![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Inter-state preventive diplomacy (PD) has mostly been regarded as successful in Southeast Asia as evidenced by the absence of inter-state armed conflict. This success has generally been credited to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Yet, in terms of addressing specific crises, the paper argues that three factors are critical to the success of inter-state PD in Southeast Asia: the level of great power interest in particular disputes, the perceived legitimacy of the PD actor, and the nature of the agreement being sought. Great power interference complicates strategic calculations and is therefore likely to make it harder for PD attempts to succeed. Reversely, the critical involvement of the United Nations as a PD-doer and negotiator helps de-escalate violence in interstate disputes in Southeast Asia. The paper applies these factors to understand why the East Timor and the Preah Vihear Temple cases were successful exercises of PD while PD, in regard to the South China Sea dialogue, has so far only produced limited results.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Amanda Huan is a Senior Analyst at RSIS. Her research interests include international organizations and political psychology.
Ralf Emmers is Professor of International Relations and Associate Dean at RSIS. His research interests cover security studies, the international institutions in the Asia Pacific, and the security and international politics of Southeast Asia.
Notes
1 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping: Report of the Secretary-General, A/47/277 (17 June 1992), http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/47/277 (accessed August 15, 2015), 5.
2 Ibid., 6.
3 Michael S. Lund, Preventing Violent Conflicts: A Strategy for Preventive Diplomacy (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 1996), 7.
4 See, for example, Amitav Acharya, Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order, 3rd ed. (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2014); Mely Caballero-Anthony, Regional Security in Southeast Asia: Beyond the ASEAN Way (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2005); and Yuen Foong Khong, ‘Michael Leifer and the Pre-requisites of Regional Order in Southeast Asia’, in Order and Security in Southeast Asia: Essays in Memory of Michael Leifer, ed. Joseph Chinyong Liow and Ralf Emmers (London: Routledge, 2006), 29–45.
5 Andrew W. Cordier and Wilder Foote, eds., Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations, Vol. V, Dag Hammarskjold (New York: Columbia University Press, 1975), 131.
6 Amitav Acharya, ‘Preventive Diplomacy: Background and Application to the Asia-Pacific Region’, in The Next Stage: Preventive Diplomacy and Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. Desmond Ball and Amitav Acharya (Canberra, Australia: Australia National University, 1999), 17.
7 Amitav Acharya, ‘Preventive Diplomacy: Issues and Institutions in the Asia Pacific Region’ (Paper presented at the Eighth Asia-Pacific Roundtable, Kuala Lumpur, June 6–8, 1994), 2.
8 UNGA, Agenda for Peace, 3.
9 United Nations General Assembly, Preventive Diplomacy: Delivering Results: Report of the Secretary-General, S/2011/552 (26 August 2011), http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/undpa/shared/undpa/pdf/SG%20Report%20on%20Preventive%20Diplomacy.pdf (accessed August 15, 2015), 2.
10 UNGA, Preventive Diplomacy: Delivering Results, 2.
11 UNGA, Agenda for Peace, 6.
12 Ibid., 7.
13 Ibid., 8.
14 Ibid., 9.
15 Desmond Ball, ‘Introduction: Towards Better Understanding of Preventive Diplomacy’, in The Next Stage: Preventive Diplomacy and Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. Desmond Ball and Amitav Acharya (Canberra, Australia: Australia National University, 1999), 1.
16 Ball, ‘Introduction’, 6.
17 Simon S.C. Tay, ‘Preventive Diplomacy and the ASEAN Regional Forum: Principles and Possibilities’, in The Next Stage: Preventive Diplomacy and Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. Desmond Ball and Amitav Acharya (Canberra, Australia: Australia National University, 1999), 120–1.
18 Amitav Acharya, ‘Preventive Diplomacy: Issues and Institutions in the Asia Pacific Region’, in Managing Security and Peace in the Asia-Pacific, ed. Bunn Nagara and Cheah Siew Ean (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Institute for Security and International Studies, 1996), 238.
19 Ralf Emmers and See Seng Tan, ‘The ASEAN Regional Forum and Preventive Diplomacy: Built to Fail?’ Asian Security 7, no. 1 (March 2011): 44–60.
20 ASEAN Regional Forum, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) Concept and Principles of Preventive Diplomacy (25 July 2001), http://aseanregionalforum.asean.org/library/arf-chairmans-statements-and-reports.html?id=159 (accessed August 20, 2015).
21 ASEAN, ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint (June 2009), http://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/archive/5187-18.pdf (accessed August 20, 2015).
22 Jonathan Wilkenfeld, Kathleen J. Young, David M. Quinn, and Victor Asal, Mediating International Crises (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2005), 9.
23 Jacob Bercovitch and Mikio Oishi, International Conflict in the Asia-Pacific: Patterns, Consequences and Management (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2010), 29.
24 For more details on the conflict, see James Cotton, ‘Against the Grain: The East Timor Intervention’, Survival 43, no. 1 (2001): 127–42 and Nicolas Wheeler and Tim Dunne, ‘East Timor and the New Humanitarian Interventionism’, International Affairs 7, no. 4 (October 2001): 805–27.
25 Katsumi Ishizuka, The History of Peace-Building in East Timor: The Issues of International Intervention (India: Foundation Books, 2010), 45–6.
26 Donald Weatherbee, International Relations in Southeast Asia: The Struggle for Autonomy (Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), 235.
27 Weatherbee, International Relations in Southeast Asia, 235.
28 Michael J. Butler, International Conflict Management (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2009), 198.
29 For more details on the conflict, see Charnvit Kasetsiri, Pou Sothirak, and Pavin Chachalpongpun, Preah Vihear: A Guide to the Thai-Cambodian Conflict and Its Solutions (Bangkok: White Lotus Press, 2013).
30 Jim Della-Giacoma, ‘Preventive Diplomacy in Southeast Asia: Redefining the ASEAN Way’, International Crisis Group (31 December 2011), http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/op-eds/2012/della-giacoma-redefining-asean-way.aspx (accessed September 20, 2015).
31 Kasetsiri, Sothirak, and Chachalpongpun, Preah Vihear, 34.
32 National Archives of Singapore, Statement by ASEAN Chair, Singapore's Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo on the Temple of Preah Vihear (20 July 2008), http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/view-html?filename=20080720992.htm (accessed October 30, 2016).
33 ASEAN, ASEAN Welcomes Cambodian-Thai Firm Commitment to Avoid Further Clashes (22 February 2011), http://asean.org/asean-welcomes-cambodian-thai-firm-commitment-to-avoid-further-clashes/# (accessed October 30, 2016).
34 United Nations, ‘UN Court Reopens Case on Ancient Temple at Core of Thai-Cambodian Border Dispute’, UN News Centre (15 April 2013), http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=44664#.WBBubeGGO9t. (accessed October 30, 2016) See International Court of Justice, Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (15 June 1962), http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=284&p1=3&p2=3&case=45&p3=5 (accessed October 30, 2016) for details of the 1962 judgment.
35 United Nations, ‘UN Court Reopens Case on Ancient Temple at Core of Thai-Cambodian Border Dispute’.
36 Della-Giacoma, ‘Preventive Diplomacy in Southeast Asia’, 32.
37 Martin Wagener, ‘Lessons from Preah Vihear: Thailand, Cambodia, and the Nature of Low-Intensity Border Conflicts’, Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 30, no. 3 (2011): 35–6.
38 United Nations, ‘UN Court Rules for Cambodia in Preah Vihear Temple Dispute with Thailand’, UN News Centre (11 November 2013), http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=46461#.WBBucOGGO9t (accessed October 30, 2016).
39 For more details on the South China Sea conflict, see Ralf Emmers, Geopolitics and Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia (London: Routledge, 2010) and Sam Bateman and Ralf Emmers, eds., Security and International Politics in the South China Sea: Towards a Cooperative Management Regime (London: Routledge, 2009).
40 Ralf Emmers, Cooperative Security and the Balance of Power in ASEAN and the ARF (Abingdon, Oxon: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 136.
41 ASEAN, 1992 ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea (22 July 1992), http://cil.nus.edu.sg/rp/pdf/1992%20ASEAN%20Declaration%20on%20the%20South%20China%20Sea-pdf.pdf (accessed September 23, 2015).
42 Michael Leifer, The ASEAN Regional Forum: Extending ASEAN's Model of Regional Security, Adelphi Paper 302 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1996), 18–19.
43 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, China Remains Committed to Peaceful Settlement of Disputes in the South China Sea Through Negotiations and Consultations (25 March 2016), http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjbxw/t1350776.shtml (accessed October 30, 2016).
44 ASEAN, ASEAN Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (4 November 2002), http://www.asean.org/asean/external-relations/china/item/declaration-on-the-conduct-of-parties-in-the-south-china-sea (accessed September 23, 2015).
45 ASEAN, Terms of Reference of the ASEAN-China Joint Working Group on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (7 December 2004), http://www.asean.org/news/item/terms-of-reference-of-the-asean-china-joint-working-group-on-the-implementation-of-the-declaration-on-the-conduct-of-parties-in-the-south-china-sea (accessed September 23, 2015), ASEAN, Guidelines for the Implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (20 July 2011), http://www.southchinasea.com/documents/law/306-guidelines-for-the-implementation-of-the-doc.html (accessed September 23, 2015).
46 Carlyle A. Thayer, ‘New Commitment to a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea?’ National Bureau of Asian Research (9 October 2013), http://nbr.org/research/activity.aspx?id=360 (accessed September 23, 2015).
47 See Ankit Panda, ‘South China Sea: Indonesian Navy Fires at and Arrests Chinese Fishermen’, The Diplomat (31 May 2016), http://thediplomat.com/2016/05/south-china-sea-indonesian-navy-fires-at-and-arrests-chinese-fishermen/ (accessed October 29, 2016), Jeremy Page, ‘Vietnam Accuses Chinese Ships’, The Wall Street Journal (3 December 2012), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323717004578157033857113510 (accessed October 29, 2016), and Robert Beckman, ‘China's Reclamation Work in S. China Sea Raises Issues’, The Straits Times (31 October 2014), http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/chinas-reclamation-work-in-s-china-sea-raises-issues (accessed October 29, 2016).
48 See BBC News, ‘Philippine Warship “in Stand-Off” with Chinese Vessels’, BBC News (11 April 2012), http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-17673426 (accessed October 30, 2016), and Hillary Whiteman, ‘How an Oil Rig Sparked Anti-China Riots in Vietnam’, CNN (19 May 2014), http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/19/world/asia/china-vietnam-islands-oil-rig-explainer/ (accessed October 30, 2016).
49 Peter Wallensteen, Understanding Conflict Resolution, 3rd ed. (London: Sage, 2012), 233–4.
50 Wallensteen, Understanding Conflict Resolution, 225.
51 Fen Osler Hampson, ‘Parent, Midwife or Accidental Executioner? The Role of Third Parties in Ending Violent Conflict’, in Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict, ed. Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela Aall (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 2001), 400.
52 Hampson, ‘Parent, Midwife or Accidental Executioner?’, 400.
53 Rodolfo C. Severino, ‘Preventing Conflict in the South China Sea’, in Entering Unchartered Waters? ASEAN and the South China Sea, ed. Pavin Chachavalpongpun (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2014), 4.
54 For more details on the role of the United States, see Ralf Emmers, ‘The US Rebalance to Asia and the South China Sea Disputes’, in The South China Sea Maritime Dispute: Political, Legal, and Regional Perspectives, ed. Leszek Buszynski and Christopher B. Roberts (London: Routledge, 2015), 150–63.
55 PCA Case No. 2013-19, The South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines vs. The People's Republic of China) (Award of 12 July 2016), https://pca-cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712-Award.pdf (accessed October 30, 2016).
56 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China on the Award of 12 July 2016 of the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration Established at the Request of the Republic of the Philippines (12 July 2016), http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1379492.shtml (accessed October 30, 2016).
57 Chinese Ambassador Yang Yanyi refers to the South China Sea arbitration award as ‘illegal, illegitimate and invalid.’ See Yang Yanyi, ‘The South China Sea Arbitration: Illegal, Illegitimate and Invalid’, China Daily (12 July 2016), http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2016-07/12/content_26060747.htm (accessed October 30, 2016).
58 Ian Hurd, ‘Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics’, International Organization 53, no. 2 (1999): 381.
59 Tom R. Tyler, ‘Social Justice: Outcome and Procedure’, International Journal of Psychology 35, no. 2 (2000): 117–25.
60 Tom R. Tyler, ‘Legitimacy and Rule Adherence: A Psychological Perspective on the Antecedents and Consequences of Legitimacy’, in The Psychology of Justice and Legitimacy: The Ontario Symposium Volume 11, ed. D. Ramona Bobocel, Aaron C. Kay, Mark P. Zanna, and James M. Olson (New York: Taylor and Francis Group, 2010), 261.
61 Katharina P. Coleman, International Organisations and Peace Enforcement: The Politics of International Legitimacy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 3.
62 James Cotton, East Timor, Australia and Regional Order: Intervention and Its Aftermath in Southeast Asia (Abingdon, Oxon: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 80.
63 Emmers, Cooperative Security and the Balance of Power in ASEAN and the ARF, 65.
64 Mely Cabellero-Anthony, ‘The Regionalization of Peace in Asia’, in The United Nations and Regional Security: Europe and Beyond, ed. Michael Pugh and Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2003), 207.
65 Coleman, International Organisations and Peace Enforcement, 262.
66 Mya Than, Myanmar in ASEAN: Regional Cooperation Experience (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2015), 18. See Amitav Acharya, Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order and Mely Caballero-Anthony, Regional Security in Southeast Asia: Beyond the ASEAN Way for more information on conflict management and dispute settlement in ASEAN.
67 ASEAN, Treaty of Amity and Co-operation in South-East Asia Indonesia (24 February 1976), http://www.asean.org/news/item/treaty-of-amity-and-cooperation-in-southeast-asia-indonesia-24-february-1976-3 (accessed November 12, 2015).
68 See ASEAN, Rules of Procedure of the High Council of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (23 July 2001), http://cil.nus.edu.sg/rp/pdf/2001%20Rules%20of%20Procedure%20of%20the%20High%20Council%20of%20the%20Treaty%20of%20Amity%20and%20Cooperation%20in%20Southeast%20Asia-pdf.pdf (accessed November 12, 2015) and ASEAN, The ASEAN Charter (Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat, January 2008).
69 Kasetsiri, Sothirak, and Chachalpongpun, Preah Vihear, 37.
70 International Crisis Group, ‘Waging Peace: ASEAN and the Thai-Cambodian Border Conflict’, Asia Report No. 215 (6 December 2011), http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/south-east-asia/thailand/215%20Waging%20Peace%20--%20ASEAN%20and%20the%20Thai-Cambodian%20Border%20Conflict.pdf (accessed November 27, 2015), 19.
71 The meeting was held at the request of Cambodia. For more information, see Hao Duy Phan, ‘Institutional Design and Its Constraints: Explaining ASEAN's Role in the Temple of the Preah Vihear Dispute’, Asia Journal of International Law 5 (2015): 11.
72 Christopher B. Roberts and Erlina Widyaningsih, ‘Indonesian Leadership in ASEAN: Mediation, Agency and Extraregional Diplomacy’, in Indonesia's Ascent: Power, Leadership, and the Regional Order, ed. Christopher B. Roberts, Ahmad D. Habir, and Leonard C. Sebastian (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 267.
73 International Crisis Group, ‘Waging Peace’, i (executive summary).
74 Donald E. Weatherbee, International Relations in Southeast Asia: The Struggle for Autonomy, 3rd ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015), 147.
75 International Crisis Group, ‘Waging Peace’, 17.
76 Yee Kuang Heng, ‘ASEAN's Position on the South China Sea and Implications for Regional Peace and Security’, in Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea: Navigating Rough Waters, ed. Jing Huang and Andrew Billo (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 69.
77 Li Mingjiang, ‘China's South China Sea Dilemma: Balancing Sovereignty, Development, and Security’, in Security and International Politics in the South China Sea: Towards a Cooperative Management Regime, ed. Sam Bateman and Ralf Emmers (Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2009), 143.
78 Ibid., 144.
79 PCA Case No. 2013-19, The South China Sea Arbitration (Award of 12 July 2016).
80 See Benjamin Kang Lim, ‘Philippines' Duterte Says South China Sea Arbitration Case to Take ‘Back Seat’’, Reuters (19 October 2016), http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-philippines-idUSKCN12J10S (accessed October 30, 2016) and Chun Han Wong, ‘Philippines’ Duterte Not Planning to Raise South China Sea Disputes in China Visit’, The Wall Street Journal (19 October 2016), http://www.wsj.com/articles/philippines-duterte-not-planning-to-raise-south-china-sea-disputes-in-china-visit-1476890752 (accessed October 30, 2016).
81 United Nations Security Council, Security Council Resolution 1264, S/RES/1264 (1999), http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N99/264/81/PDF/N9926481.pdf?OpenElement (accessed November 8, 2015), para. 3.
82 Butler, International Conflict Management, 201.
83 Michael G. Smith, Peacekeeping in East Timor, International Peace Academy Occasional Paper Series (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2003), 45–8, quoted in Simon Chesterman, ‘East Timor’, in United Nations Interventionism 1991-2004, ed. Mats Berdal and Spyros Economides (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 196.
84 Ishizuka, The History of Peace-Building in East Timor: The Issues of International Intervention, 52.
85 Richard Jackson, ‘Successful Negotiation in International Violent Conflict’, Journal of Peace Research 37, no. 3 (2000): 333.
86 Robert C. Beckman, ‘ASEAN and the South China Sea Dispute’, in Entering Unchartered Waters? ASEAN and the South China Sea, ed. Pavin Chachavalpongpun (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2014), 29.
87 Beckman, ‘ASEAN and the South China Sea Dispute’, 30.