ASEAN in the twenty-first century: a sceptical review

Abstract

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.

Notes

¹ The ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution came into effect on 25 November 2003. However, it has not been ratified by Indonesia and did not stop other regional haze events from occurring in 2005 and 2006 (Severino 2006, 112–113).

² Roberts supplies some anecdotal evidence that different ASEAN states may understand ‘democracy’ in different ways, providing some explanation for why statements supporting democracy have found their way into ASEAN documents with less contention than one might expect (Roberts 2007).

³ In Thailand, problems of democratic consolidation include the Muslim insurgency in the South.

⁴ It is relevant that the border conflicts were sparked, in part, by the Thai government's need to respond to nationalist pressures from the political opposition. In this case, democracy led directly to the exchange of gunfire between the militaries of two ASEAN states.