Good global citizen? ASEAN’s image building in the United Nations

ABSTRACT

Based on role theory, the article examines the images that ASEAN member governments project of their organization. It rests on a discourse analysis of 198 speeches in the United Nations General Assembly between 1998 and 2017. Findings suggest that ASEAN does not figure as a top priority for delegates and that an overarching ASEAN role conception is missing. However, their addresses reveal parameters on which a collective role conception can be built. Individual ASEAN countries undertake great efforts to project themselves as ‘good global citizens,’ a role conception that could also be applied to ASEAN.

KEYWORDS:

• ASEAN
• ASEAN Charter
• good global citizen
• image projection
• role theory
• United Nations

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Raphael Steinhilber, Lisa Göllert and Kai Vorberg for their excellent research assistance, Alec Crutchley for proof-reading and the special issue editors and three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments on an earlier version of the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. One of the few exceptions is the study authored by Nguitragool and Rüland (2015).

2. The following section draws from Rüland (2017).

3. See website of the United Nations, available at: http://www.un.org/depts./dhl/unms/cms.shtml, (accessed 23 January 2018).

4. Vietnam A/54/PV.15, A/55/PV.13, A/56/PV.51, A/57/PV.14, A/58/PV.14, A/65/397; Indonesia A/56/PV.54, A/66/PV.26, A/67/PV.6; Laos A/60/PV.15, A/66/PV.25, A/71/PV.18; Thailand A/63/PV.16, A/64/PV.9; Singapore A/61/PV.17.

5. Available at: https://asean.org/un-general-assembly-adopts-resolution-commemorating-aseans-50th-anniversary/, (accessed 19 April 2019).

6. See A/69/PV.6.

7. See A/61/PV.17.

8. An exception is Indonesia Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa’s 2013 address in which he highlighted the achievements en route to the completion of the ASEAN Charter. See A/68/PV.17.

9. For instance, Laos in 2015. A/59/PV.11.

10. As in the case of the Cambodian candidacy for 2013/2014, which failed, and Indonesia’s successful candidacy for 2019 and 2020.

11. For instance, Malaysia A/53/PV.51, A/54/PV.16, A/55/PV.16, A/56/PV.51; Vietnam A/58/PV.14, A/59/PV.12, A/61/PV.19, A/67/PV.20.

12. See the statements of Cambodia A/64/PV.10, A/65/PV.21; Philippines A/57/PV.13, A/59/PV.11.

13. Malaysia A/56/PV.51.

14. Myanmar A/63/PV.15, A/65/PV.21, A/66/PV.28.

15. Malaysia A/54/PV.17, A/60/PV.13.

16. Indonesia A/53/PV.8, A/54/PV.11.

17. See Thai Deputy Prime Minister Bhichai Rattakul, UNGA A/S-20/PV.5.

18. Singapore A/53/PV.17, A/56/PV.54, A/64/PV.11.

19. Philippines A/62/PV.10.

20. Indonesia A/61/PV.18.

21. Indonesia A/64/PV.13.

22. Thailand A/60(PV.12, A/62/PV.9.

23. Thailand A/64/PV.9, A/67/PV.4, A/68/PV.19, A/69/PV.15, A/70/PV.18, A/71/PV.13.

24. Philippines A/53/PV.17, A/65/PV.15, A/66/PV.30, A/67/PV.20.

25. Thailand A/57/PV.12, A/65/PV.23, A/66/PV.28.

26. Myanmar A/71/PV.11.

27. Philippines A/53/PV.17, A/54/PV.21, A/66/PV.30, A/67/PV.20, A/69/PV.17, A/70/PV.26, A/71/PV.21.

28. Vietnam A/53/PV.15, A/54/PV.15, A/55/PV.13, A/57/PV.14, A/66/PV.28, A/68/PV.16, A/69/PV.16, A/70/PV.27, A/71/PV.20.

29. Philippines A/69/PV.17.

30. Indonesia A/60/PV.14; Myanmar A/64/PV.11, A/65/PV.21; Vietnam A/65/PV.24.

31. Cambodia A/63/PV.16.

32. Indonesia A/55/PV.22; Malaysia A/55/PV.16; Philippines A/55/PV.23; Singapore A/55/PV.24; Thailand A/55/PV.23.

33. Malaysia A/55/PV.16, A/56/PV.51, A/57/PV.7, A/59/PV.11, A/60/PV.13, A/65/PV.19, A/67/PV.5, A/69/PV.12, A/70/PV.22, A/71/PV.20; Indonesia A/53/PV.8, A/55/PV.22, A/57/PV.14, A/64/PV.13, A/66/PV.26, A/70/PV.26; Brunei Darussalam A/56/PV.51, A/59/PV.14.

34. Singapore A/61/PV.17.

35. Indonesia A/57/PV.14; Malaysia A/57/PV.7.

36. Vietnam A/64/PV.8, A/65/PV.24.

37. Indonesia A/64/PV.13.

38. Cambodia A/60/PV.5, A/62/PV.12, A/63/PV.16, A/64/PV.10, A/66/PV.25, A/68/PV.23; Indonesia A/64/PV.13; Malaysia 2007; Myanmar A/62/PV.13, A/66/PV.28, Myanmar 2017, Philippines A/53/PV.17, A/62/PV.10.

39. Philippines A/64/PV.8.

40. Singapore A/59/PV.9, A/64//PV.11, A/71/PV.22; Thailand A/54/PV.14, A/55/PV.23; Vietnam A/67/PV.20.

41. Malaysia A/58/PV.11.

42. Thailand A/57/PV.12.

43. Thailand A/58/PV.17.

44. Thailand A/66/PV.28, A/67/PV.4.

45. Thailand A/68/PV.19.

46. Malaysia A/54/PV.16.

47. Brunei A/67/PV.12, Brunei 2017; Cambodia A/56/PV.47, A/57/PV.14, A/59/PV.12, A/62/PV.12, A/63/PV.16, A/64/PV.10, A/66/PV.25, A/68/PV.23, A/69/PV.18, A/70/PV.24; Indonesia A/54/PV.11, A/59/PV.11 and A/59/PV.14, A/71/PV.18; Malaysia A/64/PV.12, A/66/PV.28, A/67/PV.5, A/70/PV.22; Myanmar A/55/PV.25, A/59/PV.15, A/60/PV.19, A/61/PV.21, A/70/PV/26; Singapore A/66/PV.28.

48. Indonesia A/59/PV.11.

49. Myanmar A/54/PV.13, A/63/PV.15.

50. Cambodia A/S-24/PV.1, A/56/PV.47, A/57/PV.14, A/58/PV.18, A/59/PV.12.

51. Laos A/54/PV.21, A/59/PV.12.

52. Vietnam A/55/PV.13, A57/PV.14, A/58/PV.14, A/59/PV.12, A/60/PV.19.

53. See Malaysia A/58/PV.11, A/59/PV.11, A/64/PV.12, A/66/PV.28, A/67/PV.5; Indonesia A/63/PV.14, A/64/PV.13; Philippines A/54/PV.21, A/69/PV.17; Laos A/56/PV.52.

54. Thailand A/55/PV.23.

55. Brunei A/62/PV.11.

56. Malaysia A/55/PV.16, A/60/PV.13, A/63/PV.14, A/64/PV.12, A/66/PV.28; Philippines A/54/PV.21, A/55/PV.23; Singapore A/53/PV.17, A/54/PV.12, A/64/PV.11, A/65/PV.21; Thailand A/S-20/PV.5.

57. Malaysia A/54/PV.16.

58. This is the underlying meaning of Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Muhamad’s 2003 address in the GA.

59. Indonesia A/64/PV.13.

60. Malaysia A/64/PV.12.

61. Singapore A/53/PV.17.

62. Singapore A/66/PV.28, Singapore 2012.

63. Myanmar A/67/PV.12.

64. Singapore A/54/PV.12.

65. Singapore A/71/PV.22.

66. Thailand A/S-20/PV.5, A/54/PV.14.

67. Malaysia 2007; Philippines S/62/PV.10.

68. Laos A/62/PV.12.

69. Philippines A/53/PV.17; Malaysia A/65/PV.19.

70. Cambodia A/63/PV.16, A/67/PV.18, A/69/PV.18; Indonesia A/54/PV.11; Malaysia A/63/PV.14; Myanmar A/62/PV.13, Philippines A/64/PV.8, A/71/PV.21.

71. Singapore A/63/PV.15.

72. Myanmar A/62/PV.13.

73. Malaysia A/57/PV.7; Indonesia A/58/PV.8; Brunei A/70/PV.19.

74. Indonesia A/61/PV.18; Malaysia A/56/PV.51, A/59/PV.11, A/60/PV.13, A/65/PV.19, A/66/PV.28; Singapore A/57/PV.5, A/59/PV.9.

75. Singapore A/58/PV.16.

76. Indonesia A/56/PV.54, A/57/PV.14, A/58/PV.8, A/59/PV.11, A/60/PV.14, A/61/PV.18, A/63/PV.14, A/68/PV.17; Philippines A/53/PV.17, A/55/PV.23, A/58/PV.13, A/59/PV.11, A/60/PV.21, A/65/PV.15, A/66/PV.30; Thailand A/S-20/PV.5, A/54/PV.14, A/55/PV.23, A/63/PV.16, A/64/PV.9, A/66/PV.28.

77. For the term „soft power,“ see Nye (1988).

78. Indonesia A/66/PV.26, A/69/PV.6.

79. Brunei A/63/PV.10, A/65/PV.20.

80. Thailand A/61/PV.22.

81. Philippines A/71/PV.21.

82. Cambodia A/54/PV.5, A/71/PV.21.

83. Vietnam A/53/PV.15.

84. For instance, by stressing the rights of women and children or of migrants. See Cambodia A/68/PV.23; Laos A/67/PV.16; Malaysia A/56/PV.51; Thailand A/64/PV.9; Philippines A/57/PV.13, A/61/PV.17, A/66/PV.30, A/68/PV.22, A/69/PV.17.

85. Indonesia A/60/PV.14; Myanmar A/60/PV.19, A/61/PV.21, A/70/PV/26.

86. Myanmar A/53/PV.22, A/54/PV.1, A/55/PV.25, A/56/PV.53, A/57/PV.16, A/58/PV.15, A/59/PV.15, A/60/PV.19, A/61/PV.21.

87. Myanmar A/56/PV.53, A/57/PV.16, A/58/PV.15, A/59/PV.15, A/61/PV.21, A/62/PV.13, A/63/PV.15, A/64/PV.11, A/65/PV.21, A/66/PV.28, A/67/PV.12, A/68/PV.22, A/69/PV.17, A/70/PV/26.

88. Cambodia A/56/PV.47, A/57/PV.14, A/59/PV.12; Laos A/53/PV.10; Vietnam A/57/PV.14; Malaysia A/63/PV.14.

89. Malaysia A/65/PV.19.

90. Malaysia A/53/PV.17, A/56/PV.51, A/71/PV.20; Indonesia A/63/PV.14; Thailand A/66/PV.28; Brunei A/68/PV.19, Vietnam A/68/PV.16.

91. Malaysia A/56/PV.51.

92. Malaysia A/70/PV.22.

93. Thailand A/67/PV.4, A/68/PV.19.

94. Malaysia A/65/PV.19, A/66/PV.28, A/67/PV.5, A/68/PV.18.

95. Role theory has so far been used rarely in the analysis of Asian foreign policies. For exemptions, see Karim (2017) and Rüland (2017).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jürgen Rüland

Since 1998 Jürgen Rüland is professor for International Relations at the University of Freiburg. He served as Dean of the Faculty of Humanities IV (2000-2002), as Director of the Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institute Freiburg (2001-2007) and as Chairman of the Academic Advisory Board of the GIGA German Institute for Global and Area Studies, Hamburg (2006-2014). Since November 2009 Prof. Rüland is the Chairperson of the University of Freiburg’s Southeast Asia Programme. He was the Stanford University/National University of Singapore Distinguished Fellow for Contemporary Southeast Asia 2010. Prof. Rüland has published extensively on Southeast Asia, including contributions to the European Journal of International Relations Security Dialogue, Foreign Policy Analysis, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Journal of European Public Policy, International Relations and Development, The Pacific Review, Pacific Affairs, Asian Survey, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, European Journal of East Asian Studies, Contemporary Southeast Asia, European Foreign Affairs Review and Asia-Europe Journal. His research interests include cooperation and institution-building in international relations, globalization and regionalization, democratization, political, economic, social and cultural change in Southeast Asia.