Insights from ASEAN´s Foreign Policy Co operation: The “ASEAN Way”, a Real Spirit or a Phantom?

Abstract

Notwithstanding substantial criticism over the past two years, is regarded as a paragon case of successful regional co-operation. This article seeks to contribute to the debate about the nature of ASEAN's co-operation. Have members been guided by a sense of community in their foreign policy co-operation? The article examines the nexus between regional identity and foreign policy by gauging the regional states' norm compliance with regard to the ASEAN way. It focuses on decision-making in relation to diplomatic initiatives relevant to the grouping's security. The main emphasis is on the post-Cold War era, with a backdrop provided by specific events in the 1970s and 1980s. Introduction The achievements of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) since its establishment in 1967 are certainly impressive. In a region previously beset by confrontation, no armed conflict has erupted between the members, although bilateral tensions have surfaced on several occasions. In the international arena, has managed to attain a high profile and the regional grouping has acted in concert in the economic as well as in the diplomatic spheres. This record renders he principal success of indisputable. However, the question that arises is what has been the underlying basis of co-operation? Have he countries co-operated because they conceived of the region as a community where states share one common or has co-operation been motivated by functional considerations derived from the realization that one's bargaining power increases if the region speaks with one voice? This article sets out to answer that question, and by doing so, intends to contribute to the debate about the essential nature of state interaction in Southeast Asia. Recent critical assessments of and its approach to cooperation within the Regional Forum (ARF) have rekindled the debate between rationalist, particularly realist, and constructivist scholars about which factors determine state interactions in Southeast Asia and, by extension, in the wider Asia-Pacific region. [1] Constructivist scholars have posited the existence, or at least emergence, of a regional community among the states. [2] This perspective is underpinned by the premise that possesses a shared identity which exerts crucial influence on states' behaviour. These identity-based accounts of co-operation have emphasized the importance of norms. According to that view, shared norms represent collective expectations about proper behaviour for a given identity, and hence define how an actor should behave. [3] Norm compliance then becomes an important indicator of the existence of a regional community with a distinct identity. To date, most discus sions of the notion of a Southeast Asian community have examined the dimension of intra-ASEAN relations. The question of what role norms have played for decision-making and implementation with regard to ASEAN's external relations has largely been neglected. [4] This article seeks to fill that gap by probing whether the norms of the ASEAN way have had a significant impact on co-operation in foreign policy. leaders, as well as some scholars, have emphasized the importance of the so-called ASEAN way for the success of regional co-operation. [5] The ASEAN way entails behavioural norms encapsulated in a code-of-conduct and a set of procedural norms. [10] The former contains standard norms of international law: respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and non-use of force. More unique to ASEAN, and hence more relevant for an assessment of the identity--foreign policy nexus are procedural norms which prescribe decision-making procedures that leaders are expected to follow. According to those prescriptions, ASEAN's decision-making process should observe the principles of musyawarah (consultation) and mufakat (consensus). …