The economic, political, strategic and cultural dynamism in Southeast Asia has gained added relevance in recent years with the spectacular rise of giant economies in East and South Asia. This has drawn greater attention to the region and to the enhanced role it now plays in international relations and global economics.

The sustained effort made by Southeast Asian nations since 1967 towards a peaceful and gradual integration of their economies has had indubitable success, and perhaps as a consequence of this, most of these countries are undergoing deep political and social changes domestically and are constructing innovative solutions to meet new international challenges. Big Power tensions continue to be played out in the neighbourhood despite the tradition of neutrality exercised by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The Trends in Southeast Asia series acts as a platform for serious analyses by selected authors who are experts in their fields. It is aimed at encouraging policymakers and scholars to contemplate the diversity and dynamism of this exciting region.

THE EDITORS

Series Chairman:

Choi Shing Kwok

Series Editor:

Ooi Kee Beng

Editorial Committee:

Daljit Singh

Francis E. Hutchinson

Norshahril Saat

Two propositions motivate this book. First, a country’s culture influences its economic performance and, second, its economic performance determines its position in the international pecking order. Economic vitality is imperative for sustaining a country’s leading position in world political economy. This vitality depends critically on its mass culture which is not static but rather evolves in response to changing socioeconomic environment.

The author reviews earlier chapters about the interpretation of the mandate and traditional concerns, concluding that some review and trimming is in order. He believes this is especially so on some matters pertaining to urban “other violence” and also irregular migration. He also believes ICRC “early recovery” programs need clearer limits and at present are not sustainable. The new president from fall 2022 seems open to some changes, which may include revisiting in some ways the nature of the Assembly. A pressing question will remain that of “localization” of the global humanitarian response, and whether Western-based, governed, and financed actors such as the ICRC should yield over time to more local actors when confronting humanitarian concerns. The author believes that, while the quest for a more democratic and less imperial global humanitarian system is good, many have overlooked the importance of what the ICRC has brought to the subject of humanitarian response, namely a reputation for neutrality and appropriate action in conflict situations. These trends are precisely why donors such as the World Bank have continued or even expanded their support for the organization. Similar to Mark Twain, reports of the demise of the ICRC are premature. But that does not mean that all is in order for this oldest of humanitarian actors.

Accounts of the historical origins of international humanitarian law (IHL) routinely assume that the emergence of humanity as a constraint on the waging of war, coinciding as it did with a general rise of humanitarianism in the nineteenth century, reflected a growing commitment to a universally shared notion of human dignity. That assumption is fallacious. Those who have been mythologised as champions of humanity as constraint, including Henri Dunant and Francis Lieber, were products of their era. IHL’s ‘original sin’ was to only extend constraints of humanity to so-called civilised nations in their wars inter se. These same constraints were not intended to apply to indigenous and other colonised populations – those assumed to be ‘uncivilised’ – often referred to as such with the pejoratives ‘savages’ and/or ‘barbarians’. The exclusion of emergent constraints on the grounds of racism and colonialism is evident in the language of the early IHL treaties. It has taken many decades for the international community to overcome the exclusions of the legal protection of emergent IHL and some would argue that the tendency for exclusion is still evident in the dehumanising of the other in the Global War on Terror.

Chapter 4 examines the wave of cases before international courts and tribunals (ICTs) against the most innovative tobacco control measures, focusing in particular on Philip Morris v Uruguay (ICSID) and Australia – Plain Packaging (WTO). It contends that the alleged ineffectiveness of the tobacco control measures was one of the key arguments of the claimants, who supported their claims by submitting a hefty amount of evidence. These evidentiary challenges presented novel and demanding tasks for adjudicators of ICTs. Against this backdrop, this chapter first analyses the nature and features of the evidentiary challenges to tobacco control measures (Section 4.2). Second, it reviews how the ICTs have assessed them, zooming in on the interpretation of flexibilities and the use of different sources of evidence (Section 4.3). The picture that emerges from this chapter is that of unnecessary, manufactured complexity. Shifting the discussions on tobacco control measures from the WHO/FCTC to trade and investment ICTs, the tobacco industry has effectively managed to masterfully use international law to its own advantage. It has reframed the debate, all while starting expensive and lengthy judicial proceedings that have taken almost a decade to be concluded.

The first chapter introduces different ICRC alumni who are critics of current trends in ICRC policy. While not all alumni have the same views, some allege the organization is undermining its image as an independent and neutral humanitarian actor by such moves as allowing the ICRC president to be on the board of trustees of the World Economic Forum. Some also allege that Geneva has undertaken such broad field activities that it has weakened its reputation linked primarily to international humanitarian law and especially the protection of prisoners, including political prisoners. This introduction to claims of an ICRC in decline by experienced critics who closely follow the ICRC today, based on access to key information, sets the stage for the rest of the book. The author suggests in a preliminary way that the critics raise important points, although some may be more valid or important than others.

Continuing the analysis in the previous chapter, here the author gives attention especially to the rapid growth of staff with its central question of whether a larger, internationalized staff will kill the goose that laid the golden egg. The chapter thus addresses whether more centralized and top-down management of multi-national personnel, evident in recent years, will stifle the creativity and accomplishments of heads of delegations and other staff members who in the past largely built the reputation of the organization. Some now believe the ICRC is no longer characterized by timely, flexible, and effective assistance and protection in its field activities. The chapter also studies the important subject of digital transformation at the Geneva headquarters and in the field. These two chapters on governance and management, especially difficult to construct, are central to understanding the ICRC in contemporary times.

This chapter focuses on a contemporary Movement agreement summarized as Sevilla 2.0. This 2022 agreement tries to specify a division of labor along with increased cooperation within the Movement, both longstanding concerns. Sevilla 2.0 reflects a semantic emphasis on local humanitarian actors, with much rhetoric about the importance of National RC Societies. The agreement shows a certain fatigue with establishment and Western-based (and Western-funded) organizations such as the ICRC. However, in Sevilla 2.0 the ICRC was able to protect its traditional roles and functions, while agreeing to be more of a team player. How the ICRC and its partners functioned in the Syrian armed conflict of 2011–2022 is then examined. This case shows a very complicated relationship between the ICRC and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent Society, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, between these two actors and various fighting parties, chief among which was the Assad government. The ICRC was compelled to abandon a fully Dunantist posture in the Syrian complex conflict. Comparisons are made with other organizations and conflicts.

Continuing the discussion about how the contemporary ICRC interprets its core mandate, or how it exercises its right of initiative, this chapter starts with the subject of low-level urban violence. The author understands how the organization gets drawn into situations such as Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and Port au Prince, Haiti, but is doubtful the organization can have much impact in very large and dysfunctional urban centers such as Karachi or Lagos. Major humanitarian needs certainly exist in violent urban areas, but whether the ICRC is the right agency for addressing them merits review. Likewise, on dealing with irregular migrants, the author understands the focus on detention issues but doubts some of the other existing activities should be systematically or consistently addressed by the ICRC. There are many other actors active on irregular migration. The ICRC does indeed run the risk of losing its special niche and becoming a very broad, all purpose, do-gooder agency, as some critics fear. A dilemma is how to be a good team player within the RC Movement but not fall victim to mission creep.