ASEAN in the twenty-first century: a sceptical review

Abstract

Over the past few years, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has undertaken institutional reforms in the hope of rejuvenating itself for the twenty-first century. This paper utilizes the theory of subaltern realism (SR) to examine these initiatives. SR emphasizes that developing world states are weak and internally divided. As such, they formulate regional relations from the perspective of doing what is needed to further the state-building process. This paper assesses two of these reformsthe ASEAN Charter and the idea of the ASEAN Community idea-from the SR perspective and concludes that these measures are unlikely to have the desired rejuvenating effect. The ASEAN Charter envisions an ASEAN that is more intrusive than most of its members will tolerate. The ASEAN Community is not supported by a strong ASEAN identity. However, the regional environment of East Asia creates a political space wherein a unified and motivated ASEAN has the potential to exercise considerable influence. ASEAN member states are faced with the dilemma of determining how to balance their demands for sovereignty with the real advantages they will gain by supporting ASEAN. SR needs to be further developed before it can offer guidance in evaluating this situation.

Southeast Asia and the English School of International Relations

“…The idea that SEA can be seen as a regional international society, with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as the outward expression of some of its institutions, has been noted (Chong, 2011;Narine, 2006Narine, , 2008Narine, , 2009Tan, 2006/07), as has the relevance to SEA, and to Asia more generally, of ES ideas about order (Alagappa, 2003b) and about power-balancing (Acharya, 2005;Emmers, 2003;Goh, /08, 2011Khong, 2005;Latif, 2007;Odgaard, 2007). ES approaches have also been used to situate SEA in the wider regional or global context (Ang, 2007/08;, and passing references note further potential connections (for example, Acharya & Buzan, 2007, 289-90;Bellamy, 2005b, 23;Buzan, 2004, 238).…”

European integration through the eyes of ASEAN: Rethinking Eurocentrism in comparative regionalism

“…Furthermore, the absence of proper mechanisms for conflict resolution is another serious issue standing in the way of reaching agreement. In fact, it has been pointed out that at the time of formulating the Charter, only about 30% of agreements had been implemented (Narine, 2009: 376).…”

An Agreement to Disagree: The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration and the Absence of Regional Identity in Southeast Asia

“…Acharya stepped back from this assertion in 2001 when claiming that the concept of a security community was a fruitful way to analyse ASEAN, even though ASEAN did not fully meet the requirements of such a community (Acharya 2001). Serious criticism of the application of a security community to ASEAN has been levelled (Jones and Smith 2002;Khoo 2004;Narine 2009). An important point of contestation in this debate is that Deutsch's definition of a security community did not just rest on "stable expectations of peace among their participating units or groups, whether or not there has been a merger of their political institutions" (Deutsch 1961: 98 andDeutsch 1954: 33), but also on processes of "integration" defined as the creation of "unifying habits and institutions" (Deutsch 1978: 194) in driving peace.…”