ASEAN Norms Research Articles

"This is Not the 90s": Myanmar and Change in ASEAN's Normative Order

In this article, we examine the contours of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations' (ASEAN) response to the latest regional challenge from Myanmar, the 2021 coup. Scholars and practitioners alike often portray ASEAN as a relatively cohesive community of states united in adherence to a long-held and comparatively stable set of norms within the so-called "ASEAN way." Core among these norms has been domestic non-interference. However, we argue that rather than being determined by a coherent set of agreed norms, ASEAN's response to this crisis has been shaped by intra-regional contestation and division around how ASEAN ought to enact its particular "way" of regional governance. More narrowly, we show that the ASEAN response has been shaped by contestation over competing normative impulses in the organization—centrality and non-interference—which have developed in increasing tension since the humanitarian disaster after Cyclone Nargis in 2008 and the Rohingya crisis after 2016. We show that in response to these crises, officials from the organization and its member states advanced divergent accounts of what ASEAN ought to do and why, given competing normative commitments to centrality and non-interference. By showing how ASEAN's response to the 2021 coup is the result of internal contestation within the organization, we support accounts of regional governance in Southeast Asia that stress less the fixity of ASEAN norms than their contestation in practice. To make our argument we analyze more than 250 documents and draw on interviews with regional officials.

Whose democratization matters? Understanding the effects of regime change on normative changes in ASEAN

AbstractThis article aims to elucidate the varying effects of democratization in ASEAN members on the normative changes in the core principles of the “ASEAN Way.” Utilizing a regional-centric approach that emphasizes ASEAN members’ agency, the article posits that two critical variables shape the changing trajectory of ASEAN norms: ASEAN members' democratic performances and their regional status. While an ASEAN member’s democratic performance influences its willingness to advocate for normative changes, its regional status is also crucial in determining its capability to implement changes by navigating the divergent interests among ASEAN members. Only the ASEAN member with a high-quality democratic performance at home and recognized regional leadership can effectively bring about normative changes to ASEAN norms. Otherwise, either the domestic democratic deficit or a lack of leadership status will hinder the ASEAN members’ efforts to promote normative changes. Using the process-tracing method, the article empirically focuses on the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia for comparative case studies. The findings reveal that the Philippines’ poor democratic performance since the democratic restoration in 1986 has hindered its motivation to push for normative changes in ASEAN, rendering the Philippines a reluctant promoter. Although Thailand has made notable achievements in democratic consolidation since the downfall of junta rule in 1992, its lack of regional leadership has greatly limited its capability to reconcile the divergent interests among ASEAN members, resulting in the failure of its “flexible engagement” initiative. Conversely, Indonesia, with a high-quality democratic performance at home and bolstered by its regional leadership status, successfully brought significant changes to ASEAN norms by facilitating the ASEAN Charter signed in 2007.

Embedded ASEAN Norms in Managing and Resolving Maritime Disputes

Embedded ASEAN Norms in Managing and Resolving Maritime Disputes

The State of the Discipline: How Far Along Are We in Developing an IR Theory Based on Southeast Asia’s Experiences

Abstract Based on reflexive stocktaking and data collected from a cross-country survey distributed in seven Southeast Asian academic communities, namely Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, and Vietnam, this article explores how much progress Southeast Asian international relations (IR) academic communities have made in advancing a theory or concept based on local experiences. It is argued that while mainstream IR remains dominant, debates since the early 2000s have introduced new concepts. At the same time, new theoretical proposals are rare due to the vast diversity in Southeast Asia and a general interest in producing policy- and empirical-oriented work. Nevertheless, there are opportunities for constructing a Southeast Asian theory based on the region’s distinct perspectives on international relations shaped by ASEAN norms and institutions and the complex interactions between politics at the domestic and international levels. Any new conceptual or theoretical framework must also provide useful implications beyond the region.

Milk Tea Alliance: The Power of New Democracy in ASEAN and Efforts to Increase the Effectiveness of ASEAN Norms

Democracy and human rights issues in the ASEAN region came into the focus of attention with the emergence of the Milk Tea Alliance, a cross-border movement fighting for democratic values. This article aims to explore the role of the milk tea alliance movement as a new democratic force in ASEAN and how it can be enhanced in effectiveness through adaptation to existing ASEAN norms and institutions. Methodologically, secondary data collection often involves the use of literature research techniques and is analyzed explanatory with the framework of constructivist analysis to understand the social construction of identity, norms, and political relations in ASEAN with the movement. This research shows that this movement effectively increases public awareness of democratic principles. Nonetheless, normative and institutional challenges in the ASEAN region require the implementation of adequate adaptive measures. The study presents several tactics aimed at increasing the influence of this movement in facilitating democratic progress in the ASEAN region.

ASEAN Norms and Gender-Responsive Human security

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has instrumentalized gender equality to present itself as a responsible regional organization accommodating universal norms. However, there is an ontological gap between ASEAN and UN-led programs derived from the inconsistency between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation toward universal norms. This study argues that the inefficiency of ASEAN in pursuing gender equality is primarily attributed to the practice matter of ASEAN. Using primary and secondary data collected through various means, this paper finds that ASEAN efforts on gender equality were mainly raised in declarations and conferences. ASEAN is a particularly important agent in promoting gender-responsive human security, given the nature of challenges and the political and economic limitations of ASEAN member states. It also tends to be a good global citizen as a norm entrepreneur by promoting universal norms and involving global programs led by the UN, such as Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Keywords: ASEAN norms, ASEAN community, gender equality, human security, and norm entrepreneur Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) telah melembagakan kesetaraan gender untuk menampilkan dirinya sebagai organisasi regional yang bertanggung jawab mengakomodasi norma-norma universal. Namun, terdapat kesenjangan ontologis antara program-program yang dipimpin ASEAN dan PBB, yang berasal dari inkonsistensi antara motivasi intrinsik dan ekstrinsik terhadap norma-norma universal. Studi ini berpendapat bahwa inefisiensi ASEAN dalam mengejar kesetaraan gender sebagian besar dikaitkan dengan masalah praktik ASEAN. Dengan menggunakan data primer dan sekunder yang dikumpulkan melalui berbagai sumber, makalah ini menemukan bahwa upaya ASEAN dalam kesetaraan gender secara umum diangkat dalam deklarasi dan konferensi. ASEAN adalah agen yang sangat penting dalam mempromosikan keamanan manusia yang responsif gender, mengingat sifat tantangan dan keterbatasan politik dan ekonomi negara-negara anggota ASEAN. Hal ini juga cenderung menjadi warga dunia yang baik sebagai norm entrepreneur dengan mempromosikan norma-norma universal dan melibatkan program global yang dipimpin oleh PBB seperti Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) dan Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Kata-kata kunci: ASEAN norms, komunitas ASEAN, kesetaraan gender, keamanan manusia, dan norm entrepreneur

Adaptability of ASEAN states’ political security concept in the post-Cold War under a theory of social evolution analysis

This study attempts to explain the changes in the adaptation of ASEAN states to security norms since the Cold War. This study focuses on qualitative research methods, mainly “process tracking” and “historical comparison.” After the end of the Cold War, the ASEAN states did not immediately adopt the ASEAN framework for security cooperation, but still followed a certain degree of survival instinct. With the strengthening of ASEAN’s normative power, the situation of security cooperation between Southeast Asia and other major states in the region has begun to be dominated by ASEAN. This change has not only led to changes in the security habits of ASEAN states but also prompted ASEAN states to gradually adapt to the security norms based on the ASEAN framework. The changes in the adaptability of ASEAN states to security norms illustrate the fact that ASEAN norms (ASEAN Way) are spread from another perspective, and also show the reasons why ASEAN can advance toward a security community. On the whole, the development of security norms of ASEAN states after the Cold War shows a direction of social evolution, and it is a kind of convergent evolution. With the influence of the external environment, ASEAN states “choose” ASEAN norms (ASEAN Way) to obtain security, and the ASEAN Security Community finally becomes a form of “inheritance”.

HOW ASEAN PERCEIVE NATURAL DISASTER AS PART OF SECURITY COMMUNITY AGENDA?

As a disaster-prone area, ASEAN had a set of disaster management mechanisms. In 2011 ASEAN established an institution that focuses on regional disaster management, namely the AHA Centre. However, the AHA Center did not show its significant role in some disasters. This article aimed to determine the obstacles faced by the AHA Center in 4 phases of international disaster management, namely mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery, and to use the concept of the security community to analyze ASEAN norms, institutions, and collective identity and relation to disaster management through the AHA Centre. The method used is a qualitative research method. The data collection technique collaborated several techniques derived from interviews with Indonesia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the AHA Center, and BNPB RI, document-based research, and internet-based research. This research showed how the AHA Center had played a role in the four phases of disaster management. However, there were still shortcomings such as its limited role, lack of resource management, and mechanisms that only focused on government-to-government. In addition, this shortcoming can also be found stemming from the collective identity of ASEAN, which is applied in its regional disaster management. Thus, this study suggested that the ASEAN policymakers increase the role of the AHA Center in regional disaster management, improve mechanisms and resource management, and establish cross-pillar mechanisms of the ASEAN community.

Kesesuaian ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (AATHP) dengan Norma ASEAN

Haze pollution is one of the challenges that ASEAN has faced from several decades. Indonesia, as the country that hold most of the tropical forestry in the region, occasionally had forest fire that caused by either climate change or man-made deforestation. Forest fire that occurred in Indonesia consequences at thick haze in neighboring countries Malaysia and Singapore skies, which madeboth countries securitize as it was threatening the lives of their people. Thus, in order to tackle the problem, on 2002, ASEAN released an environmental protocol named ASEAN Agreement of Transboundary Haze Pollution (AATHP). However, the questions raises whether the enviromental protocol fit to the ASEAN Way. This paper argues that AATHP is not violating any of ASEAN norms and value, as it is not a fully legally binding protocol. Constructivism approach will be used as a tool to analyse how AATHP comply to ASEAN way.

ASEAN and Janus-faced constitutionalism: The Indonesian case

This article addresses the phenomenon of dual constitutionalism, using a case study on Indonesia that presents a double conundrum. The first facet of this conundrum is that the Indonesian president can constitutionally ignore the views of the Constitutional Court and the House of Representatives regarding the highly sensitive subject of energy policy and instead write policies in response to perceived political or economic necessity. The second facet pertains to the fact that Indonesia’s energy policies ultimately converge with “soft” ASEAN norms and diverge from its own Constitution, jurisprudence, and legislation. This article argues that this conundrum has emerged because Indonesia operates a dual constitutional system. This dual constitutional system comprises two spheres of legislative action, which are legally and politically autonomous from one another. There is a presidential system of decision-making committed to economic liberalism, whose main checks are those of international law. There is, also, a parliamentary system whose main checks are provided by electoral politics and the constitutional court. This dualism forms part of the Indonesian constitutional identity through two means. First, it provides a platform for the enactment of the continuing ideological conflict between economic liberalism and economic democracy. Second, the dualism is maintained by a constitutional abeyance, a “suspended irresolution,” which none of the actors seek to resolve, lest they cause a constitutional crisis.

ASEAN in 2017 :Democracy in Crisis and ASEAN Norms

ASEAN in 2017 :Democracy in Crisis and ASEAN Norms

Regional Human Rights Institutions and R2P: The Role of State Monitoring in Atrocity Prevention

This paper considers the potential of regional human rights institutions in the global South – including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights – to exercise atrocity prevention functions. Specifically, it considers the possibilities and limits of their institutions and activities in contributing to early warning, direct prevention, and ‘root cause’ prevention, finding that much potential exists for the Inter-American and African Commission to make tangible contributions to prevention, broadly conceived, but that there remain important gaps between mandate and actual practices. The asean Commission lags significantly behind the others because of the Southeast Asian grouping’s continued commitment to non-interference. Despite this fact, asean norms and institutions are ever-evolving – even if slowly – and so opportunities may arise for the creation of prevention-relevant mandates and mechanisms that mirror those already embedded in the Inter-American and African systems.

Japan’s Aspirations for Regional Leadership – Is the Goose Finally Cooked?

ABSTRACTJapan’s rise has often been conceived in terms of the ‘flying geese’ model in which Japan led a flock of emerging East Asian economies as its production networks expanded and it shed outdated technologies to the followers. Though the model implied a continuing Japanese leadership role in the East Asian region, two lost decades have undermined Japan’s claim to head the flock of ‘flying geese’ and Japan is often perceived as in decline relative to China’s rapid rise. This paper challenges such accounts to argue that Japan still has significant leadership ambitions and, potentially, the means to bring them to fruition. Understanding Japan’s leadership ambitions requires conceptualizing power in terms of discursive as well as material resources. Doing so highlights how different policymakers articulate contrasting visions of how Japan should take the lead in East Asia. These visions are of Japan as (variously) a functional leader, a conveyer of universal values, a conformist to ASEAN norms, a strategic partner and a promoter of open regionalism. Whilst most analyses have focused on Japan as a declining power, it is the spatial, temporal and ethical incompatibility of these regional visions that undermines Japan’s aspirations to lead the East Asian region.

Korea-ASEAN Dialogue Partnership and ASEAN Norms: An Analysis of Diplomatic History in the Early 1980s

Korea-ASEAN Dialogue Partnership and ASEAN Norms: An Analysis of Diplomatic History in the Early 1980s

The ASEAN Charter: A Commentary

The ASEAN Charter:A Commentary Andrew Harding Walter Woon Singapore: NUS Press, 2016. xi + 295 pp. ISBN: 978-981-4722-08-7 (pb) ASEAN has been in existence for almost half a century, and has progressed via a system of consultation and non-confrontation, rather than by implementation of a highly legalist structure such as that which governs the European Union. This modus operandi was often referred to as ‘the ASEAN way’. However, since 2008, when the ASEAN Charter came into effect, ASEAN has inched towards a more legalist approach. For example, a Protocol on Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism was added in 2010. In a real sense, this Charter is the organization’s constitution. This book provides a thorough commentary on the Charter and, if we understand (as we should) the Charter as a major development in ASEAN’s history, it is a very timely book. In the intervening seven years several developments have made the Charter even more significant. It follows from the same author’s Towards a Rule-Based Community: An ASEAN Legal Service (2014), and Tommy Koh, Rosario Manalo and Walter Woon (eds), The Making of the ASEAN Charter (World Scientific Publishing, 2009). Walter Woon is currently David Marshall Professor of Law at the National University of Singapore, the Dean of the Singapore Institute of Legal Education, and President of the Goethe Institute Singapore. He was formerly Attorney-General of Singapore, ambassador to the European Communities and several European countries, a member of the High-Level Task Force to draft the ASEAN Charter, and a nominated Member of Singapore’s Parliament. As such he is eminently qualified to provide us with this welcome commentary. The commentary itself is embedded within a helpful historical and contextual narrative provided in the Introduction and continued in detail throughout the book, which also provides a timeline of ASEAN’s development and details of the process that led to the drafting of the Charter. Interestingly enough, this process began as early as 1974, when it was proposed by the then Philippines Foreign Minister. It took the multiple crises of 1997–8 (political change in Indonesia and Thailand; economic and environmental disaster across the region); and the adding [End Page 180] of four new members (Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Myanmar), coming in at a lower level of economic development than the existing six, to propel the idea of a Charter towards realization. It was, as the express intention of the ASEAN Leaders’ Declaration on the Establishment of the Charter in Kuala Lumpur in 2005 showed, to create a legal and institutional basis for ASEAN, codify ASEAN norms and values, and provide for the legal identity of ASEAN itself. Naturally enough, given the prevalence in SE Asia since the 1990s of the Asian values debate on human rights, it was this topic which created the most difficulties, with member states expressing different preferences, the principal issue being whether there should be a human rights commission. The CLMV countries were against having a commission; Indonesia and Thailand wanted one; the other states took an intermediate position. This potential deal-breaker was finessed into an agreement to deal with the issue of human rights via a separately developed ‘mechanism’. In a move that proved interesting in light of further developments, a principle of rejecting unconstitutional and undemocratic changes of government was modified into a general support for constitutional and democratic government (Thailand experienced a military coup in 2006, and again in 2014; Myanmar experienced its ‘saffron revolution’ in 2007). The Charter finally came into effect in December 2008. Apart from some useful appendices and the index, the balance of the book— more than 200 pages—sets out the text of each provision of the Charter in bold with a commentary by the author. The commentary provides information about the background of each portion of text, including its progenitors, comparative information, and extensive footnotes. The author discusses the controversial issue of human rights at length. His discussion reveals strongly how the settling of this issue represents a compromise between the positive and negative views and explains a good deal about the half-hearted and almost symbolic nature of ASEAN’s embrace of human rights following the ASEAN...

ASEAN and regional governance after the Cold War: from regional order to regional community?

This paper first reviews and critiques the dominant realist and constructivist accounts of ASEAN, which have enjoyed much prominence in The Pacific Review since the journal's founding in 1988. ASEAN behaviour and outcomes cannot be fitted into neat theoretical categories that emphasize either material or ideational variables in explanation. Instead, ASEAN displays complexities in behaviour that are the product of the contingent interaction between the material (power, territory, wealth) and the ideational (norms, ideas, identity) as member states actively seek to manage domestic order as well as regional order within and beyond ASEAN. In all of this, state interests and identities remain paramount, which means that the long-standing ASEAN norms of sovereignty/non-interference remain central to regional governance. Under these conditions, and despite the Charter's newly articulated political norms of democratization, human rights, and the rule of law, the prospects seem doubtful for building a people-centred ASEAN Community in which regional governance displays inclusiveness, seeking to address the interests and needs of the region's ordinary people as opposed to what its elites deem appropriate. The final portion of the paper explores what a critical approach to studying ASEAN might reveal. In particular, the paper attempts to identify whether there may be any political spaces opening up within existing structures and practices from which progressive change could emerge, even if slowly, particularly in the area of human rights and social justice, key elements in building an inclusive, ASEAN Community.

Myanmar in EU–ASEAN relations

The aim of this paper is to discuss and examine the regional projects of institutionalism in Europe and Southeast Asia. The main focus is on Myanmar, a regional ‘outcast’ whose membership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 1997 has helped it to gain international legitimacy and be able to stand relatively strong against Western sanctions. The military regime is riding on the wave of ASEAN norms and a communitarian culture. The question remains as to how long the country can continue to do so. A rather skeptical view is emphasized on the ‘ASEAN Way’ in dealing with the military regime, and for the overall political dialogue with the European Union. Many ambitious objectives such as sovereign equality in institutionalism are widely questioned, and the European Union has gone against many of its treaties in order to keep its relationship with Southeast Asia. The paper puts prominence on the political and security relationship rather than on the economic aspect, which has been far more successful. The role of values and the human rights debate will be highlighted and described as the greatest obstacle for any future political cooperation.

Building an East Asian Community: Origins, Structure, and Limits

Is an East Asian Community possible? In November 2001 the leaders of the ASEAN countries were presented with the report of the East Asian Vision Group (EAVG). The report laid down a road map for future regional integration efforts across East Asia. Beginning with an overview of East Asian regionalization to date , this article adopts the three most developed areas of the EAVG report and examines their potential for deepening regional community-building endeavors. The article argues that there is an identifiable and sustainable trend within the region toward the development of an East Asian Community based on the ASEAN norms of consensus and noninterference but that these norms are

Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order

Introduction: Security Communities and ASEAN in Theoretical Perspective 1. Constructing Security Communities 2. The Evolution of ASEAN Norms and the Emergence of the 'ASEAN Way' 3. ASEAN and the Cambodia Conflict: A Regional Solution to a Regional Problem? 4. Extending ASEAN Norms: Benefits and Burdens of ASEAN-Ten 5. Managing Intra-regional Relations 6. ASEAN and Asia Pacific Security: Limits of the ASEAN Way? 7. The 'ASEAN Security Community': Idea Shaping Reality? Conclusion: Remaking ASEAN

The Limits of Defense and Security Cooperation in Southeast Asia

Interest in regional security arrangements is burgeoning in the Asia-Pacific. Discussions about cooperative security either as an alternative or supplement to national defense reflect the concern that some form of cooperative security would provide greater stability than a reliance upon transitory balances of power; and reflect the belief that there should be a less costly and more stabilizing option superior to an exclusive dependence on individual national military buildups that could degenerate into a regional arms race. For Southeast Asia, the institutional solution to the security dilemma is located in ASEAN. In this article, I assess the barriers to a fuller security community in Southeast Asia; the current military situation in Southeast Asia, paying particular attention to the concurrent weapons modernization programs in most of the ASEAN countries; and focus on the role of China as a destabilizing power in the ASEAN region. More generally, I argue that ASEAN is a security community, that there is a set of ASEAN norms which promise greater security cooperation, and that there are real limits to security multilateralism in Southeast Asia.