A

s the great and good of the region gathered in Naypyidaw, Myanmar, last month for the 21st ASEAN Regional Forum, there was a rather predictable if not dull feeling to it all. They arrived '€” with bold promises; they talked '€” about the South China Sea, as always, and they went home '€” after the obligatory photo session, of course.

For critics, the whole spectacle was nothing more than a '€œtalking shop'€. As a former lecturer once joked to me, the ASEAN acronym stood for '€œall sitting, eating and nodding'€. Yet as any diplomat (or sane person for that matter) would agree, talking is always better than fighting '€” and this is where ASEAN should be praised.

While there have been occasional outbreaks of violence in the region, including among ASEAN member states themselves, the regional organization has always been consistent in its emphasis on dialogue, negotiation and non-violent means to resolve differences between states in the region. Enshrining this belief is ASEAN'€™s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, which to date has 27 signatories including the United States, China, Russia and the European Union. Among the key principles found in the treaty are: (1) the settlement of differences or disputes by peaceful means, and (2) the renunciation of the threat or use of force.

While detractors may point out that the treaty'€™s high council has never been utilized '€” only a few years ago Thailand and Cambodia came to deadly blows '€” and that the South China Sea issue continues to dog the region, they cannot deny that in the absence of ASEAN, the region would be a much darker place than the peaceful, stable and prosperous Southeast Asia that we know today. This speaks to the counterfactual value of ASEAN.

To demonstrate, one only needs to look at Indonesia. As the biggest country in Southeast Asia, Indonesia was not afraid in the past to use force to get its way in the region '€” launching military offensives in Malaysia, Timor Leste and West Papua '€” in moves that destabilized the region. Fast forward to this year, and Indonesia has signed historic agreements with the Philippines and just recently with Singapore to settle their maritime border disputes after years of negotiations in the spirit of ASEAN and its Treaty of Amity and Cooperation.

Another interesting development to take place this year was news that Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution has been nominated for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize. A win for the article, which renounces Japan'€™s sovereign right to wage war and use/threaten to use force to settle disputes, would build upon 2012, when the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Recalling that the EU was awarded the Nobel prize in recognition of turning a '€œcontinent of war'€ into a '€œcontinent of peace'€, a question emerged in this author'€™s mind: '€œWhy not award the Nobel Peace Prize to ASEAN and its Treaty of Amity and Cooperation?'€

Certainly the above has demonstrated that ASEAN would be a fitting recipient. ASEAN has turned a region beset by war, conflict and violent political upheavals into one striving toward the ASEAN Community 2015. So, if the 21st ASEAN Regional Forum had a predictable and dull feeling to it, it is worth remembering that the so-called '€œtalking shop'€ illustrates the laudable fact that former enemies now trade with one another, governments now talk with one another at the negotiating table and young men are now no longer being sent to pointlessly die on a battlefield.

With Dec. 31, 2015, being the date when Southeast Asia ushers in the ASEAN Community, the year 2015 may very well be a timely moment for ASEAN and its Treaty of Amity and Cooperation to be recognized for its achievement in securing peace for the peoples of the region '€” with a Nobel Peace Prize of its own.

The writer is ASEAN Studies Program coordinator at The Habibie Center in Jakarta.