Association Of Southeast Asian Nations 's Role Research Articles

Peran Perhimpunan Bangsa-Bangsa Asia Tenggara dalam Menanggulangi Eksploitasi Perempuan dan Anak

Human trafficking, especially the exploitation of women and children, is a serious problem that threatens humanity in the ASEAN region. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has an important role in tackling this phenomenon. This research aims to analyze ASEAN's role in tackling human trafficking, with a focus on the exploitation of women and children, as well as to identify challenges and provide recommendations for improvement. The research method used is the normative juridical method, which examines various legal materials as the main basis for answering research problems. A statutory and conceptual approach is used to examine relevant legal instruments and examine concepts related to human trafficking, human rights, and the protection of women and children. Data was collected through document studies and secondary literature, then analyzed qualitatively to evaluate ASEAN's role and effectiveness in tackling human trafficking. The research results show that ASEAN has adopted various legal instruments, including the ASEAN Convention Against Trafficking in Persons (ACTIP), but implementation and coordination between member countries is still a major challenge. The role of civil society and non-governmental organizations is also important in supporting efforts to combat human trafficking in the ASEAN region. Recommendations are suggested to strengthen policy implementation, increase regional cooperation, and strengthen protection for victims, especially women and children.

MANIFESTATION OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY IN ASEAN AS A REGIONAL ORGANIZATION DURING PANDEMIC COVID-19

This research is entitled Manifestation of Collective Security in ASEAN as a Regional Organisation During the COVID-19 Pandemic. This research aims to identify ASEAN policies and efforts to realise collective security during the COVID-19 pandemic period. This research examines the manifestation of collective security in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a regional organisation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The research method is to use a qualitative approach, combining desk research and data analysis. The results highlight ASEAN's important role in enhancing regional security through cooperation, particularly in the economic and diplomatic sectors, ASEAN utilises digital platforms for information exchange and coordination. The ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Health Development and the ASEAN Health Ministers Meeting facilitate open communication, allowing countries to share best practices and resources. For example, Thailand received early notification of COVID-19 through the ASEAN Emergency Operations Centre Network, enabling swift preparedness actions. The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated ASEAN's capacity to uphold its mission of regional stability and security. Through coordinated efforts, resource sharing, and international partnerships, ASEAN has effectively addressed the challenges posed by the pandemic. This experience underscores the importance of collective security and regional cooperation, reaffirming ASEAN's role as an important actor in maintaining stability and fostering resilience in Southeast Asia. This study concludes that ASEAN as a regional organisation plays an important role in ensuring the collective security of its members

The Role of ASEAN and Vietnam in Counter-Terrorism

This study examines the role of Vietnam in the fight against terrorism. The study focuses on the activities of the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its member VietNam in the area of counter-terrorism, radicalism and extremism. The authors examine in detail the legal framework of ASEAN’s counter-terrorism activities: the ASEAN Convention on Counter-Terrorism, the ASEAN Comprehensive Plan of Action on Counter-Terrorism, ASEAN plan of action to prevent and counter the rise of radicalisation and violent extremism (POA PCVE). Moreover, close attention is given to the activities of specialized bodies: ASEAN Ministerial Meetings on Transnational Crime (AMMTC), Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC), ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the Intersessional Meeting on Terrorism and Transnational Crime (ISM on CTTC). The main conclusions of the study are the establishment of activities of the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the field of counter-terrorism, the definition of the role of Vietnam in the fight against terrorism, radicalism and extremism, Analysis of Viet Nam’s cooperation with various international organizations on counter-terrorism issues and identification of further necessary actions of Vietnam aimed at improving the fight against terrorism. The relevance of the study is due to the increased level of terrorist threat in the world and in the region of South-East Asia in particular. This study is based on the theory of political realism, which views international relations as an eternal confrontation between States defending their national interests. In the process of studying this problem, the authors apply institutional, analytical and problem-chronological methods.

The role of ASEAN and its members in promoting the norm of responsible governance of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction

AbstractThis article analyses the potential of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its members to promote the norm of responsible governance of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). Based on the literature on international norms, this article suggests that the norm of responsible governance of ABNJ biodiversity will soon reach the point of a norm cascade, after which it will gradually move towards the stage of norm internalization. As such, the norm can have the potential to standardize appropriate behaviour of States. This article examines ASEAN’s norm‐promotion activities within and outside the region that support an improved governance system for ABNJ. Notably, some ASEAN States play an important role both individually and collectively in the development of a new global legal instrument on marine biodiversity of ABNJ. The findings suggest that although the conservation of biodiversity of ABNJ has been the subject of debate for more than a decade, ASEAN’s initiatives to protect marine biodiversity of ABNJ are limited. This is not surprising considering the lack of jurisdiction in ABNJ. Nevertheless, ASEAN’s overall initiatives for conservation of the marine environment are highly relevant for its future role in ABNJ governance because some regional ocean governance norms are transferable in the ABNJ context.

PLURALISTIC NATIONS AND PREVENTING THE ETHNO-RELIGIOUS DIVERGENCES IN SOUTHEAST ASIA

This study analysed the socio-ethno-religious divergences in Southeast Asia, and the role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The three main foci in this research are: 1) the dynamics of the social-ethnic and`religious divergences in Southeast Asia Nations; 2) factors causing the Southeast Asian social divergences; and 3) the role of ASEAN in the social divergence resolution strategy in Southeast Asia. The research method is qualitative. The data was colleted by using literature review. The results show that there are several factors that cause social-ethnic and religious divergences in Southeast Asian countries: Indonesia, Myanmar, Fhilipina, Thailand, and Malaysia. Those major factors are related to facilitating contexts: 'inheritance' of various colonial discriminatory policies, socio-economic and political imbalances, demographics, and minority-majority ethnic relations. The core of divergences are the level of social deprivation or an intolerable social marginalization, the tendency of socio-economic inequalities in a pluralistic society, differences and mental attitudes, differences of ethnicity, race, and religion, differences in cultural level and issues of majority-religious minorities. The fuse factors are the 'axes' of divergences that have been waiting to be ignited. Trigging factors are the momentum where various elements accumulated give rise to social-ethnic and religious divergences. The role of ASEAN in social-ethnic and religious divergence resolution strategies in Southeast Asia appears to be suboptimal due to the dilemma of the ASEAN mission relating to the ‘Non-Interference’ principle which prohibits the intervention of the internal affairs of a member country.

'Rubbery' ASEAN: mediating people-movement in Southeast Asia

Southeast Asians on the move are caught 'between a fluid region and a hard state', as Malaysian historian Farish Noor puts it. Drawing on mobilities theory, this article seeks to locate the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) within this ideational map of flows and gates, arguing that it can best be characterised as a 'semi-soft' entity, mediating between the need for mobility and the fear of mobility. ASEAN intersects with people-movement in the areas of skilled and unskilled labour; connectivity and development; and security and protection. On aggregate, its goals reflect an ambivalence that leaves it open to charges of ineffectiveness, even duplicity. Yet this incoherence might be both an inevitable and also sometimes positive element of ASEAN's shock-absorber role, as it both buffers and is imprinted by the dual pressures of fluidity and fixity.

'Rubbery' ASEAN: mediating people-movement in Southeast Asia

Southeast Asians on the move are caught 'between a fluid region and a hard state', as Malaysian historian Farish Noor puts it. Drawing on mobilities theory, this article seeks to locate the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) within this ideational map of flows and gates, arguing that it can best be characterised as a 'semi-soft' entity, mediating between the need for mobility and the fear of mobility. ASEAN intersects with people-movement in the areas of skilled and unskilled labour; connectivity and development; and security and protection. On aggregate, its goals reflect an ambivalence that leaves it open to charges of ineffectiveness, even duplicity. Yet this incoherence might be both an inevitable and also sometimes positive element of ASEAN's shock-absorber role, as it both buffers and is imprinted by the dual pressures of fluidity and fixity.

Rising Sino-Japanese competition: perspectives from South-East Asian elites

ABSTRACTOne of the biggest challenges for the East Asian region today is the Sino-Japanese relationship. Starting with the fishing trawler incident in September 2010, followed by Japan's nationalisation of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, this relationship is experiencing an escalation of tensions in most, if not all, areas of the bilateral relationship. In response to the intensifying competition, China and Japan have elevated the importance of South-East Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in their foreign policy strategies. Focusing on how elites from five South-East Asian states—Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam—perceive the engagement of China and Japan with the region, this article poses two questions: (1) How do South-East Asian elites view the Sino-Japanese competition? and (2) How do South-East Asian elites view the role of ASEAN in managing the competition? The analysis here concludes that while some South-East Asian elites see opportunities in the Sino-Japanese competition, they nevertheless do not perceive it as an issue of critical significance. Instead, the concern lies generally with major-power dynamics, and particularly with Sino-US relations. ASEAN is viewed to lack the ability to manage the negative consequences of the Sino-Japanese competition, although its external balancing function has perceptibly helped to restrain any escalation of major-power tensions.

Institutional transformation of ASEAN: ZOPFAN, TAC, and the Bali Concord I in 1968–1976

Many international relations (IR) scholars discuss whether the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) possesses institutional utility in maintaining security in Southeast Asia or East Asia. While this has important implications for both academics and policy-makers, ASEAN's role has been too often evaluated in terms of what has persisted within the association rather than what changed. Yet, exploring the causes and processes of institutional transformation are particularly important because they have made ASEAN expand its security utility by creating security dialogues and fostering security cooperation in the region. In this context, the crucial question is: when and how has ASEAN changed?Focusing on the causes and processes of institutional transformation which have occurred within ASEAN, this article explores ASEAN's transformation from 1968 to 1976, by using a theoretical model, developed from historical institutionalism and the punctuated equilibrium model. Applying this approach to institutional transformation of ASEAN in the political-security field, three transformation processes are constructed. First, ASEAN member states’ expected changes in the external security environment triggered internal discussions regarding ASEAN's political-security function; second, these internal political discussions fostered institutional consolidation of ASEAN during this period; and third, such direction of institutional transformation was fundamentally guided by ideas provided by institutional norm entrepreneurs (INEs), especially Malaysia's neutrality proposal.In particular, this article examines the process of ASEAN's creation of the Zone of Peace, Freedom, and Neutrality (ZOPFAN) in 1971, and the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) and the Bali Concord in 1976, and argues that this model shed light on the significance of ZOPFAN that created a foundation of TAC and the Bali Concord, for which conventional wisdom has dismissed as an insignificant institutional concept by academics and practitioners.

ASEAN's leadership in East Asian region-building: strength in weakness

Despite none of its members being a major economic or military power, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has played a leading role in building East Asia's regional institutions. In exploring this apparent puzzle, the analysis reviews the literature on state leadership at the regional and international level, asks why the region's major powers ceded leadership on the question of regional institution building to ASEAN, and assesses the consequences for East Asia's regional architecture of ASEAN's leadership role in institution-building. The conclusion is that leadership at the state level entails a state, or a group of states, proposing, executing and getting others to agree on a course of action to deal with a specific problem or challenge. The analysis also underscores the point that, while ASEAN has been the leader in East Asian institution-building, the Association and its members should not automatically be expected to play a leadership role on all issues preoccupying the region.

Comment on “Politics of Association of Southeast Asian Nations Economic Cooperation”

Comment on “Politics of Association of Southeast Asian Nations Economic Cooperation”

Still in the “Drivers’ Seat”, but for how Long? ASEAN's Capacity for Leadership in East-Asian International Relations

This paper assesses the capacity of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to moderate great-power relations in East Asia, especially in light of recent regional developments that have challenged ASEAN's traditional modus operandi and its corporate cohesion. The first of three sections argues that capacity emerges not from institutional arrangements but rather the social relationships that give rise to particular institutions, and therefore can only be understood relationally. A number of key relationships are highlighted and explored in the rest of the paper. First, the relationships among regional great powers, which are considered in section two. Second, the relationships among ASEAN states, and between ASEAN states and their own societies, which are considered in section three. The paper's basic argument is that the first set of relationships is essentially what gives ASEAN its capacity to play a wider regional role. However, it also sets profound constraints for what this role can involve in practical terms. The second set of relationships also creates serious and deep constraints that are often not well understood. However, despite the serious limitations on ASEAN's leadership role, unless the first set of relationships change, this role is likely to continue, regardless of how frustrating or ineffectual it might be.

Comprehensive security and resilience in Southeast Asia: ASEAN's approach to terrorism1

This paper explores how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has tackled the threat of terrorism since 9/11 and the Bali bombings. It claims that ASEAN has applied its traditional approach to security, based on comprehensive security and the principle of resilience, when addressing this challenge. The resilience concept underpins the nexus between national and regional security and emphasizes domestic regime consolidation re-enforced by regional consultations. In their pursuit of resilience, member states have sought in various degrees to address terrorism domestically through a mixture of security, law enforcement, socio-economic, ideological, and educational policies. It is noted that Indonesia, the Philippines, and Singapore have tackled terrorism more comprehensively than Thailand and Malaysia. Reflecting the synergy between national and regional resilience, ASEAN has operated as an umbrella organization meant to complement domestic and sub-regional efforts. It has been committed rhetorically, has produced frameworks of action, as well as reached agreements with the great powers. The paper is not overly optimistic, however, about ASEAN's role in promoting regional resilience against the threat of terrorism in Southeast Asia.

ASEAN and Multilateralism: The Long, Bumpy Road to Community

From a geopolitical perspective, the Asian littoral divides into three subregions: Northeast Asia (the People's Republic of China, Japan, North and South Korea, Taiwan and the Russian Far East), Southeast Asia (Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam) and South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka). Both Northeast Asia and South Asia contain political and economic Great Powers. In the latter, India's economic activities and growing politico-security influence extend to all of Asia. In the former, Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan play significant global economic roles, while Tokyo and Beijing are also major political-security players. By contrast, Southeast Asia contains no Great Powers with global reach. While the region consists of several states with vibrant economies--Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand--or economic potential--Vietnam and Indonesia--in geopolitical stature, Southeast Asia pales in comparison to its Northeast and South Asia neighbours. Yet Southeast Asia is where most Asian regional organizations originate and whose structures and procedures are determined by Southeast Asian preferences. The primary goal of this article is to explain how this has happened, what the implications are for Asia's future and whether Southeast Asian states organized for the past forty years through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will be able to maintain their pivotal position in Asian affairs. For the past several decades, the Asia-Pacific region has been marked by a difficult asymmetry: the most dangerous disputes lie in Northeast and South Asia while the region's multilateral institutions designed to manage and reduce conflict have originated in Southeast Asia. While ASEAN has maintained its organizational integrity, it has added new internal and external dimensions. The former include the incipient ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), the ASEAN Interparliamentary Organization which has been particularly vocal in condemning Myanmar's human rights violations, and the Track Three ASEAN People's Assembly, an NGO that brings a variety of societal interest groups together to lobby ASEAN governments. ASEAN-dominated organizations encompass the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) on security matters, ASEAN+3 (Japan, South Korea and China), various ASEAN+1 dialogues with important states, the ASEAN-Europe meeting (ASEM), and most recently, regular dialogues with the Gulf Cooperation Council, Africa and Latin America. The newest and most contentious addition to the mix is the East Asian Summit (EAS) inaugurated in December 2005. The EAS brings ASEAN+3 countries together with India, Australia and New Zealand--all of which have signed ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) as a membership condition. Conceptualizing ASEAN The Asia-Pacific region has no hegemon. Instead, political, economic and social networks proliferate. Regional issues are addressed through collective action. The various frameworks have diminished the strength of the absolute sovereignty norm that dominated ASEAN at the time of its 1967 creation. Over the ensuing decades, security issues have become increasingly transnational. Money laundering, human trafficking, environmental degradation, multi-national river development, migratory maritime species, terrorism and piracy require multilateral regime building rather than ad hoc diplomacy. In theory, at least, organizations such as ASEAN have established procedures and decision-making rules in which all governmental stakeholders have a voice. (2) Conceptualizing ASEAN, International Relations theorists generally employ three analytical frameworks: neo-realism, neoliberalism and constructivism. (3) Neo-realists disdain ASEAN's role in regional security because, in their view, institutions are epiphenomenal. Stability depends on the distribution of power within the Asia-Pacific and not on an international organization of small and medium states confined to Southeast Asia. …

ASEAN intervention in Cambodia: from Cold War to conditionality

Despite their other theoretical differences, virtually all scholars of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) agree that the organization's members share an almost religious commitment to the norm of non-intervention. This article disrupts this consensus, arguing that ASEAN repeatedly intervened in Cambodia's internal political conflicts from 1979 to 1999, often with powerful and destructive effects. ASEAN's role in maintaining Khmer Rouge occupancy of Cambodia's UN seat, constructing a new coalition government in exile, manipulating Khmer refugee camps and informing the content of the Cambodian peace process will be explored, before turning to the ‘creeping conditionality’ for ASEAN membership imposed after the 1997 ‘coup’ in Phnom Penh. The article argues for an analysis recognizing the political nature of intervention, and seeks to explain both the creation of non-intervention norms and specific violations of them as attempts by ASEAN elites to maintain their own illiberal, capitalist regimes against domestic and international political threats.

Explaining Trade Flows of Singapore

The objective of this paper is twofold. First, the development of the trade patterns of Singapore and particularly between Singapore and its South‐East Asian partners will be outlined and interpreted against a backdrop of relevant trade policy measures, for example in the context of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Second, a simple model of the gravity type is applied in order to establish and quantify the role of various trade determinants. Despite the fact that Singapore has strived at being a ‘global city’, it remains rather heavily biased towards East Asia as far as foreign trade is concerned. The role of ASEAN in particular is strong, even if the role of entrepôt trade tends to exaggerate the degree of integration between the economies of Singapore and ASEAN. It also seems clear that the latter, as an organization, has not contributed much to the development of trade relations between its members. Rather the closeness and the liberalization of these economies during the last 15 years or so appear to have been decisive. It is interesting to note that the newer members of ASEAN seem to have been integrated quickly in Singapore's economic network.

ASEAN: An Untapped Export Market for Finland and Sweden?

The purpose of this article is to determine exports of Finland and Sweden to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and to compare actual exports to the potential, in order to see whether there remain untapped possibilities in the region. This was done both for the time (more exactly, for 1995) and for the next ten-year period, up till 2005. Introduction During the last few decades the member countries of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)' have displayed extremely high growth rates. This, in addition to the fact that a formal integration process has been initiated in the region (for a stock-taking, see ASEAN Secretariat 1997), has recently brought ASEAN into the focus of interest as a market and host of foreign direct investment. Despite the present economic downturn in Asia, ASEAN with its more than 450 million people remains an attractive market, especially in the longer run. As for the Nordic countries, increasing interest in ASEAN can clearly be noticed as well. While the economic relationships between ASEAN and the Nordic countries take many different forms, this article concentrates on the role of ASEAN as an market for Finland and Sweden. A more or less implicit idea in these countries seems to be that ASEAN represents a large market which has not yet been fully utilized and, especially, that its will grow rapidly in the future. The main purpose of this article is to determine exports for Finland and Sweden to the markets of ASEAN and to compare actual exports to the to see whether there remain untapped possibilities in the region. This type of question has not been addressed much in applied international economics, perhaps due to measurement problems. Export potential is, of course, an elusive concept which has to be defined operationally in order to be meaningful. In this article, export potential stands for exports predicted by some kind of model. (I used several alternatives in this work.) The article deals with the in both a static and a dynamic version. On the one hand, I make an attempt to evaluate whether there is untapped at the moment (i.e. in 1995); on the other hand, I try to assess how this is likely to develop over time, extending the time horizon to 2005. This article starts out with a descriptive view of the exports of Finland and Sweden to ASEAN. After this, I evaluate the present with the aid of the so-called trade intensity index, a rough method of assessing unused potential. Then a causal model of the gravity type is estimated, and the fitted values of this model are taken as values. Possible untapped exports can then be derived by comparing those values and actual values. Next, attention is focused on the long run orientation. To provide a benchmark, a log-linear trend of Finnish and Swedish exports to ASEAN was estimated and extrapolated to 2005. Finally I utilized the results of the gravity model, obtaining estimates of the exports in 2005 by inserting forecast values of the explanatory variables. Discussion of the results concludes the article. Of ASEAN's present member countries, Myanmar was excluded due to data problems while Laos was included despite the fact that the country became a member of the organization only in 1997. Both those cases, in fact, make little difference for the broad picture since Finnish and Swedish trade is quite insignificant with both Laos and Myanmar. Finnish and Swedish exports to ASEAN In the case of both Finland and Sweden, exports to ASEAN increased rapidly through the late 1980s and early 1990s but from a rather low starting level. In 1985 the share of ASEAN was only 0.7 per cent for Finland and 1.6 per cent for Sweden, increasing to 3.5 per cent for Finland and 3. …

Regional Military-Security Cooperation in the Third World: A Conceptual Analysis of the Relevance and Limitations of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations)

In the Third World, regional military-security cooperation has evolved through three frameworks. The advent of the Cold War saw the emergence of two competing frameworks, one of which may be termed `autonomous' and the other, `hegemonic'. A review of these frameworks and their practical manifestations points to some important lessons concerning the limitations of regional military-security cooperation in the Third World. By using these lessons as a conceptual framework, the paper analyses the role of ASEAN, which the paper finds as a third framework in the evolutionary adaptation of regional military-security cooperation in the Third World. Within this framework, the four main criteria of evaluation applied to ASEAN are: (1) ASEAN's role in intra-member conflict resolution, (2) the structure of military-security cooperation within ASEAN, (3) the types of military-security cooperation undertaken by the ASEAN members, and (4) the conflict between ASEAN's professed aspirations for regional autonomy versus the need felt by its members for great power security guarantees. On the basis of such an evaluation, the paper establishes the major features and limitations of ASEAN and examines whether these are similar to some other contemporary subregional groupings in the Third World groupings.