Search results

Why has ASEAN endured and why do members, many of whom remain comparatively weak and poor, continue to invest in the regional project? Existing answers, either that ASEAN is meaningless or that it has transformed regional affairs through the creation of shared values are both misplaced. Neither argument is empirically plausible. Instead, this Element argues that ASEAN has and continues to serve state interest through the creation of a shared ritual and symbolic framework. This framework has mitigated regional tension through the performance of regionalism, but has not fundamentally addressed the sources of that tension.

"This book presents the hitherto unstudied variety of ways that human rights socialisation is attempted in the context of regional organisations, arguing that existing conceptual accounts of this phenomenon need to be expanded to best explain this diversity. By placing the study of the European Union's relationship with Turkey alongside parallel studies of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations engagement with Myanmar, and the Organization of American States history with Panama, this book argues that rights socialisation efforts are far more diverse than previously thought. Alongside the conditionality that dominates the EU experience, and that has received the majority of existing academic attention, this book argues that both the politics of social influence, the strategic manipulation of legitimacy and the politics of debate over the meaning of membership also drive socialisation efforts. This book situates these socialisation efforts along the journey states take when applying to, joining and then maintaining membership of, a regional organisation, and further distinguishes between what conditions are necessary for socialisation to be attempted and what further requirements are needed for that attempt to be successful. To appreciate the diversity of socialisation politics revealed, this book constructs an inclusive conceptual framework drawing on both rational choice and constructivist theorising and will be of interest to students of Politics and International Relations. "--

"This book presents the hitherto unstudied variety of ways that human rights socialisation is attempted in the context of regional organisations, arguing that existing conceptual accounts of this phenomenon need to be expanded to best explain this diversity. By placing the study of the European Union's relationship with Turkey alongside parallel studies of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations engagement with Myanmar, and the Organization of American States history with Panama, this book argues that rights socialisation efforts are far more diverse than previously thought. Alongside the conditionality that dominates the EU experience, and that has received the majority of existing academic attention, this book argues that both the politics of social influence, the strategic manipulation of legitimacy and the politics of debate over the meaning of membership also drive socialisation efforts. This book situates these socialisation efforts along the journey states take when applying to, joining and then maintaining membership of, a regional organisation, and further distinguishes between what conditions are necessary for socialisation to be attempted and what further requirements are needed for that attempt to be successful. To appreciate the diversity of socialisation politics revealed, this book constructs an inclusive conceptual framework drawing on both rational choice and constructivist theorising and will be of interest to students of Politics and International Relations."--

What happens when trust ends? This article identifies a hitherto overlooked possibility, a performance of trust. Comprising ritualized diplomacy, performances of trust communicate the products of trust, the values that define membership of an international organization, but do not constitute those values. Realizing the obscuring, subjunctive, orthopraxic, and located nature of these ritual performances helps distinguish performance from other social processes of identity and interest construction. Demonstrated in the context of Southeast Asian regionalism, performances of trust suggest the relevance of trust in explaining what states and their leaders say and do may outlive the presence of trust itself.

Instead of asking whether regional organisations can promote democracy, a well-established conclusion, this article asks what type of democracy regional organisations can promote. Where their commitments to democracy are weak, regional organisations can promote the transition away from authoritarianism but cannot drive that process to completion with the creation of embedded liberal democracies. Under such circumstances regional organisations serve as regimes of bounded toleration, and can provide regional linkages that sustain defective democracies. Through examining the relationship between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and Myanmar, three supporting roles are identified; regional legitimacy, defence from external pressure, and future-oriented accommodation. The presence of these linkages between defective democracies and regional organisations provides a caveat to the positive assessments of regional organisations as socialisers of democracy.

AbstractInstead of asking whether regional organisations can promote democracy, a well-established conclusion, this article asks what type of democracy regional organisations can promote. Where their commitments to democracy are weak, regional organisations can promote the transition away from authoritarianism but cannot drive that process to completion with the creation of embedded liberal democracies. Under such circumstances regional organisations serve as regimes of bounded toleration, and can provide regional linkages that sustain defective democracies. Through examining the relationship between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and Myanmar, three supporting roles are identified; regional legitimacy, defence from external pressure, and future-oriented accommodation. The presence of these linkages between defective democracies and regional organisations provides a caveat to the positive assessments of regional organisations as socialisers of democracy.

While questions have been asked about whether ASEAN could, or even should, adopt the United Nation's Women Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, this article is the first to ask why it has not done so already. ASEAN's strong engagement with gender issues beyond the WPS agenda, together with the pressing need to address conflict and security concerns within Southeast Asia, make this an absence that requires an explanation. I argue that the usual explanatory framework deployed to account for ASEAN "not doing" something — the weaknesses caused by consensus, unanimity and the "ASEAN Way" — do not explain the absence of the WPS agenda; ASEAN's engagement with gender is too advanced for the "it does not want to" explanation to hold. Instead, I locate the failure to engage with the WPS agenda in a particular elite understanding of women as both non-political and vehicles for the realization of economic and social well-being. This elite mindset, which both differs from that found within the ASEAN institutions dedicated to gender issues and which serves as the key driver of ASEAN's institutional design, has retarded engagement with WPS because it stands at odds with the active political agency of women that WPS promotes. Revealing this reason for ASEAN's failure to institutionalize WPS provides a way to consider the future of this important set of norms. I argue that efforts to mainstream WPS must take account of this ingrained framing of women as apolitical if they are to be successful.

While questions have been asked about whether ASEAN could, or even should, adopt the United Nation's Women Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, this article is the first to ask why it has not done so already. ASEAN's strong engagement with gender issues beyond the WPS agenda, together with the pressing need to address conflict and security concerns within Southeast Asia, make this an absence that requires an explanation. I argue that the usual explanatory framework deployed to account for ASEAN "not doing" something - the weaknesses caused by consensus, unanimity and the "ASEAN Way" - do not explain the absence of the WPS agenda; ASEAN's engagement with gender is too advanced for the "it does not want to" explanation to hold. Instead, I locate the failure to engage with the WPS agenda in a particular elite understanding of women as both non-political and vehicles for the realization of economic and social well-being. This elite mindset, which both differs from that found within the ASEAN institutions dedicated to gender issues and which serves as the key driver of ASEAN's institutional design, has retarded engagement with WPS because it stands at odds with the active political agency of women that WPS promotes. Revealing this reason for ASEAN's failure to institutionalize WPS provides a way to consider the future of this important set of norms. I argue that efforts to mainstream WPS must take account of this ingrained framing of women as apolitical if they are to be successful. (Contemp Southeast Asia/GIGA)

Despite change in the aims, institutions and informal diplomacy of ASEAN since 1997, the formal diplomatic code of conduct remains locked in a traditionalist mode first outlined in the 1970s. Existing approaches from mainstream International Relations theorising are unable to adequately explain this continuity and change. The recent 'practice turn' in theorising offers distinct explanatory advantage, which this article illustrates by arguing that the formation of an 'ASEAN rationality' between 1967 and 1997 fundamentally curtailed the ability of regional diplomats to revise ASEAN post 1997, resulting in the coexistence of new and old norms in ASEAN's organisation design. (Pac Rev/GIGA)