Central Asians, phlegmatic South Asians and even a cherubic South Pacific Islander.
Communication was halting at first — English was our common language, but some were more fluent than others.
While resting, another Malaysian journalist bought ice cream for everybody in the group. That broke the ice, and the conversation, though still halting, was more animated after that.
Tentative questions about each other’s country were answered with pride.
“You should go to Luang Prabang,” said the Laotian.
“Borobudur has many mysteries,” said the Indonesian.
At the end of the trip, the Malaysians informed all: “Contact us if you are in Kuala Lumpur next month to cover the Asean Summit.”
Warm handshakes and calling cards were exchanged as we bid goodbye.
Unfortunately, none were assigned to cover the 27th Asean Summit and Related Summits that ran from Nov 18 till Nov 22 in Kuala Lumpur.
It would have been nice to pick each other’s brain after regional leaders inked the Kuala Lumpur Declaration on the Establishment of the Asean Community on Nov 22.
The Asean Community promises greater regional integration predicated on the grouping’s three pillars — Political-Security, Economic and Socio-Cultural.
Leaders, diplomats and officials had laboured hard to navigate the myriad, and sometimes conflicting, interests among the Asean nations, to see through what was touted to be a historic initiative.
But there is a disconnect between what the leaders are pitching and what’s happening on the ground.
The Asean Community officially came into being on Dec 31 and, four days into the New Year, it is likely the event went unnoticed for most people in Southeast Asia.
For those in the more affluent nations of Asean — like Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia — some are probably still hung-over from the weekend of merriment. Others may be fretting about resolutions they had made, but doubt they could keep.
For those in the poorer nations — like Myanmar or Cambodia — Jan 1 is probably a lucrative day to make some money off well-heeled tourists hung-over from the weekend of merriment and fretting about resolutions they had made, but doubt they could keep.
Analysts have long derided Asean as being a top-heavy organisation that has consistently failed to translate its initiatives into action on the ground.
The language of the Asean Community documents didn’t help — encumbered by legalese and diplomatic speak as international fora are wont. Analysts had trouble digesting the alphabet soup of jargon to find out what it was really about.
While these criticisms are justified, and must be heeded, it also vital not to lose sight of the usefulness of Asean and the challenges it will face as it seeks to be a more cohesive grouping.
The Asean Community has been compared with the European Union — a convenient but unfair exercise.
The integration in Europe was achieved after more than 50 years of work, and even then, there have been recent calls for the power centred in Brussels to be devolved back to member states.
Getting Europeans to unite could be seen as easier. They have a common Judeo-Christian heritage to draw on, and the histories of their nations are through alliances, marriages between their royal houses, and the movement of their great thinkers and artists across borders.
Even then, war and conflict blighted much of Europe throughout history, and it was only through sheer political will after World War 2 that peace has prevailed and the continent is allowed to prosper.
The cultural differences in Southeast Asia are hard to ignore. In the north are Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam which share a Buddhist heritage.
Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia are predominantly Muslim, the Philippines is a majority-Catholic nation, while Chinese culture prevails in Singapore.
Yet, the nations did come together out of necessity. Communist insurgencies were rampant in the region in the 1960s, as the Cold War was in full swing. Southeast Asian nations, newly minted after Western colonialist withdrew, were wary of the United States and the Soviet Union jostling for dominance.
Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines banded together in 1967 to form Asean as a bulwark against a new wave colonisation.
And they embraced others in the region to form the current 10-nation bloc. Asean looks poised to accept another, if Timor Leste’s application is accepted.
The region has grown from strength to strength.
Collectively, Asean nations would be the world’s seventh largest economy, with a combined gross domestic product of US$2.5 trillion (RM10.7 trillion).
Like us journalists on that dreary October evening in Beijing last year, we might not understand each other perfectly, but, we speak the same language of amity and companionship.
NST Foreign Editor Syed Azahedi breaks down overseas happenings