Fear No Evil: ASEAN's Dilemma Through the Eyes of a Critical Lover
Adelina Kamal is a highly experienced professional who has dedicated nearly 30 years to the ASEAN community, and recently joined the podcast. She served 22 years with the ASEAN Secretariat, now the ASEAN headquarters in Jakarta, and subsequently joined the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance (AHA Centre). As the Deputy Executive Director and later the Executive Director of the AHA Centre from 2017 to 2021, she played a pivotal role in facilitating ASEAN's collective response to natural disasters. Her tenure included drafting significant regional agreements and establishing operational protocols. Adelina is known for her critical yet constructive perspective on ASEAN's approaches, especially regarding the Myanmar crisis. She advocates for a people-centered ASEAN that genuinely addresses humanitarian needs and stands firm on principles of democracy and human rights. Since leaving ASEAN, she continues to contribute as an independent consultant and writer, emphasizing the need for dynamic and proactive leadership within ASEAN.
“When I’m given the platform, why should I be afraid of anyone? I should not be afraid of people. I should only be afraid of God. So that’s what I did, and I wrote the article. ”
Two months after I left the AHA center, I wrote an article that was published by the Jakarta Post in October 2021. It was my colleague from the CSIS Indonesia that asked me to write for them on how ASEAN should approach the Myanmar crisis. After I wrote the article and sent it to CSIS Indonesia, I decided to share it with the Jakarta Post. It shocked people because I was really critical about ASEAN-led approach to the Myanmar crisis, detailing how inconvenient it was. Basically, I questioned the issue our AHA Centre being tasked to facilitate the humanitarian assistant to the people affected by the crisis. I basically questioned the issue of trust of the people in the AHA Centre, whether AHA Centre have actually gained a level of trust from the people of Myanmar. I really grilled the fact that whether ASEAN is considering working with an outfit that killed their own people in Myanmar! So, this was actually the dilemma that I had during my last year with ASEAN and given the opportunity to speak up, I felt provoked at first by CSIS when they told me, ‘Adelina, now you are out of ASEAN, perhaps can say something about this more freely”.
It took me a while to say yes to the CSIS request on writing about ASEAN’s approach to the Myanmar crisis. I had to muster my courage to say yes, because I love ASEAN. I think the turning point for me was when I left ASEAN, I didn't want to deal with ASEAN anymore. To tell you the truth, I wanted a break, not because I was fed up with ASEAN but truly, I needed a break. I was already 50 years old and I really wanted to have a real break. It also coincided with COVID period which proved a difficult time for everyone. So I really like wanted to have a break from work just to question myself about what I want to do with my life; perhaps you can come call it as a midlife-crisis. However, it was really an important call made by CSIS, so I really had to muster my courage and act.
Before that, I had a conversation with one of my good non-Indonesian humanitarian friends, whom I consider a mentor. If she listened to this podcast, I think she knows that I'm talking about her. I asked her, ‘What's should I do? I'm given this platform, and I'm now independent. I have my own thoughts. What should I do?’. She didn't lecture me on anything and I didn't even give her the details to why I am asking her the question. Instead, she just said ‘Adelina, only fear Allah. Only fear god’. At the time, my mother just had a stroke and she was worried that the Myanmar junta might capture me if I offend them. My husband was fully supportive on me writing the article. But it was mainly because of what my good friend said about only fearing Allah that inspired me to speak up. I have the privilege to be able to speak up. When I'm given the platform, why should I be afraid of anyone? I should not be afraid of people. I should only be afraid of God. So that's what I did, and I wrote the article.
Afterwards, the way I approach the Myanmar crisis actually turned drastically because by then, I already knew I had nothing to lose. Perhaps people would say I was too naïve and warned me that I would burn bridges. But it was in my experience of a so-called midlife crisis, I knew that ASEAN could have done better, that ASEAN should do better, and all of us should do better for the people of Myanmar during this humanitarian crisis. We have to consider the fact that perhaps the AHA Centre is not the right vehicle to facilitate humanitarian assistance.
When it comes to humanitarian assistance, we should go back to the objectives: to alleviate the suffering of those affected, help the people’s right and protect their dignity. More importantly, trust is the cornerstone of human assistance, especially in a political crisis. In a crisis like Myanmar, the issue of who is behind the assistance is often much more important than the assistance itself. Some people say I am being too hard on ASEAN and I completely disagree because I believe trust is extremely important. We have been promoting localization - the most effective way for international and regional organizations to assist in a humanitarian crisis, in which the role of local communities is prioritized and the role of international and even regional actors is to support those local communities on the ground whenever necessary. So, if we are to follow our own advice of localization, we should really question ourselves whether we are actually the right vehicle to lead the humanitarian assistance in this situation and whether there are other means of providing aid to the people of Myanmar.
The way I confronted these two questions in the article for the Jakarta Post was starting with ‘Should we consider the one that killed their own people as the focal point?’. This is because the disaster management agreement that established the AHA center is based on international disaster law that states that humanitarian assistance is to be provided when the country affected by the natural disaster request for assistance or when the Centre’s offers of assistance is selected.
Basically, it begins with consent. The conclusion I had when I was still the executive director and when I wrote that article was that if international humanitarian assistance is based on the premise of consent and if the focal point is under the instruction of the military junta who kills their own people, first of all, that outfit is illegal and illegitimate. By the definition of both domestic and international law, why should we actually facilitate assistance through this outfit? Is there any other way of reaching the people, that is not through this illegal outfit? I had many questions so I read a lot of articles and I talked to a lot of people inside the system. Well, actually, I have been talking to a lot of people even when I was still inside the system. Although I couldn't be too outspoken, it didn't stop me from talking to people discreetly and consulting them. I think that is also the reason why some people reach out to me, because they knew that I was always a contrarian inside the system anyway.
So, back to the question about whether there are any other ways to reach out to the population when ASEAN is not fully trusted by the people. Fortunately, there are other ways to help through cross-border aid, through local communities, and community-based civil society groups who have been providing immediate humanitarian assistance to their own communities since the crisis started in 2021. So, I suggested that ASEAN should change their approach. Sometimes, when the AHA Centre is asked to facilitate humanitarian assistance, it doesn't mean we have to physically do it ourselves. We can just facilitate. When it comes to humanitarian assistance, I think it is more important to really see who can be the most effective provider. The most effective people are those on the ground, the local agents. Not only because they are efficient at their work, but also because they are trusted by the people affected by the crisis. If my people got killed and got annihilated by the junta, I would not want to receive help from either the junta who are actually the cause of many death or from organizations working with the junta. How can I trust them? So, I tried to like position myself in the shoes of the people of Myanmar and really question myself. Imagining myself directly affected by the crisis on the ground in Myanmar is essentially how I came up with the article.
It was a process. It was a process that made some of my friends in the pro-democracy movement think I was moving to the dark side, the side of the rebels. On the contrary, I can also argue that I was moving to the bright side, like ‘the rebellions versus the Empire’. So, personally, writing the article was really a major turning point, both spiritually and perhaps even religiously. It pushed me to be critical about ASEAN for ASEAN’s own good. It is important for some of us to be a loving critic and critical lover of ASEAN because otherwise, ASEAN will languish if our lovers are uncritical and our critics are unloving. I got that saying from a Singaporean professor, who wrote an article on the importance of Singaporeans to be critical and be independent thinkers who are also willing to be criticized from both internal and external critics. Otherwise, Singapore will not thrive.
His words inspired me and then when people ask, ‘Oh, Adelina why are you doing that? Why are you exposing the dirt?’, I would respond by saying that I am not actually exposing the dirt on ASEAN. I am criticizing ASEAN, simply because I love ASEAN and I think that ASEAN can be better. Since I am no longer part of ASEAN, I continue to contribute to ASEAN by becoming a loving critic and critical lover for the organization.