 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ASEAN’s Role and Potential in East Asian Integration: Theoretical Approaches Revisited
Nguyen Huu Quyet
Full-Text PDF
XML 2297 Views
DOI:10.17265/1548-6591/2015.08.005
Vinh University, Nghe An, Vietnam
Theoretical interpretation of the role and potential of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) remains controversial. Three salient theoretical approaches, neo-realist, neo-liberal, and domestic factors, have provided crucial explanations of ASEAN’s weaknesses. These attributes, however, lack essential analytical tools to interpret ASEAN’s role and potential in creating regionalism and regionalization in East Asia in the post-Cold War era. Given both theoretical and operational levels, constructivism is a predominant approach to portray the role and potential of ASEAN, particularly the role it plays in creating an increasingly connected web of cooperation and in managing the regional frameworks and arrangements with its founding principles and norms. While the endeavour on regionalization driven by the ASEAN Way and principles is impressive, the 2008-adopted Charter has marked a crucial step in ASEAN’s institutional and political development for regionalism. The marginalization of the ASEAN Way, however, remains a default norm. Thus, much needs to be done to bring about strong political will and commitment per se toward the realization of the ASEAN Community and toward East Asian regionalism.
theoretical approaches, the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Way, regionalization, regionalism
Journal of US-China Public Administration, August 2015, Vol. 12, No. 8, 635-650
Acharya, A. (2002). Regionalism and the emerging world order: Sovereignty, autonomy, identity. In S. Breslin, C. Hughes, N. Phillips, and B. Rosamond (Eds.), New regionalism in the global political economy (pp. 20-32). London: Routledge.
Acharya, A. (2003). Regional institutions and Asian security order: Norms, power, and prospects for peaceful change. In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Asian security order: Instrumental and normative features (pp. 210-241). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Acharya, A. (2005). Do norms and identity matter? Community and power in Southeast Asia’s regional order. The Pacific Review, 18(1), 95-118.
Buzan, B. (2003). Security architecture in Asia: The interplay of regional and global levels. The Pacific Review, 16(2), 143-173.
Ciorciari, J. D. (2009). The balance of great-power influence in contemporary Southeast Asia. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 9(1), 157-196.
Eaton, S., & Stubbs, R. (2006). Is ASEAN powerful? Neo-realists versus constructivist approaches to power in Southeast Asia. The Pacific Review, 19(2), 135-155.
Emmerson, D. K. (Ed.). (2008). Hard choices: Security, democracy, and regionalism in Southeast Asia. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 2(1), 105-112. Retrieved from http://www.seas.at/aseas/2_1/ASEAS_2_1_A7.pdf
Gamble, A., & Payne, A. (Eds.). (1996). Regionalism and world order. London: Palgrave Macmillan Press.
Gourevitch, P. (1978). The second image reversed: The international sources of domestic politics. International Organization, 32(4), 88-91.
Hill, H. (1999). An overview of the issues. In H. W. Arndt and H. Hill (Eds.), Southeast Asia’s economic crisis: Origins, lessons, and the way forward (pp. 1-15). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Hoang Anh Tuan. (2005). Some political and security issues of the East Asian community. International Studies, 16(2), 28-42. Hanoi: Institute for International Relations.
Hund, M. (2003). ASEAN plus three: Towards a new age of pan-East Asian regionalism? A skeptic’s appraisal. The Pacific Review, 16(3), 383-418.
Ikenberry, J. G., & Tsuchiyama, J. (2002). Between balance of power and community: The future of multilateral security cooperation in the Asia Pacific. International Relations of the Asia Pacific, 2(1), 69-94.
Jayasuriya, K. (2003). Embedded mercantilism and open regionalism: The crisis of a regional political project. Third World Quarterly, 24(2), 339-355.
Jenina Joy Chavez. (2007). Regionalism beyond an elite project: Challenge of building responsive sub-regional economic communities. In M. G. Curley and N. Thomas (Eds.), Advancing East Asian regionalism. London and New York: Routledge.
John Funston. (2000). ASEAN and the principle of non-intervention—Practice and prospects. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS). Retrieved from http://www.iseas.edu.sg/trends520.pdf
Jones, D. M., & Smith, M. L. (2001). The changing security agenda in Southeast Asia: Globalization, new terror, and the delusions of regionalism. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 24(4), 271-288.
Jorgensen-Dahl, A. (1982). Regional organization and order in Southeast Asia. London: Macmillan.
Keiichi Tsunekawa. (2005). Why so many maps there? In T. J. Pempel (Ed.), Remapping East Asia: The construction of a region. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Keohane, R., & Milner, H. (Eds.). (1996). Internationalization and domestic politics (pp. 1-24). London: Cambridge University Press.
Kivimaki, T. (2011). East Asian relative peace and the ASEAN way. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 11(1), 57-85.
Leifer, M. (1989). ASEAN and the security of Southeast Asia. London & New York: Routledge.
Leifer, M. (1996). The ASEAN regional forum: Extending ASEAN’s model of regional security. Adelphi Papers, 32. London: Oxford University Press.
Lipson, C. (1991). Why are some international agreements informal? International Organization, 45(4), 495-538.
Manyin, M. E., Garcia, M. J., & Morrison, W. G. (2009). U.S. accession to ASEAN’s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC). Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress.
Mohamed Jawhar Hassan. (2005). Strengthening cooperation in the ASEAN Regional Forum: An ASEAN view. In S. Swee-Hock, S. Lijun, and C. K. Wah (Eds.), ASEAN-China relations: Realities and prospects. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) Publication.
Muthiah Alagappa. (2003). The study of international order: An analytical framework. In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Asian security order: Instrumental and normative feature. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ohmae Kenichi. (1991). An inside-out view of macroeconomics. In O. Henichi (Ed.), The borderless world: Power and strategy in the interlinked economy (pp. 109-121). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
Pempel, T. J. (2005). Emerging webs of regional connectedness. In T. J. Pempel (Ed.), Remapping East Asia: The construction of a region. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Rodolfo C. Severino. (2007). ASEAN beyond forty: Towards political and economic integration. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 29(3), 406-423.
Solingen, E. (2005). East Asian regional institutions: Characteristics, sources, distinctiveness. In T. J. Pempel (Ed.), Remapping East Asia: The construction of a region (p. 32). Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Tan, S., & Cossa, R. (2001). Rescuing realism from the realists: A theoretical note on East Asian security. In S. Simon (Ed.), The many faces of Asian security. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Watanabe, M. (2004). Issues in regional integration of East Asia: Conflicting priorities and perceptions. Asia-Pacific Review, 11(2), 1-17.
Yoshimatsu, H. (2005). Political leadership, informality, and regional integration in East Asia: The evolution of ASEAN plus three. European Journal of East Asian Studies, 4(2), 205-232.