4.

Legal and Security Threats to Malaysia’s Sovereignty

4.1 Cross-border Security Risks

4.1.1 ASEAN's legal stance on border security and the implications of insurgent activities
spilling over into Malaysia.

Ethnic conflicts have long plagued ASEAN countries and posed a major challenge to regional
security. The complex population structure of Southeast Asian countries has led to widespread
ethnic conflicts. Ethnic conflicts in some ASEAN countries have even triggered ethnic violence,
which has also indirectly affected border security. The country most affected by the outbreak of
violence in southern Thailand in late 2001 and its escalation in 2004 was neighboring Malaysia.
For decades, Malaysia has viewed the resurgence of violence in southern Thailand as a national
security risk and has tried to address the issue by strengthening cooperation with its northern
neighbor （ John Funston ， 2010 ） . The increasing violence in the border of Malaysia-Thailand
hassled to rising tensions between the two countries. The violence in southern Thailand will
certainly bring many social problems to Malaysia's border, especially the instability of the
Malaysia-Thailand border. The crime rate on the border between Malaysia and Thailand has
increased due to the violence, and the local people are not happy with what is happening in
Thailand (Mohd Mizan Aslam,2008). To solve this problem, the Malaysian government has to
spend a lot of money, which could have been used for development and poverty alleviation. The
burden on the government has become heavier because the Malaysian government needs to take
care of Thai refugees in refugee camps.

Common separatist movements in Southeast Asia are the conflict in the southern Philippines and
the Islamic separatist groups in Pattani, southern Thailand. The purpose of these groups is to seek
to concentrate socio-economic and political power and demand autonomy from the government.
In addition, they also demand separation from the country (Mohd Radzi bin Hj Abdul
Hamid,2017). These conflicts have led to human rights violations in Southeast Asia, increasing
refugee problems, and causing some Southeast Asian countries to fall into political storms. This
separatist movement threatens not only the security of Southeast Asian countries, but also the
entire region. Malaysia has also been caught in a dilemma of national security being threatened
due to the armed conflict in southern Thailand. Since southern Thailand borders Malaysia, many
separatists and drug gang members have Thai or Malaysian nationality. After creating violent
movements in southern Thailand, they flee to Malaysia, leading to increasing criminal activities
in northern Malaysia close to Thailand. In several cases, Malaysians, especially criminal groups,
also use the lack of enforcement in Southern Thailand to buy arms such as machine guns, pistols,
bombs, rifles, and automatic pistols (Mohd Mizan Aslam,2008).

4.2 Impact on Regional Stability

4.2.1 How ongoing conflicts challenge the ASEAN principle of non-interference.

The principle of non-interference in internal affairs is the core foundation for maintaining
relations between ASEAN member states (Keling, 2011). This principle was first incorporated
into the Bangkok Declaration, the founding document of ASEAN in 1967. The Bangkok
Declaration stated that ASEAN member states have the responsibility to prevent external
interference to ensure domestic and regional stability (Stubbs, 2008). At the same time, the 1997
Kuala Lumpur Declaration reaffirmed the policy of non-interference in internal affairs (Keling,
2011). The 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) further emphasized
this policy, which explicitly stated that the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of
ASEAN countries is one of the basic principles of ASEAN's operation (Stubbs, 2008).

Whether it is the problems brought to the Malaysian border by the riots in northern Thailand or
the armed conflict in the southern Philippines, they must still be resolved based on the principle
of non-interference. Former Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad discusses the Muslim
insurgency in southern Thailand in Thailand on November 21, 2006. These events demonstrate
that Malaysia has taken positive actions to achieve harmony and peace in the region without
interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and without using force (Mohd Mizan
Aslam,2008). In 2004, the two countries' deputy prime ministers attended the annual meeting of
the Malaysia-Thailand Border General Council to discuss how to cooperate in solving the crime
and refugee problems on the Malaysia-Thailand border. Both sides were also satisfied with the
results, and Malaysia agreed to repatriate all refugees to Thailand. The Malaysian government
has also actively participated in the peace process negotiations in the southern Philippines and
hopes to achieve the goal of putting national interests and security first (Rammani
Karupiah,2019). By participating in the peace process, the bilateral relations between the
Philippines and Malaysia have made substantial progress. Scholars generally agree that the
original norms guiding ASEAN’s behavior are first rooted in the principle of non-interference in
the internal affairs of its neighbors (Jones, 2010). It can be said that the principle of non-
interference has made a significant contribution to regional stability in the way ASEAN handles
inter-state relations. ASEAN member states are advised not to interfere in each other’s internal
affairs, not to support political rebellions in neighboring countries, and to protect their own
national interests through peaceful negotiations.

4.3 ASEAN's Collective Security Mechanisms

4.3.1 Examination of ASEAN’s legal tools for addressing cross-border insurgency threats.

In recent years, ethnic conflict crises in ASEAN have occurred from time to time, and the scale
and impact of conflicts have been expanding. Some conflict areas have even become hotbeds of
terrorism, posing a major challenge to regional security. The ASEAN Charter has become the
legal basis for countries to resolve border conflicts. After the ASEAN Charter officially came
into effect, it defined ASEAN's goals: (i) to maintain and promote regional peace, security and
stability and further strengthen peace-oriented values; (ii) to enhance regional vitality by
strengthening political, security, economic and socio-cultural cooperation; (iii) to maintain
Southeast Asia's status as a nuclear-weapon-free zone and eliminate weapons of mass
destruction; (iv) to ensure that the people and member states of ASEAN live in peace with the
world and in a just, democratic and harmonious environment; (v) to establish a stable,
prosperous, highly competitive and integrated common market and manufacturing base, and to
achieve the free flow of goods, services, investment, people and capital; (vi) to reduce poverty
and narrow the development gap within ASEAN through mutual assistance and cooperation; (vii)
to strengthen democracy, promote good governance and the rule of law, and promote and protect
human rights and fundamental freedoms while fully considering the rights and obligations of
ASEAN member states; (viii) to respond effectively to all forms of threats, transnational crimes
and cross-border challenges based on the principle of comprehensive security; and (ix) to
promote sustainable development, protect the environment, natural resources and cultural
heritage of the region and ensure a high quality of life for the people（Atena S. Feraru，2015）.
Before the ASEAN Charter was formulated, ASEAN was established based on the ASEAN
Declaration (Bangkok Declaration). The ASEAN Declaration contains a very complete reference
to conflict management, as can be seen from its description: “To establish a solid foundation,
take joint actions, and promote regional cooperation in Southeast Asia in a spirit of equality and
partnership, thereby contributing to peace, progress and prosperity in the region. The ASEAN
Declaration mentions conflict management in a very incomplete way. It can be seen from its
description: "Establish a solid foundation, take joint action, and promote regional cooperation in
Southeast Asia in the spirit of equality and partnership, thereby contributing to peace, progress
and prosperity in the region." Therefore, some scholars believe that the ASEAN Declaration is
more about promoting social and economic cooperation and does not explain how to resolve
conflicts within ASEAN member states (Ramses Amer，1999).

That’s why we had the ASEAN Charter later. According to the literature, when the working
group was drafting Article 22, paragraph 1, of the ASEAN Charter, it was proposed to break with
tradition and give ASEAN member states the right to resolve disputes through legal means from
the outset. However, some ASEAN members have expressed reservations about the prospect of
involving too much law in the initial stages of the border dispute settlement process （Hao Duy
Phan ， 2013 ） . In addition, according to Article 22(1) of the ASEAN Charter, countries are
required to resolve border disputes through consultation. Some scholars believe that ASEAN is
an impotent institution because it has failed to actively resolve territorial disputes and border
violence, while others counter that despite the lack of sanctions, the organization is actually able
to promote dialogue among its member states (Emmers ， 2017). Although ASEAN cannot
effectively coordinate relations between China and the Philippines on the South China Sea
dispute, under the ASEAN Charter, ASEAN still takes an active attitude to resolve violence in
southern Thailand and armed conflicts in the Philippines, which is one of the importance of
ASEAN's existence. Some studies have suggested that ASEAN has a unique way of managing
conflicts in Southeast Asia, characterized by an informal, anti-legalistic approach （ Nicole
Jenne，2017）. Southeast Asian countries are reluctant to resort to legal means to resolve disputes
when they find favorable conditions. However, we can still see that ASEAN member states still
bring certain disputes to international courts for handling, such as the territorial dispute between
Singapore and Malaysia over Pedra Branca. In the case of conflicts within member states or
border riots, ASEAN still chooses to resolve crises through peaceful negotiations and preventive
diplomacy.
Atena S. Feraru. (2015). ASEAN DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: BEFORE AND AFTER THE
ASEAN CHARTER.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Atena-Feraru/publication/315321767_ASEAN_Decision-
Making_Process_Before_and_after_the_ASEAN_Charter/links/5b801c2292851c1e122f428c/
ASEAN-Decision-Making-Process-Before-and-after-the-ASEAN-Charter.pdf

Hao Duy Phan, & Duy Phan. (2013). Towards a Rules-Based ASEAN: The Protocol to the
ASEAN Charter on Dispute Settlement Mechanisms Recommended Citation TOWARDS A
RULES-BASED ASEAN: THE PROTOCOL TO THE ASEAN CHARTER ON DISPUTE
SETTLEMENT MECHANISMS. Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation Article, 5, 254.
https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=arbitrationlawreview

JOHN FUNSTON. (2010, August). Malaysia and Thailand’s Southern Conflict: Reconciling
Security and Ethnicity. https://www-jstor-org.libezp2.utar.edu.my/stable/pdf/41756328.pdf?
refreqid=fastly-default
%3A6782921458aaf8630f0434faad456a16&ab_segments=&origin=&initiator=&acceptTC=1

Keling, Md Som, H., Saludin, M. N., Shuib, Md. S., & Ajis, M. N. (2011). THE
DEVELOPMENT OF ASEAN FROM STRATEGIC APPROACHE. Asian Social Science, 7(7).
https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v7n7p169

Mieke Molthof. (2012, February 8). ASEAN and the Principle of Non-Interference. E-
International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2012/02/08/asean-and-the-principle-of-non-
interference/

Mohd Radzi bin Hj Abdul Hamid, Khairul Said bin Mohd Ali, & Mohd Tawil bin Daud. (2017,
June). THE JOURNAL OF THE MALAYSIAN ARMY. Ministry of Defence Malaysia.
https://elibrary.army.mil.my/images/Sorotan%20Darat%20pdf/SD70.pdf#page=60

Nicole Jenne. (2017). Managing Territorial Disputes in Southeast Asia: Is There more than the
South China Sea? Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 36(3), 35–61.
https://doi.org/10.1177/186810341703600302
Ramses Amer. (1999, December). Managing Border Disputes in Southeast Asia. Researchgate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263890910_Managing_Border_Disputes_in_Southeast
_Asia

Jones (2010). ASEAN’s unchanged melody? The theory and practice of ‘non-interference’ in
Southeast Asia. The Pacific Review, 23(4), 479–502.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2010.495996

Emmers (2017). Enduring Mistrust and Conflict Management in Southeast Asia: An Assessment
of ASEAN as a Security Community. TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of
Southeast Asia, 5(1), 75–97. doi:10.1017/trn.2016.24

Stubbs (2008). The ASEAN alternative? Ideas, institutions and the challenge to ‘global’
governance. The Pacific Review, 21(4), 451–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512740802294713