Institutions and the great power bargain in East Asia: ASEAN's limited 'brokerage' role

Goh, Evelyn

doi:10.1093/irap/lcr014

Cited by 50 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It reinforces the claim by Thomas (, 138) that ‘the China‐ASEAN relationship is the key nexus for wider moves towards Asian regionalism’. It confirms the conclusion of Goh (, 115) that ASEAN has found ‘a major normative ally’ in Beijing. Conversely Acharya (, 227) reminds us: ‘China needs ASEAN's acquiescence to realize its leadership ambition in Asia and the world.…”

Section: Pacific Asian Voting In the General Assemblysupporting

confidence: 88%

Foreign Policy Convergence in Pacific Asia: The Evidence from Voting in the UN General Assembly

Ferdinand¹

2013

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Highlights and Abstract Research Highlights Comparative assessment of three indexes of voting cohesion Demonstrates the strong shared orientation towards global affairs among states in the Pacific Asian region, especially ASEAN and China, which is greater than that of the EU Shows the widespread reluctance of most Pacific Asian states publicly to criticize human rights abuses Shows the estrangement of the US from the foreign policy orientations of Pacific Asian states, even Japan and South Korea This article aims to do three things: (i) compare three different indexes for assessing the voting cohesion of regional groups of states in the UN General Assembly; (ii) use these indexes to assess the foreign policy convergence of states in Pacific Asia on global issues between 1974 and 2008; (iii) compare the extent of that convergence with the European Union (EU). All three indexes show a high degree of convergence in the voting records of states in Pacific Asia, but particularly in ASEAN, which is higher than in the EU. The most frequent cause of divergence since the end of the Cold War has been the reluctance of most states in the region, apart from Japan and South Korea, publicly to criticize the human rights records of other states. Although there are variations, the results also reveal the divergence in voting between states throughout the region and the US.

show abstract

Section: Pacific Asian Voting In the General Assemblysupporting

confidence: 88%

Foreign Policy Convergence in Pacific Asia: The Evidence from Voting in the UN General Assembly

Ferdinand¹

2013

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The followership of Southeast Asian states has allowed China to officially "institutionalize" its growing power resources by calling a hierarchical system in terms of ranking relations among related states in effect, which implies the long-term benefits of legitimate rule (Goh 2011). At the level of position hierarchy, China is a dominant state, and other Southeast Asian countries play the role of client states under three following aspects.…”

Section: China and The Quest For Leadership In Southeast Asiamentioning

confidence: 99%

International Leadership as a Process: The case of China in Southeast Asia

2017

Rev. bras. polít. int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leadership theory in IR still lacks a coherent approach, and it is analytically useful to use eclectic lenses by combining all factors related to power and the usage of power to gain leadership status. I define the term "international leadership" as a process in which a state mobilizes its resources to influence a group of other states (followership) in order to achieve a common goal. In the empirical investigation, I will focus on China's abilities to lead in Southeast Asia. Despite the fact that there are many advantages for China, the mechanism of transforming power resources into regional leadership is still questionable. • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author and source are credited.• Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto e distribuído sob os termos da Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons, que permite uso irrestrito, distribuição e reprodução em qualquer meio, desde que o autor e a fonte originais sejam creditados.

show abstract

“…The ES seeks to understand how particular international and regional orders are constituted through the negotiation and mutual understandings of the members of international or regional society. A central feature of such negotiation is legitimacy, analysed by scholars working within the ES specifically in relation to how great and small powers reach bargains over respective responsibilities towards building and managing order (Goh 2011, Clark 2011, Bukovansky et al 2012. This paper contributes to this work by developing a simple framework based on the practice of legitimation which helps capture roles negotiation between actors interacting within their specific social and historical contexts.…”

Section: Debating Asean's Rolementioning

confidence: 99%

ASEAN as the ‘regional conductor’: understanding ASEAN's role in Asia-Pacific order

Yates

2016

The Pacific Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Institutions and the great power bargain in East Asia: ASEAN's limited 'brokerage' role

Cited by 50 publications

References 30 publications

Foreign Policy Convergence in Pacific Asia: The Evidence from Voting in the UN General Assembly

Foreign Policy Convergence in Pacific Asia: The Evidence from Voting in the UN General Assembly

International Leadership as a Process: The case of China in Southeast Asia

ASEAN as the ‘regional conductor’: understanding ASEAN's role in Asia-Pacific order

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About