The Asia-Pacific region remains the hotbed of a host of incipient or actual conflicts ranging from potentially strategic nuclear confrontations to decades-old domestic secessionist or other hostilities but remains incapable of developing effective conflict prevention instrument comparable to those set in place in Europe.

Some of the most dangerous and long-standing flash-points in the world include the Korean Peninsula, the Taiwan Straits and Kashmir, as well as a number of other national and regional conflicts or tensions that occasionally escalate into full-blown crises.

According to a list provided by one expert to the meeting in Berlin jointly planned and organised by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and the Asia-Europe Foundation virtually no Asian state is absent from those confronted with a secessionist, ethnic, religious or political rebellion or tension. The latter domestic conflicts have become more frequent in recent years than the traditional territorial or nationalistic outbreaks that predominated in the past.

In addition, the threat of international terrorism as well as other non-traditional threats to individuals rather than states also figure prominently in crisis centres and strategic discussions such as the Berlin meeting. But the concept of a global war on terrorism, as well as other plans to combat various perceived threats, were regarded by some as sometimes either distractions, smokescreens or manipulations that obscured the real situation or other risks. The very act of becoming involved in a conflict prevention effort may also sometimes be subverted and manipulated by participants, some speakers cautioned.

But in general, there seemed to be widespread feeling that addressing the upstream causes of tensions, injustice or grievances was essential to lessen the danger of latent frictions exploding into outright hostilities.

While there was considerable emphasis during the discussions on possible examples that could be shared between the European Union and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the ASEAN and its ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) there was the usual reference to the much slower development of conflict prevention capability in the latter. There was also some reference to NATO and other Asian or Asia-Pacific mechanisms that could also be useful in such efforts.

To a large degree, however, many speakers underlined the belief that Asian states were still inclined to jealously protect their sovereignty and integrity and therefore less inclined to seek regional or multilateral assistance, using various national means to deal with security or other tensions with diverse consequences and results. Among the case studies examined during the meeting, speakers concentrated on the decade-long crises and conflicts in the Balkans, the long-running conflict in the Philippine region of Mindanao and the rival claims in the South China Sea.

Much of the individual workshop discussion was therefore spent on comparing these capabilities and developing suggestions for possible application in both regions.