Strengthening Regional Diplomacy: India-ASEAN Deliberations on the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC)

Recent bilateral deliberations between India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have brought the legal framework of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC) into sharp focus. The discussions centered on operationalizing the TAC’s High Council, a ministerial-level body designed to facilitate the peaceful settlement of regional disputes.

The TAC, established in 1976 and signed by India in 2003, serves as a foundational code of conduct for inter-state relations in the region. It is built on principles of mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interference in internal affairs, and the renunciation of the threat or use of force. While the treaty has long provided a normative framework, the High Council—intended to act as a dispute-resolution mechanism—has historically remained underutilized. The current deliberations signify a strategic shift toward institutionalizing regional conflict management.

From a governance and policy perspective, this move is significant for several reasons. First, it reinforces 'ASEAN Centrality' in the Indo-Pacific architecture, a core pillar of India’s Act East Policy. Second, it aligns with Chapter VIII of the UN Charter, which encourages regional arrangements to make every effort to achieve peaceful settlements of local disputes before referring them to the Security Council. By strengthening the High Council, India and ASEAN aim to create a more robust, rules-based regional order that can address maritime and territorial sensitivities without immediate external intervention.

For India, engaging with the TAC’s legal mechanisms demonstrates its commitment to international law and regional stability. It provides a platform to counter unilateralism and promotes a multilateral approach to security. However, the effectiveness of the High Council depends on the consensus-based 'ASEAN Way,' which requires all parties to a dispute to agree to its mediation—a hurdle that remains a subject of ongoing legal and diplomatic refinement.