Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO06085 | The ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) & the French Exception
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO06085 | The ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) & the French Exception
    Eric Teo Chu Cheow

    17 August 2006

    download pdf

    Commentary

    In the world of strategic thinking and diplomacy, the French have an uncanny ability to surprise and astound. In strategic calculations, it could be considered a case of “thinking outside the box” in the name of interet d’Etat (or “interest of the State”).

    France recently showed its diplomatic mettle once again when it led efforts to pilot through United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 by leading Continental Europe to “balance” Washington and London. France’s diplomatic prowess and clout are undoubtedly larger than the country itself.

    In yet another example, France officially announced its intention to sign the ASEAN TAC at the recently-held ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM) in Kuala Lumpur (KL), Malaysia. But it had to postpone the signing ceremony at the last minute, as Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy was heavily occupied with the Middle East, especially with Lebanon (as a former French protectorate) constituting a crucial factor in France’s Middle East policy and domestic politics.

    But nevertheless, France’s intention to sign the TAC was an exception diplomatique, just as one would remember French exception during the last GATT talks in the 1990s, when France adamantly professed its exception culturelle in opposing American Hollywood films from dominating the world. Undoubtedly, France’s signaled intention to sign the TAC with ASEAN would again constitute another “exception”, as Paris would have been the first Western power (and a Western permanent UNSC member too) to do so.

    So far the TAC has been signed by Asia-Pacific countries – ranging from China and Japan to Australia, New Zealand and India – but France would have been the first EU nation to sign the TAC, a diplomatic breakthrough for ASEAN. Moreover, only by signing the TAC could a country hope to accede to the ASEAN-led East Asia Summit (EAS), which met for the first time in KL last December, and would meet again this December in Cebu, Philippines. No doubt, France, and probably the EU, would wish to partake one day in the EAS, although Australia (which was one of the sixteen countries at the inaugural EAS) had advised during the latest AMM to temporarily close the EAS membership.

    Is France a trail-blazer again in diplomacy or is it simply breaking ranks with the United States and leading Europeans away from the Western “dogma” on TAC? Indeed, EU Diplomatic Chief Javier Solana surprisingly announced in KL that the EU would also like to sign the TAC, probably thanks to France’s imminent lead.

    French motives for signing the TAC

    As far back as late 2005, Paris had seriously considered signing the TAC, after studying implications for France should they sign it. A very senior French diplomat had already argued cogently to his European counterparts at internal EU meetings in Brussels the benefits of signing, what the Quai d’Orsay (French Foreign Ministry) had considered more of a political document than a truly security-related one.

    This “political argument” was central to the Quai’s thinking and was “diffused” progressively to other members of the EU. Back in April, at an informal lunch at the Quai, I was privately informed by this senior French diplomat that some other EU members, especially from southern Europe, could follow Paris’ lead in posing their signatures on the TAC. The fact that Solana is Spanish is probably not a coincidence, when he announced the EU’s intention recently: Italy, under Romano Prodi, would seem a priori amenable to this diplomatic act too. UK and Germany would thus be central in shifting the entire EU position, if the Union collectively signs on, especially with London being the other European UNSC permanent member and the new German Chancellor Angela Merkel finding her diplomatic feet within the EU.

    Moreover, France had argued strongly that Europe must show more interest in ASEAN, given its strategic position within the Asia-Pacific; Paris is actively seeking to consolidate its own trade and investment, as well as political and security links with Asia. Acceding to the TAC would certainly help stabilize EU-ASEAN relations, which have hit a diplomatic snag over the thorny “Myanmar issue”; at this year’s Asia-Europe Meeting or ASEM in Helsinki, Finland in September, Myanmar again could pose a controversial quagmire for both Asians and Europeans, if mishandled.

    But Paris could perhaps take heart that the latest AMM in KL had also created some controversy and dissensions within ASEAN ranks over Myanmar; hence the signing of the TAC would certainly seal France’s own political ties with the rest of ASEAN, with whom France maintains excellent relations. The TAC is therefore perceived by Paris as a means of further reaching out to ASEAN as a whole, beyond the thorny “Myanmar issue”, as confided by this senior French diplomat in Paris last April. This is undoubtedly where such a bold French strategic calculation would eventually pay off in Asia.

    But strategically, this is also France’s exception diplomatique vis-à-vis the United States, where Paris could again mark its own diplomatic prowess within the Western camp, especially in leading its European partners to such a “diplomatic coup”. French diplomacy has proven generally to be innovative and daring and at times, even defying realpolitik logic; the interet d’Etat logically primes in Paris’ strategic thinking and calculations, a pillar in Gaullien diplomacy and always attuned to the sole goal of promoting the grandeur de la France.

    Rumours had it too that Beijing had been preliminarily informed of the French decision to sign the TAC, which the Chinese would have naturally and logically applauded; Beijing would certainly have warmly welcomed another UNSC permanent member signing the TAC, after itself and Russia. From the strategic international relations angle, Paris’ decision thus carries international significance for Asia generally and ASEAN specifically, especially when France was dismayed several years back with ASEAN’s rebuff of its bid to join the ASEAN Regional Forum (in its own name as a UNSC permanent member, and not as a member of the EU).

    It is in this geo-strategic game and context that France’s intention to sign the TAC must be viewed and analyzed. France would certainly stand to gain heftily from its own consolidation of relations with ASEAN and Asia, especially in portraying this signature as a symbolic indication of its current “middle power” status in Asian regional affairs. Paris has always staked its claims as a Pacific power too, as it controls territories in the Pacific Ocean, such as New Caledonia and French Polynesia; the South Pacific, ASEAN’s and Asia’s southern- eastern flank, is thus equally vital to French strategic interests too.

    With its diplomatic standing and clout in Asia better sealed, Paris could then hope to further consolidate its economic and financial ties with the prospering and “rising” East Asia; the TAC is thus a useful key and a strategic vehicle for France’s further advancement into the Southeast Asian region.

    However, if the EU is to sign the TAC, ASEAN would need to amend the TAC in order to accommodate the accession to the Treaty by entities, and not countries alone.

    About the Author

    Dr Eric Teo Chu Cheow, a business consultant and strategist, is Adjunct Professor at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, NTU and Council Member of the Singapore Institute for International Affairs (SIIA).

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Southeast Asia and ASEAN

    Commentary

    In the world of strategic thinking and diplomacy, the French have an uncanny ability to surprise and astound. In strategic calculations, it could be considered a case of “thinking outside the box” in the name of interet d’Etat (or “interest of the State”).

    France recently showed its diplomatic mettle once again when it led efforts to pilot through United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 by leading Continental Europe to “balance” Washington and London. France’s diplomatic prowess and clout are undoubtedly larger than the country itself.

    In yet another example, France officially announced its intention to sign the ASEAN TAC at the recently-held ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM) in Kuala Lumpur (KL), Malaysia. But it had to postpone the signing ceremony at the last minute, as Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy was heavily occupied with the Middle East, especially with Lebanon (as a former French protectorate) constituting a crucial factor in France’s Middle East policy and domestic politics.

    But nevertheless, France’s intention to sign the TAC was an exception diplomatique, just as one would remember French exception during the last GATT talks in the 1990s, when France adamantly professed its exception culturelle in opposing American Hollywood films from dominating the world. Undoubtedly, France’s signaled intention to sign the TAC with ASEAN would again constitute another “exception”, as Paris would have been the first Western power (and a Western permanent UNSC member too) to do so.

    So far the TAC has been signed by Asia-Pacific countries – ranging from China and Japan to Australia, New Zealand and India – but France would have been the first EU nation to sign the TAC, a diplomatic breakthrough for ASEAN. Moreover, only by signing the TAC could a country hope to accede to the ASEAN-led East Asia Summit (EAS), which met for the first time in KL last December, and would meet again this December in Cebu, Philippines. No doubt, France, and probably the EU, would wish to partake one day in the EAS, although Australia (which was one of the sixteen countries at the inaugural EAS) had advised during the latest AMM to temporarily close the EAS membership.

    Is France a trail-blazer again in diplomacy or is it simply breaking ranks with the United States and leading Europeans away from the Western “dogma” on TAC? Indeed, EU Diplomatic Chief Javier Solana surprisingly announced in KL that the EU would also like to sign the TAC, probably thanks to France’s imminent lead.

    French motives for signing the TAC

    As far back as late 2005, Paris had seriously considered signing the TAC, after studying implications for France should they sign it. A very senior French diplomat had already argued cogently to his European counterparts at internal EU meetings in Brussels the benefits of signing, what the Quai d’Orsay (French Foreign Ministry) had considered more of a political document than a truly security-related one.

    This “political argument” was central to the Quai’s thinking and was “diffused” progressively to other members of the EU. Back in April, at an informal lunch at the Quai, I was privately informed by this senior French diplomat that some other EU members, especially from southern Europe, could follow Paris’ lead in posing their signatures on the TAC. The fact that Solana is Spanish is probably not a coincidence, when he announced the EU’s intention recently: Italy, under Romano Prodi, would seem a priori amenable to this diplomatic act too. UK and Germany would thus be central in shifting the entire EU position, if the Union collectively signs on, especially with London being the other European UNSC permanent member and the new German Chancellor Angela Merkel finding her diplomatic feet within the EU.

    Moreover, France had argued strongly that Europe must show more interest in ASEAN, given its strategic position within the Asia-Pacific; Paris is actively seeking to consolidate its own trade and investment, as well as political and security links with Asia. Acceding to the TAC would certainly help stabilize EU-ASEAN relations, which have hit a diplomatic snag over the thorny “Myanmar issue”; at this year’s Asia-Europe Meeting or ASEM in Helsinki, Finland in September, Myanmar again could pose a controversial quagmire for both Asians and Europeans, if mishandled.

    But Paris could perhaps take heart that the latest AMM in KL had also created some controversy and dissensions within ASEAN ranks over Myanmar; hence the signing of the TAC would certainly seal France’s own political ties with the rest of ASEAN, with whom France maintains excellent relations. The TAC is therefore perceived by Paris as a means of further reaching out to ASEAN as a whole, beyond the thorny “Myanmar issue”, as confided by this senior French diplomat in Paris last April. This is undoubtedly where such a bold French strategic calculation would eventually pay off in Asia.

    But strategically, this is also France’s exception diplomatique vis-à-vis the United States, where Paris could again mark its own diplomatic prowess within the Western camp, especially in leading its European partners to such a “diplomatic coup”. French diplomacy has proven generally to be innovative and daring and at times, even defying realpolitik logic; the interet d’Etat logically primes in Paris’ strategic thinking and calculations, a pillar in Gaullien diplomacy and always attuned to the sole goal of promoting the grandeur de la France.

    Rumours had it too that Beijing had been preliminarily informed of the French decision to sign the TAC, which the Chinese would have naturally and logically applauded; Beijing would certainly have warmly welcomed another UNSC permanent member signing the TAC, after itself and Russia. From the strategic international relations angle, Paris’ decision thus carries international significance for Asia generally and ASEAN specifically, especially when France was dismayed several years back with ASEAN’s rebuff of its bid to join the ASEAN Regional Forum (in its own name as a UNSC permanent member, and not as a member of the EU).

    It is in this geo-strategic game and context that France’s intention to sign the TAC must be viewed and analyzed. France would certainly stand to gain heftily from its own consolidation of relations with ASEAN and Asia, especially in portraying this signature as a symbolic indication of its current “middle power” status in Asian regional affairs. Paris has always staked its claims as a Pacific power too, as it controls territories in the Pacific Ocean, such as New Caledonia and French Polynesia; the South Pacific, ASEAN’s and Asia’s southern- eastern flank, is thus equally vital to French strategic interests too.

    With its diplomatic standing and clout in Asia better sealed, Paris could then hope to further consolidate its economic and financial ties with the prospering and “rising” East Asia; the TAC is thus a useful key and a strategic vehicle for France’s further advancement into the Southeast Asian region.

    However, if the EU is to sign the TAC, ASEAN would need to amend the TAC in order to accommodate the accession to the Treaty by entities, and not countries alone.

    About the Author

    Dr Eric Teo Chu Cheow, a business consultant and strategist, is Adjunct Professor at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, NTU and Council Member of the Singapore Institute for International Affairs (SIIA).

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info