National and Regional Obligations, the Metaphor of Two‐Level Games, and the ASEAN Socio‐Cultural Community

Abstract

This article draws on ideas associated with "two-level games" to focus on the continuing difficulty within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) of reconciling national responsibilities and regional commitments. Using this perspective to examine three areas included in the remit of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community-migrant workers, "haze", and disaster management-it disaggregates some of the complex domestic and international pressures that can lead to varying regional outcomes. Whereas problems with regional cooperation are often simply laid at the door of recalcitrant governments or inadequate regional institutions, this lens foregrounds a different source of difficulties, in which significant domestic constituencies severely constrain what governments can offer to the region. Conceptualizing the national/regional interface in this way, however, also suggests ways through some of the sticking points. This lens therefore has implications for policy, advocacy, ASEAN's communication efforts, and its routine collaborative undertakings.

Integrating ASEAN in Labor Migration Policy: From Disjointed to Complementary Actor

“…In addition, ASEAN currently has little effect on bilateral agreements and on states’ signing and ratifying of international conventions. It is virtually impossible for ASEAN to forthrightly convince states to do something that is not in their interest (Quayle, ); it must therefore ease itself into national discussions and negotiations in order to facilitate regional governance on migration.…”

“…These challenges are exacerbated when the media and political discourse exploit emotive and dismissive sentiments against migrant workers, which then limit policy choices (ASEF, ). ASEAN initiatives that target national‐level perceptions and treatment of migrant workers through much needed public education (Quayle, ) may also add to an entrenched role for ASEAN at the national level that would foster regulatory regionalism activities.…”

“…While Southeast Asia has active and vibrant nongovernmental organizations and grassroots organizations for labor migration (Rother & Piper, ), it remains a challenge for them to meaningfully engage with formal regional processes and decisions initiated by ASEAN. Although ASEAN acknowledged proposals made by the TF‐AMW and the ACMW did consult widely in the lead up to the ADMW (Quayle, ), how these consultations and interactions result in concrete inputs and changes in ASEAN policies still require further development and institutionalization.…”

“…There are perennial critiques of ASEAN's normative framework and how it impacts the progress of policy decisions in various fields (Quayle, ). ASEAN's fundamental norms of consensus decision making, respect for sovereignty, noninterference in internal affairs, and informality have slowed progress.…”