Forming a security community: lessons from ASEAN

At its Ninth Summit in October 2003 the Association of SouthEast Asian Nations (ASEAN) announced its intention to createan ASEAN Community based upon three pillars: ASEAN EconomicCommunity, ASEAN Security Community and an ASEAN Socio-CulturalCommunity. A year later ASEAN established the Vientiane ActionProgramme to realise this goal. The official discourse of communitybuilding is complemented by a vibrant academic debate over whetherASEAN's norms indicate that it is a nascent security communityready to transform itself into a fully-fledged security community.In this article I argue that ASEAN has never been a nascentsecurity community but has instead been a security regime andtherefore its norm compliance does not provide evidence of communitybuilding. If ASEAN is to form a security community then newsocialising norms will need to emerge, which will need to includethe active involvement of regional civil society organisationsin order to bring plurality to ASEAN decision making. Only thenwill the people of ASEAN be able to take ownership of the communitybuilding process. Received for publication December 14, 2005. Accepted for publication July 13, 2006.     

Are non-traditional security challenges leading regional organizations towards greater convergence?

How are regional organizations responding to the emergence of non-traditional security (NTS) challenges? Are they engaging in more cooperative efforts to meet new threats? Or, on the contrary, do they react in different manners according to their distinctive values, principles and internal structures? This article attempts to investigate how the threats posed by NTS are compelling different regional organizations to reconsider their security thinking and to find new innovative ways of cooperation. This is done by comparing two diverse regional organizations, the EU and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), whose models of security cooperation have significantly varied reflecting the preference for different security approaches. The EU's security system has been more formalized and institutionalized; conversely, the "ASEAN way" has traditionally been rooted in the principles of informality and consensus. It is argued, however, that the emergence of NTS threats is acting as a catalyst behind a normative and operational shift of the modus operandi of both organizations. In so doing, this empirical analysis will try to shed light on the effects of exogenous factors on the emergence of patterns of convergence within the security sphere of distinctive regional processes.     

Deconstructing the ASEAN security community: a review essay

Once viewed as a bastion of stability and economic growth, theAssociation of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is now besetwith a variety of seemingly intractable problems ranging fromterrorism to internal secessionist conflict and economic stagnation.The central and evolving role of ASEAN in the internationalrelations of Southeast Asia since 1967 raises the question ofhow we should conceptualize the organization. This review articleargues that Amitav Acharya's recent claim that a nascent securitycommunity is emerging in Southeast Asia is flawed for at leastfour reasons. First, a variety of problems surround the independentvariable – norms – that Acharya uses to explainASEAN's emergence as a security community. The author failsto adequately explain why the norms he privileges emerged asASEAN's dominant norms. The lack of a convincing explanationfor the origins of the author's favored ASEAN norms is damagingbecause, prima facie, other kinds of norms – ‘perversenorms’ – appear to give us greater purchase in understandingthe organization. Second, a critical flaw in Acharya's argumentrelates to its tautological nature. Third, from an empiricalperspective, the dependent variable, the nascent ASEAN securitycommunity has arguably never existed. Finally, alternative explanationsfor ASEAN are not fully explored. While Acharya examines neo-liberalinstitutionalism and neo-realism, he overlooks the possibilitythat a form of realist institutionalism may most accuratelyexplain ASEAN's history, and perhaps even predict its future.     

“后冷战时代”东盟安全观的变化

1991年苏联解体,标志"后冷战时代"的到来,全球安全环境发生重大转变.安全观念也发生了变化,传统安全意识逐渐让位于新安全意识.东盟也形成自己的新安全观,这种新安全观在安全要素、安全重心和安全范围等方面相对于传统安全观都发生重大变化.     

非传统安全视角下的东盟国家问领土边界争端及解决思路

从非传统安全视角看,东盟国家间领土边界争端与经济安全、文化安全和生态安全等因素密切相关。资源储量丰富的区域、文化古迹和无国界的生态体系都成为引发东盟国家间领土边界争端的因素。从安全角度讲,建构东盟“安全共同体”是一条解决东盟国家间领土边界争端有效可行的途径。     

ASEAN's diplomatic and security culture: a constructivist assessment

In the wake of the Asian financial crisis and the subsequentviolence that built up and then tore apart East Timor in 1999,serious criticisms were levelled at the Association of SoutheastAsian Nations (ASEAN) and its diplomatic and security culture.This article examines to what extent members of ASEAN –after the Hanoi Summit in 1998 until mid-2001 – collectivelyembraced new understandings in relation to norms associatedwith the ‘ASEAN way’. This question is exploredwith respect to four initiatives: the initiation of the retreatof ASEAN foreign ministers, the participation of ASEAN membersin United Nations missions in East Timor, the adoption of theASEAN Troika concept, and the passing of rules of procedureof the ASEAN High Council. It is argued that due to concernsabout ASEAN's image and reputation, some of the shared understandingsintrinsic to ASEAN's long-standing diplomatic and security culturehave been relaxed, particularly the principle of non-interference.While this development reaffirms the value of constructivisttheorizing in international relations, the article also demonstratesthat the aforementioned initiatives and agreements do not yetamount to a radical change in ASEAN's diplomatic and securityculture. The main reason for this is that norms associated withthe ‘ASEAN way’ are still perceived to serve theimportant and necessary function of helping to mediate estrangementand insecurity among ASEAN leaderships, as well as limitinginterference by non-ASEAN states.     

Transatlantic conflict management inside-out: the impact of domestic norms on regional security practices

This article explores the impact of domestic norms on regional security practices in a pluralistic security community in the transatlantic area. A security community is considered to be ‘a group which has become integrated, where integration is defined as the attainment of a sense of community, accompanied by formal or informal institutions or practices, sufficiently strong and widespread to assure peaceful change among members of a group with “reasonable” certainty over a “long” period of time’ (Karl W Deutsch, Sidney A Burrell, Robert A Kann, Maurice Lee Jr, Martin Lichterman, Raymond E Lindgren, Francis L Loewenheim and Richard W Van Wagenen (1957) Political community and the North Atlantic area: international organization in the light of historical experience (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press)). Recent studies have aligned the concept of security community with the practice turn in International Relations theory. Although practice theory is able to explain peaceful conflict resolution within a security community, this article shows that its explanatory power is significantly weaker when it comes to military interventions outside the security community. The article theoretically and empirically investigates this argument by using the empirical case of extraregional conflict management in Afghanistan. The importance of domestic norms in constructing and perceiving regional security practices in out-of-area operations emphasizes the ‘local’ over the ‘regional’ as a crucial driver behind the emergence of a regional actor's understanding of security and thus for the formation and consolidation of regional peace.     

东盟构建安全共同体之建构主义分析

2007年11月,在东盟第13届首脑会议上东盟各成员国正式签署《东盟宪章》。《东盟宪章》强调“在维护地区和平、安全与稳定问题上……通过一体化推广东盟身份认同,以增强东盟大家庭意识和建构东盟安全共同体”。由此可见,东盟构建安全共同体的整体思路是,通过东盟一体化构建东盟国家集体身份认同,通过构建东盟国家集体身份认同内化东盟诸国认知国家利益与地区利益,并共享地区和平观念,进而达到实现东盟安全共同体的目标。建构主义关于安全共同体形成的“三个层级”假定对东盟安全共同体的形成过程具有较强的解释力。     

Something old,something new: security governance in Iraq

The lack of a coherent security paradigm capable of explaining the concerns of both traditional and ‘new’ security is evident from the US-led occupation of Iraq. Security is the critical element in Iraq's reconstruction, and understanding the multiple meanings and relationships through which it is exercised is essential for empirical and analytical reasons, yet policy is flawed and the debate remains polarized. Thus Washington assumes that conventional security can be provided—and US power employed—independently of the relationship in which it is to be exercised, whereas Iraqi concerns focus on security at the level of the individual. The result can be seen in the paradigmatic examples of coalition operations in Basra in 2003 and Falluja in 2004. This article suggests that the interaction between coalition authorities and Iraqis, and, by extension, conventional and new forms of security, is best understood in terms of power relations; a comprehensive understanding of security must incorporate a relational dimension.     

Betwixt balance and community: America, ASEAN, and the security of Southeast Asia

Realist scholars have long claimed, not incorrectly, that aUS-led balance of power is fundamental to the security and prosperityof Southeast Asia. Yet the Southeast Asian experience has alsobeen one where multilateral security dialogue and regional communityformation figure prominently. In contrast to views which exaggeratethe importance of US preponderance in Southeast Asia whilstdismissing regional multilateral efforts, we offer seven argumentsagainst any undue overstatement of the US contribution to regionalpeace and stability. If anything, a historically ambivalentUS presence contributed to ASEAN's emergence as a mechanismof regional diplomacy. Such ambivalence is no longer feasiblesince 9/11. However, Washington's current engagement in SoutheastAsia should focus on revitalizing regional multilateralism.Our claim is not that the region's security is due to ASEANregionalism rather than US strategic dominance. We argue insteadthat absent the region's fluency with ‘soft’ multilateralism,Southeast Asia's security would probably have been far worse.

SoutheastAsians are more acutely aware of the uncertainties of U.S. policiesthan other regions of the world. They remember the Americanretrenchment in the 1970s followed by a decade of self-doubt.Hence ASEAN countries drew towards each other to seek greaterstrength in self-reliance. They found that together in ASEAN,they could better overcome their problems; but they still needthe United States to balance the strength of the Soviet shipsand aircraft. The renewal of self-confidence in America hasreassured us that America will help maintain the peace and stabilityof the region. It is this balance of power which has enabledthe free market economies to thrive. – Lee Kuan Yew¹

     

非传统安全视野下中国与东盟警务合作机制研究

一、中国与东盟各国所面临的非传统安全挑战 近年来，中国积极与东盟各国加强对外合作关系建设。通过“10＋1”与“10＋3”会议机制以及东盟地区论坛等形式，中国与东盟各国在政治、经济、文化等多个领域的交流与合作得到了进一步的加强与发展。但是，中国与东盟同样也共同面临着非传统安全的严峻挑战。     

国家间协调与区域安全治理:理解东盟安全机制

东盟安全机制以"东盟方式"著称,基于东盟的经验事实,本文认为,国家间协调是理解东盟安全机制的恰当理论框架。在此基础上评估了东盟安全机制的绩效:在抑制成员国内部冲突、化解东南亚地区国家间争端方面取得了积极效果。同时,由于东盟国家利益分歧,安全合作领域数量少、程度浅;东盟安全机制是中小国家之间的协调机制,其治理能力有限,无法单独解决地区重大安全问题,需要与外部大国相配合;东盟国家对主权独立格外重视,在安全领域缺少制裁机制,导致领土争端无法在区域内得到解决。面对本地区的复杂安全形势,东盟对内需要拓宽、深化安全领域的合作,对外需要加强与大国的安全合作。     

2020年的东盟及其与中国关系

由10个中小国家组成的东盟，无论从其国土面积，人口数量还是从经济、贸易规模来看，作为一个整体已相当于一个重要的大国，成为亚太地区的一极。在经济全球化和区域一体化浪潮不断高涨的今天，东盟迎来了成立40年。回眸东盟成立的历史，它的确取得了举世瞩目的辉煌成就，在国际上的地位和作用日益显现。在关注它的昨天和今天的同时，这里笔者也试图对今后10多年的东盟作一前瞻，尤其是它的一体化进程、经济发展及其与中国关系的前景。     

Human (in)security: Palestinian perceptions of security in and around the refugee camps in Lebanon

Based upon over 20 hours of focus groups and in-depth interviews with diverse representation from three Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, the authors analyse Palestinian perceptions of both Lebanese and Palestinian security institutions, detailing the ways in which conventional, state-centric approaches to security by both parties have been insufficient. Special attention is paid to the new security regime in the Nahr al-Bared camp, which was destroyed in 2007 during a protracted battle between the Lebanese army and the militant Islamist group Fatah al-Islam. This is because the Government of Lebanon has made clear its intention that this regime serve as a model for the country's other 11 camps. Ultimately, the authors argue, Palestinian human security is inextricably linked to Lebanese sovereignty and national security, and the improvement of Palestinian human security will yield tangible security benefits for Lebanese and Palestinians alike. Rather than presume to speak on behalf of all Palestinians in Lebanon, the authors have instead opted to present detailed—and sometimes contradictory—quotations from Palestinians interviewed on such subjects as arms, violent extremism, Lebanese–Palestinian relations and the protection of human rights.     

ASEAN in the twenty-first century: a sceptical review

Over the past few years, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has undertaken institutional reforms in the hope of rejuvenating itself for the twenty-first century. This paper utilizes the theory of subaltern realism (SR) to examine these initiatives. SR emphasizes that developing world states are weak and internally divided. As such, they formulate regional relations from the perspective of doing what is needed to further the state-building process. This paper assesses two of these reforms—the ASEAN Charter and the idea of the ASEAN Community idea—from the SR perspective and concludes that these measures are unlikely to have the desired rejuvenating effect. The ASEAN Charter envisions an ASEAN that is more intrusive than most of its members will tolerate. The ASEAN Community is not supported by a strong ASEAN identity. However, the regional environment of East Asia creates a political space wherein a unified and motivated ASEAN has the potential to exercise considerable influence. ASEAN member states are faced with the dilemma of determining how to balance their demands for sovereignty with the real advantages they will gain by supporting ASEAN. SR needs to be further developed before it can offer guidance in evaluating this situation.     

安全观与东盟气候变化认知及政策

东南亚是世界上最易受到气候变化影响的地区之一。作为东南亚重要的地区一体化组织,东盟应对气候变化的政策受到越来越多的关注。作为对基于物质条件与能力的解释的补充,从观念的影响出发可以为理解东盟气候变化安全认知与应对政策提供一个新的视角。由于地理暴露度与社会经济脆弱性,东盟面临着高度的气候变化风险。而东盟如何认知与应对气候变化风险带来的安全威胁,除了受到客观条件的影响外,还受到其综合安全观的框定作用。在综合安全现的影响下,东盟对气候变化安全的认知与应对表现出三个特征,即将气候变化安全诠释为实现可持续发展问题、采取多领域综合性应对措施以及鼓励多元化主体参与。目前,东盟的主导安全观是以国家为中心的综合安全观,但随着"人的安全"思想影响的增强,东盟气候变化认知与应对正在发生微妙变化。     

尊重多样性 建设人民共同体——东盟2009年内外合作分析

2009年,东盟面临着世界金融危机的影响和个别成员国政局不稳定的挑战,但仍加强政治安全、经济、社会文化各领域的合作,坚定地朝着2015年建成"人民的共同体"的目标迈进。展望2010年,东盟将继续采取各种措施,加强各成员国以及与对话伙伴的合作,推进东盟共同体的建设。     

A recurring anarchy? The emergence of climate change as a threat to international peace and security

Robert Kaplan's 1994 article, ‘The Coming Anarchy’ was a milestone in the literature on the links between environmental change and security. The article predicted that disease, corruption, overpopulation, scarce resources and climate change would plunge West Africa into pervasive conflict. Nearly a decade and a half—and several civil wars—later this article returns to West Africa to see to what extent Kaplan's predictions have come to pass. While West Africa may not have followed exactly the trajectory that Kaplan foresaw, he did correctly predict that climate change would be recognised as a threat to international security. This paper reviews in greater detail the development of conceptualisations of environment and security that influence current discussions over the potential impacts of climate change on security, paying particular attention to the ways in which West Africa is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.     

Energy security concerns of China and ASEAN: trigger for conflict or cooperation in the South China Sea?

Asia Europe Journal - China and some ASEAN countries are emerging economies. As their population and economies grow at a rapid pace, energy security and related environmental problems remain a big...     

冷战后东盟地区安全机制的发展及对中国的影响

安全机制是当今国际安全研究领域的一个热点问题。在本文中，“安全机制”将被界定为“容许国家相信其他国家将予以回报，而在它的行为上保持克制的那些原则、规则和标准。这一概念不仅指便于合作的标准和期望，而且指一种超出短期自我利益追逐的一种合作形式”。而所谓东盟地区安全机制，在文中则主要指的是以下两类机制：一是东盟组织框架内、涉及东南亚地区的安全机制；二是由东盟主导的、有区域外因家参加的、