Burma is not on the agenda but it could again hijack talks between the nations of Asia and Europe starting today. The problem is that Asem is just another international talking shop without something like Burma to spice up things.

ANURAJ MANIBHANDU and SARITDET MARUKATAT

The dream of Asians and Europeans supporting each other in the spirit of mutual co-operation could be dealt another blow if a meeting opening today in Madrid allows the Burma situation to dominate the agenda.

Many Europeans think the release from house arrest on May 6 of Aung San Suu Kyi was too little too late, and they are expected to block a probable bid by some Asians to admit Burma to the Asia-Europe Meeting (Asem) forum launched in Bangkok in March 1996.

``Aung San Suu Kyi should have been released a long time ago,'' said an officer at one European foreign ministry, adding that much more needs to be done.

The European camp is unhappy with the political situation in Burma and does not count Mrs Suu Kyi's release as a democratic advance, he said.

Asem groups 10 Asian countries _ Thailand, Brunei, China, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Vietnam _ with the 15 member states of the European Union.

The bid to bring Burma into Asem could revive bad blood between Southeast Asians and Europeans as the EU fiercely opposed the membership of Burma in Asean in July 1997 and froze relations with the grouping for more than three years.

The gathering of 25 foreign ministers, which takes place tomorrow, is due to discuss political, economic and social/cultural issues. Informal meetings of the Asian ministers and bilateral talks take place today.

The gathering is part of preparations for a leaders' summit due to take place in Copenhagen in September.

As well as the question of Burma's admission, which is not on the formal agenda, the ministers are expected to discuss the India-Pakistan conflict, the Middle East, the Korean peninsula and Afghanistan.

Three Thai initiatives, put forward at the senior officials meeting in Lanzarote, one of Spain's Canary islands, in April and in Madrid yesterday _ for an information and technology performance forum, Asia-European co-operation in promoting awareness among young people on drug problems, and an e-education hub _ are expected to be endorsed by the ministers.

The ministers are also due to consider steps to address transnational issues, like migration and people trafficking, and the impact and international security and economics of the terrorist attacks in the United States last September.

Asem has developed a web of conferences since its launch in Bangkok six years ago. Besides meetings of heads of government every two years, alternately in Asian and European capitals, that are preceded by those of foreign ministers, finance and economic ministers have also gathered according to similar timetables and venues. Senior officials have met twice each year.

After the launch in Bangkok, London hosted the second leaders' meeting in 1998. This was dominated by the financial crisis that erupted in Thailand in July 1997 and spread to other Asian countries. This summit came up with a trust fund to help affected economies deal with financial restructuring and social safety nets.

The last meeting of Asem heads of government, in Seoul in October 2000, advocated ``orderly financial liberalisation'', pursuit of the fight against money laundering, and the systematic involvement of private creditors in crisis prevention and resolution.

The summit also ``recognised'' the importance of promoting international stability through regional economic and monetary co-operation ``as exemplified by the European Monetary Union''.

The Seoul summit further approved the pursuit of efforts to manage migration flows, and address problems of trafficking in women and children, and the digital divide. The leaders, among other things, reviewed inter-Korean talks which took place the previous June, the transition to independence of East Timor and questions of arms control.

The talks in Madrid follow the release last September of a new European ``strategic framework'' for enhanced relations with Asia. This caused a controversy in Southeast Asia by revealing European Commission doubts about Asean.

As Wim Stockhof, director of the International Institute for Asian Studies in Leiden/Amsterdam, said in a newsletter published the following month: ``In the Commission's recent communication, India, Japan and China are given special emphasis; however the Southeast Asian countries are lumped together.

``I sense a tendency in Brussels to underestimate the use of bilateral relations between the EU and the individual Southeast Asian countries, and, indeed, even a certain doubt about the efficaciousness of the regional groupings/regional multilateral constructions Asean or ARF [Asean Regional Forum].''

Asean, he went on, could not be expected to ``play a crucial role'' in shaping a new regional order because member states had to deal with the economic crisis and domestic problems.

Although the economic crisis had shifted economic and political weight to Northeast Asia, he said, it would be ``most unfortunate'' for the EU to downgrade relations with individual Asean states.

On the Asem process, Mr Stockhof observed that most progress had been made in economic co-operation, the first of three ``pillars''. He made no comment on the ``political dialogue'' that is the second pillar, but noted that the third pillar, co-operation in social, cultural and intellectual domains, is ``most underdeveloped''.

``Few European countries show real interest in Asem. Even after Sept 11, this has not really changed,'' he said. Upholding Asem as a ``unique vehicle for rapprochement between Europe and Asia'', he called on the European Union to do more to advance the third pillar.

He stressed in particular the importance of ``joint inter-regional research on topics of common interest such as environmental degradation, global epidemics, terrorism, migration, social welfare, and poverty reduction''.

Thai academics probably would support the Dutch professor, as cultural and intellectual exchanges are fundamental to a sound relationship between two very different continents. At the same time, as he says, there is plenty of room for the brightest brains on both sides to pool their resources in joint research on issues deemed as common threats.

Towards social, and cultural issues, the Seoul summit did touch on education. But it supported initiatives that do not match realities and seem intended for only selected Asian states, like the call to explore the possibility of ``mutual recognition'' of degrees between education institutions of the two regions. For instance, which European university would recognise a degree from Chulalongkorn as being on a par with its own?

The leaders also reaffirmed full support for the Asia-Europe Foundation in Singapore, which has published various works of inter-regional interest, but seems still locked in an elite shell, promoting contacts within a certain circle of people.

The foreign ministers meeting in Madrid could consider giving more attention to this third pillar, and demand broad-based exchanges, and they could as well as push on with economic and political dialogues.