IN CONVERSATION: "Parliamentary diplomacy is part and parcel of the diplomatic toolbox"

Antoine Ripoll, in charge of parliamentary affairs at the EU delegation to ASEAN, on why parliamentary-to-parliamentary relations matter to European diplomacy in Southeast Asia.

Send tips here | Tweet @davidhuttjourno or @WatchingEUASEAN |

Good morning! Welcome to this week’s “In Conversation” forWatching Europe In Southeast Asia, by journalist and columnist David Hutt.

As well as weekly news briefs about Europe-Southeast Asia engagement, this newsletter also brings you exclusive analysis and in-depth Q&As with leading diplomats and businesspeople from both regions.

If you haven’t already, you can become a supporter of Watching Europe In Southeast Asia.

The European Union is a complex beast: decision-making is intricate, tangled and misunderstood; purviews overlap between its many institutions; countless commissioners maraud across the world. And then there are the 27 member states, which rarely see eye-to-eye. ASEAN is quite a bit simpler. Although it has an executive, the ASEAN Secretariat, power really lies with the 10 member states and the most important decisions are taken during their ministerial meetings. So think of ASEAN much more like the European Council. But, unlike the EU, it has no parliament. There is the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA), but it has no real legislative or oversight powers, and there are some groupings of lawmakers from national parliaments, such as the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, but they’re more like lobbyists and campaigners. Moreover, national parliaments in Southeast Asia often lack teeth, especially in the region’s one-party states, like Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, while others have varying degrees of influence over foreign policy.

All that said, the EU sees parliamentary-to-parliamentary ties as an important sidebar to traditional forms of diplomacy. The European Parliament’s committees are becoming more engaged in the region. The latest EU-ASEAN plan of action (for 2023-2027) states both sides should "encourage linkages" between the European Parliament and the individual parliaments of ASEAN member states. Meanwhile, lawmakers from European and Southeast Asia national parliaments are also busier with visits to the other region.

Spearheading much of this activity is Antoine Ripoll, minister counsellor for parliamentary affairs at the EU Delegation to ASEAN in Jakarta. We spoke last week about why parliamentary ties matter to diplomacy, the importance of parliamentary scrutiny on foreign affairs, and divisions of responsibility. Enjoy!

What role does the European Parliament hope to play in Southeast Asia?

The European Parliament has been active in the region for a long time. Its relations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the ten countries that it comprises are channelled through a single dedicated European Parliament delegation: the Delegation for relations with the countries of  ASEAN, currently chaired by Daniel Caspary MEP. Created in 1979, the delegation focuses on discussions with elected representatives in the ASEAN countries, as well as with Timor-Leste, now a candidate country to the regional organisation. The European Parliament is also an official observer of ASEAN's parliamentary arm, the ASEAN Inter-parliamentary Assembly (AIPA). In addition, a growing number of parliamentary committees travel to the region every year to meet their counterparts on their topics of competence. In 2023 alone, some eight committees have met their Southeast Asian homologues and the stakeholders in their fields. This trend is set to grow in the upcoming mandate. In addition to field trips, an increasing number of debates are organised in Brussels and Strasbourg on topics directly or indirectly linked to ASEAN; from connectivity to cooperation in the fields of energy and climate, trade and investments, or security.

It is only natural in this context that the European Parliament should have an established presence in the EU Delegation to ASEAN, based in Jakarta, Indonesia, to cover parliamentary affairs in the whole region. A similar exercise of parliamentary engagement is carried out in other strategic parts of the world: the USA, Africa, UN, UK, and also very soon South America and the European Eastern neighbourhood. A new Directorate-General for Parliamentary Democracy Partnerships was set up to better coordinate the overall parliamentary diplomacy activity, both within and outside of the EU.

On a personal level, I led the European Parliament office in Washington DC from 2012 to 2019, and I am thrilled to now be able to focus my attention on another strategic part of the world: the Indo-Pacific, and Southeast Asia in particular. The motto is engagement, engagement, and more engagement. Our partners in Southeast Asia deserve our full attention and respect; developing a more robust parliamentary dialogue is one of the ways to do just that.

One of the expressed hopes of some Southeast Asian MPs is that their parliamentary diplomacy will complement their government's diplomatic efforts. Have you found that to be the case in your time in office, and what more can be done by the European Parliament to focus on better cooperation between Southeast Asian parliaments and their diplomats?

Parliamentary diplomacy is part and parcel of the diplomatic toolbox. It conducts dialogue, fosters international cooperation, and influences the decision-making of foreign policy. The skills and abilities of conflict resolution, mediation, and peaceful resolution can be sourced from the parliamentarians. It is also known as legislative diplomacy. The European Parliament is probably the only one so far to have developed an engagement at officials’ level within diplomatic missions in certain strategic locations. In this sense, the European legislator is undoubtedly a pioneer. Its efforts aim at raising the flag and at increasing its influence in carefully selected countries, regions or international organisations, but also at raising the flags of these strategic partners within its own circles. 

It is, indeed, the hope and the ambition of many parliaments in the world, including in Southeast Asia, to influence and complement, in one way or another, their respective executive diplomatic action.  It is actually an indicator of the good health of a parliamentary system to nourish this ambition, as one of the functions of a parliament is to exert scrutiny and oversight over the executive branch, including in its external affairs. The European Parliament is fully engaged in this exercise, especially in fields in which it has an undeniable power, such as trade. Since the Lisbon Treaty, no international treaty can be ratified by the Council of the European Union without the express consent of the European Parliament. With Free Trade Agreements already approved between the EU and Singapore and Vietnam, and ongoing negotiations with major additional partners such as Indonesia, Thailand and now the Philippines, trade is one of the major fields of parliamentary scrutiny and influence. This is already showing clearly in the intense trade dialogue between Southeast Asian MPs and MEPs. One can bet this will also be increasingly the case on AI, digital, climate, energy, and more.

There are obviously differences of opinion between the European Parliament, European Council and European Commission over certain policies relating to Southeast Asia. Parliament has often been more hawkish on punishing regional governments that violate human rights and democracy. It has been more willing to engage with bodies such as Myanmar’s National Unity Government. It adopted a resolution demanding the expulsion of the Philippines from the EU's GSP+ during the Duterte presidency. Has the European Parliament’s typically more principled or hawkish stance affected your engagement with Southeast Asian counterparts? 

The very fact that each EU institution has its own competencies, powers and culture is a major asset for its diplomacy, if played well. The EU decision-making process is rich in its diversity, and once a European position or legislation is decided, it is usually rather future-proof, precisely because it has been difficult to achieve.  It is up to the various EU institutions to use as best and as efficiently as possible their various instruments—and these include the European and the national parliaments—; and this also goes for diplomacy. As the EU High Representative Josep Borrell recently said, “We need regular dialogue between the European Union institutions and national parliaments if we want to maximise our collective impact. In particular, your support for our European Union foreign policy, including our [Common Security and Defence Policy] missions and operations, is vital. It is even more in today’s complex security environment.” In the framework of the relations between the EU and ASEAN, the latest Plan of Action 2023-2027 includes the encouragement of “linkages between the ASEAN Member States’ Parliaments and the European Parliament, as well as between the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly and the European Parliament”.

It is normal then, and it is healthy, that each EU institution should articulate its views on various issues, including external affairs, in a different manner corresponding to their respective competencies and sensitivities. The European Parliament may be more vocal or noticeable on issues such as the rule of law or universal human rights—in Southeast Asia as anywhere else, including domestically—but it is its role, after all. And it doesn’t mean that other EU institutions are necessarily less active in these fields. They just do it in their own way and according to their own competencies and modus operandi. So to the question: are there internal differences in approach between EU institutions, the answer is yes, certainly and thankfully. To the other question, should we or do we show a unity of action in our diplomatic outreach, the answer is equally positive. There is only one EU diplomatic message. 

And how have you sought to work with the European Commissioners and EU ambassadors in Southeast Asia, especially on issues where the Parliament and Commission don’t necessarily see eye to eye?

As a European Parliament official seconded to the EU Delegation to ASEAN, my hierarchy is the EU Ambassador to ASEAN, and I work closely with colleagues from this very delegation as well as with colleagues in all EU delegations based in the region. I also interact every day with MEPs and European Parliament colleagues; the working relationship between us is based on mutual respect and duty to develop as much as possible efficient and useful outreach to our Southeast Asian partners and interlocutors. Internal considerations aren’t and won’t be interfering with this strategic objective.

One critique of parliamentary relations could be that local parliaments in many Southeast Asian countries are weak and ineffective (Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia) or have a relatively small voice on foreign policy (Indonesia or Thailand, for instance). First of all, would you accept that? If so, does this slightly detract from the impact of developing parliamentary-to-parliamentary engagement?  

Each country develops its own governance model in a sovereign way, and the ambition of the European Parliament is to respect each one of them and to establish strong relations with each of them, in a respectful way and in a spirit of equal partnership. No model of governance is perfect, starting with ours. What is important is being able to develop a real, genuine, deep and comprehensive dialogue in which no topic is taboo. This is where Parliament is an asset: parliamentarians have both the legitimacy and freedom to speak their mind, and this contributes to a vibrant diplomacy. This is the way the European Parliament develops its parliamentary diplomacy: mutual respect and sincere engagement on all topics are the only sustainable way to go.

One goal is to create an EU-ASEAN parliamentary assembly, although I believe that some AIPA Parliament members are sceptical of the idea. Can you talk about that?

The European Parliament and AIPA have been close partners for decades, and their relationship is deepening year on year. The main objective of the European Parliament is to establish, channel and promote parliamentary dialogue with its ASEAN partners, especially in the fields of regional cooperation and integration, democracy, good governance, the rule of law, human rights issues, trade relations and security issues. Over the last few years, our Members have engaged in the framework of a new Inter-Regional EP-AIPA Dialogue, with the latest edition taking place last November in Strasbourg under the co-chairmanship of Daniel Caspary MEP and Sanya Praseuth MP from the National Assembly of Lao PDR. The Inter-regional Dialogue Meeting agreed on the next steps in further developing the dialogues and the next one is scheduled during the 45th AIPA General Assembly in Vientiane in October 2024. The European Parliament is committed to deepening the relationship with its ASEAN partners and indeed proposed to create an EU-ASEAN Parliamentary Assembly. It will be up to the newly elected EU Parliament and its Southeast Asian partners to decide on the form of their cooperation. 

The European Parliamentary elections are approaching. How important will this be in showcasing the European parliamentary process in Southeast Asia? 

2024 is a mega election year. With the Indonesian elections just behind us, the three other major ones will be India in April, the EU in June, and the USA in November. Our Southeast Asian partners respect the European Union as a major global partner, exactly as the EU does with ASEAN. In March, the largest ASEAN member state, Indonesia, showed a great level of mobilisation in its presidential, general and local elections; these elections took place in an orderly manner, not a mean feat in a country of 274 million inhabitants and 17,000 islands. The upcoming European elections in June are very much on the radar of our ASEAN partners, as they are aware that their outcome will determine the future of what is—alongside ASEAN—one of the world's most advanced experiences of regional integration, and a great source of trade and investment. ASEAN and the EU are united on the fundamentals: defence of multilateralism, of the UN Charter principles, and of the rule of law. The strength of the parliamentary dimension between the EU and ASEAN will largely depend on the strength of the new Parliament and other EU institutions after June 6-9, considering that the European elections are decisive for the composition of the European Commission, elected by the EU Parliament. Much is at stake.