The Subsidiarity Model of Global Governance in the UN-ASEAN Context

Abstract

The end of Cold War has raised some interesting conceptual is sues relating to question of global governance in a turbulent world. This has been characterized as a movement away from state centrism toward multicentrism by some scholars who view world as being in a state of complexity, commotion, and uncertainty.1 Some have been looking at possibilities of enabling UN system to cope with new demands and rising challenges. Andy Knight, for example, has devel oped a subsidiarity model for peacemaking and preventive diplomacy by way of making Chapter VIII of UN Charter operational. He argues that post-Cold War needs and demands placed on UN are unprecedented and thus require a new global governance structure based on concept of panarchy?that is, rule of all by all for all. Plagued by problem of overstretch, UN system needs to be restructured in such a way that will promote a global division of labor between UN and other regional, transnational, state, substate, and nonstate actors.2 Subsidiarity is the principle according to which a central authority should have subsidiary functions, performing only those tasks which can not be performed effectively at more immediate or local level. This can be worked out in two different ways: bottom-up subsidiarity, in which cen tral authorities (e.g., UN) play a subsidiary or auxiliary role, and top down subsidiarity, in which central authorities exercise political power in a noncentralized way. The subsidiarity model rests on two basic nonrealist assumptions: bottom-up subsidiarity can work when member states of re gional organizations are technically and financially competent and politi cally capable of achieving collective action; top-down subsidiarity can succeed when members of regional organizations care less about their sovereignty, and great powers in UN system are willing to let re gional organizations take part in decisionmaking process and policy execution.3