Last week, the Association of South East Nations (ASEAN), an economic alliance of seven countries with varying degrees of democracy, agreed to put Cambodia's entrance to the economic circle on hold. It seems that Hun Sen's bloody coup and overthrow of the government, and with it the end of all semblance of democratic rule, bothered the ASEAN leadership.
Not that ASEAN is bothered by a lack of democracy in and of itself. ASEAN specifically cites in its charter a "non-interference" clause; that the organization as a whole will not interfere with the internal affairs of its members. Considering that Indonesia, probably the most powerful member of ASEAN, has a less-than-sparkling human rights record, it is not surprising that ASEAN as a whole tends to turn a blind eye to human rights in favor of expanding trade.
Of course, the theory of favoring trade as a means to improve human rights and democracy enjoys a strong following in contemporary politics, especially in the last few United States presidential administrations. Most Favored Nation status for China is just one example of this theory in action. According to this theory, trade embargoes work only when there is full compliance. For example, the embargo against South Africa's apartheid regimes worked because every nation and company in the world (notable exceptions include Dutch Royal Shell) followed the embargo, to the point that South Africa had to change. But the American embargo against Cuba is futile, since so many other countries trade with Cuba. Because China has too compelling a market to ignore, it would be impossible for one nation to convince the rest of the world to stop trade, and thus, any one nation's embargo would only sour that nation's relations with China, to no benefit on the human rights front.
So, ASEAN has a valid argument in choosing to overlook some of the human rights violations and anti-democratic tendencies of its members in order to further trade, which is helping to raise national per capita GNP, and raise standards of living for even the poorest in those nations.
Therefore, the issue is not democracy, but stability. But here is where ASEAN's logic is so puzzling. At the same time ASEAN was to initiate Cambodia, ASEAN welcomed in Laos and Myanmar, two nations not known for their strong tradition of democracy. In fact, while Laos seems to be headed in the right direction, Myanmar maintains one of the most repressive regimes in the world.
