Contested regionalism in the Asia-Pacific: the case of the Bali Process and the protection of refugees

Abstract

ABSTRACT Due to the lack of formal refugee protection framework, the Asia-Pacific region represents a particularly interesting case study regarding the interface between migration management and refugee protection. Since the end of the Indochinese refugee crisis in the late 1990s, priorities have largely shifted towards a more security and law enforcement approach, as embedded in particular in the Bali Process on People smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime, the main Regional Consultative Process in the region. Yet, various others migration-related initiatives have been taken in recent years outside the Bali Process, and somehow against the Bali Process. These resulted in the adoption of numerous statements, roadmaps or of more formal (albeit non-binding) ‘declarations’, some of them with a stronger focus on refugee protection. This contribution sets out to shed light on the development of regional migration governance in the Asia-Pacific by analysing the reasons behind the proliferation of migration-related initiatives in the region and the resulting increase in the number of non-binding intergovernmental frameworks on migration in the region. Against this backdrop, it is argued that this phenomenon is essentially the result of a situation of “contested regionalism” where either substantive issues (in particular the inclusion or lack thereof of human rights and refugee protection considerations in the work of the Bali Process) or organizational/institutional issues (essentially the prominent role of Australia) have been contested by other states and/or international organizations through processes known as “regime shifting” and “competitive regime creation”.