Speech by IPB Executive Director Sean Conner at the “Treaty of Amity & Cooperation and the Imperative of Civil Society: Understanding, Participation, and Solidarity” on 28 October 2026.
Dear friends,
It’s an honor to speak with you all today. I am sorry that I could not be with you in person, though I hope this dialogue today can spark greater coordination and solidarity between us all.
At the International Peace Bureau, we have been campaigning for a shift in how we define security – away from narrow definitions focused on national security, military power, and confrontation, toward a wider definition of “Common Security”, based in human security, diplomacy, trust-building, multilateralism, and disarmament. This common security approach understands that security need not be a zero-sum game, that through dialogue we can create security for all, instead of against one another. It also recognizes that security cannot and must not be limited to traditional definitions – security includes “unconventional” threats including the effects of climate change and environmental degradation, and economic, gender, and other inequalities.
The term common security originated in Europe during the high tensions of the early 1980s, where nuclear and conventional arms races had led to a looming feeling of insecurity for peoples on both sides of the iron curtain. Through the framework of common security, progress toward disarmament and détente developed over the following years, leading to, among other processes, the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty which banned an entire class of nuclear missiles on the continent which resulted in greater security for all.
While Europe today has lamentably strayed far from the principles of Common Security, the sentiment of common security is present – even if under different names and with distinct characteristics – in many regional and international institutions and agreements across the world. ASEAN and particularly the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) embody many of the fundamentals of common security – mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interference, active cooperation, and peaceful conflict and dispute resolution.
While the TAC, like any treaty, has had a less-than-perfect record in practice, it remains a vital reference and resource for ensuring peace, cooperation, and common security in Southeast Asia. Given the geopolitical shifts of the past decades, including the relative strengthening of China vis-à-vis the United States, the general weakness of international institutions, and a global drive toward militarism and confrontation, the TAC is perhaps more important now than ever.
The rapid growth in the number of High Contracting Parties to the TAC in recent years is also remarkable – from 1976 until 2016 the membership grew from 5 to 35 meanwhile in the last decade alone that number has soared to 62 – covering diverse countries and regions and including Russia, China, the United States, and the European Union.
It is clear that Southeast Asia remains a highly important region geopolitically and that how these High Contracting Parties relate to ASEAN will have a large impact on the region’s future. If external forces see engagement with Southeast Asia as part of larger geopolitical competition, they may take advantage of new or existing fault lines in the region which put at risk the fundamental principles of the TAC. On the other hand, if these core commitments can be maintained and strengthened in the region, ASEAN can serve as an example of common security in practice. In this sense, the Guidelines on the Modalities for Engagement are vital and must strengthen adherence to the principles of the TAC – not just in rhetoric but in practice.
Furthermore, ASEAN would be wise to consider a wider common security framework for the TAC that would strengthen its role in peaceful conflict resolution, neutrality, and disarmament both in Southeast Asia and more widely – particularly in the wider Asia-Pacific region.
In 2024 IPB co-developed a report with partners across Asia-Pacific entitled “Common Security in the Indo-Pacific Region”, which acknowledges the potential of ASEAN in resolving regional conflicts and engaging diverse partners in diplomatic and multilateral discussions on peace and security. This includes the vital question of ASEAN-Chinese negotiations over a South China Sea code of conduct and demilitarization.
Finally, and nonetheless importantly, ASEAN and the TAC must carve out a role for civil society to play a more active role in the creation and sustaining of regional common security. The engagement of civil society becomes a two way channel which can both strengthen the commitment of states to the principles of the TAC and strengthen public awareness and understanding of the work of ASEAN. This mutual reinforcement is key to a strong, effective, and sustainable regional body for peace, cooperation, and common security.