Search

The question whether ASEAN has managed to recover from the Asian crisis has received much interest over the last years. The present contribution to the debate is made through an analysis of the prospects for change after the Bali Summit in 2003, with a focus on attempts to enforce stronger regional cohesion. In a joint effort to revive Southeast and East Asian regionalism, the ASEAN states proclaimed the goal to become an 'Economic and Security Community'. While the indicated reforms concentrate mainly on the economic and, secondarily, on the security sectors, the papers argues that matters of social cohesion are also a relevant factor in the making of a regional community. After a short introduction on post-crisis politics, the article examines the concrete measures proposed in the Bali Declaration and their potential to reform ASEAN. The main argument is that regional co-operation can only be successful if internal divides are mitigated and if a stronger normative consensus can be found so as to create a collective identity among the member states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyses the security dimension of the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) by taking into account traditional as well as non-traditional security issues. The Greater Mekong Subregion, which was established in 1992 at the initiative of the ADB, emerged after the Cold War in the wake of the so-called new regionalism as one of the growth triangles within ASEAN. Participating countries/regions are China's Yunnan province, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The article places the discussion of the Greater Mekong Subregion within the debate on post-Cold War sub-regionalism and sets out to discuss the development of regionalism in the Mekong Basin. The article shows how economic cooperation is followed in the pursuit of security and stability in a formerly conflict-ridden area and assesses the relevance of the GMS towards the issue of conflict reduction in the Mekong Basin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the late 1990s there has been a rapid proliferation of bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) projects in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific, regions previously largely devoid of FTA activity by comparison to others. As this trend has intensified, so have discussions on whether it will help advance regional co-operation and integration. This paper examines the nature of FTAs themselves and the main causes of East Asia and Asia-Pacific FTAs. The 'lattice regionalism' hypothesis is considered: whether dense economic bilateralism provides a sub-structural foundation on which economic regionalism (i.e. co-operation and integration) can build. Closely related is the issue of competing FTA models and modalities in the Asia-Pacific, and special attention is afforded to the 'asymmetric neoliberal' FTA model of the United States and the 'developmental–industrial' FTA model championed by Japan. It is argued that the contrasts between these make the emergence of an Asia-Pacific FTA unlikely in even the distant future. Japan's FTA model is also considered relative to perhaps East Asia's most important FTA project, the ASEAN–China FTA (ACFTA), and we discuss how bilateral FTA developments in the region more generally may or may not lead to enhanced regional economic co-operation and integration in East Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why do Southeast Asian states use regional mechanisms for disaster relief? From a conventional functionalist perspective, inadequate domestic-level responses to emergencies create a demand for scaled-up governance. This article offers an alternative interpretation of disaster cooperation in Southeast Asia. Drawing on theoretical insights from comparative regionalism and critical disaster studies, it argues that the raison d'être of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (AHA Centre) is to empower ASEAN states vis-à-vis extraregional humanitarian actors. The AHA Centre works to enable Member States to gatekeep intrusive extraregional aid and, ultimately, to transform authority relations in the international humanitarian system in favor of state actors that have traditionally found themselves in a peripheral and passive role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-level development cooperation, a relatively overlooked dimension in assessing regionalism in Southeast Asia, by examining the Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI). The IAI provides a unique case of experimenting with multilateral South-South development cooperation based on regional solidarity; however, despite the declared aspirations and commitments to the program, this article finds that the IAI's actual development has been quite contrary to the declared goals. First, unlike what was expected, IAI has not been able to provide institutional benefits to help pool ASEAN-6's resources regionally and coordinate their development programs. Second, the principle of solidarity made the IAI valuable, but it did not stand out in its actions. Third, although its primary goal was to narrow the gap among members, IAI ironically created unwanted diplomatic divide and discontent. The observations confirm a perspective that constructing ASEAN as a regional community is both driven and constrained by member states' nationalistic priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, Brazil became a crucial player as the principal advocate of South American integration. To Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur) was added the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), reaffirming regional policies around the idea of "South America." Today, however, the withdrawal of Brazilian leadership along with the reversals and loss of focus in UNASUR and Mercosur have damaged the credibility of the region's initiatives, as well as finding South America's common voice. Despite this, this article argues that Brazil has not entirely disengaged from the region or abandoned the principle of regionalism. Recognition of Latin America's distinctive history the authors to construct a model that incorporates complexity and disorder in which Brazil's institutional political development will have significant repercussions for the future of the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Popularly represented as the phenomenon of "land grab," changes in the acquisition, exploitation and significance of land across the world encapsulate myriad needs, motivations, and strategic ambitions. What is becoming clear is that these diverse burgeoning twenty-first-century phenomena in the name of land increasingly define and structure many of the decisions made by states and international institutions today. Despite being one of the most pressing regional and international problems of the current era, however, the issue of land grab is not on the agenda of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Member states of this association have acknowledged the transboundary effects of many contemporary phenomena and work together to alleviate security concerns and enhance collective economic opportunities, and yet they face both institutional and cognitive barriers to any attempts to address collectively the problems related to land grabbing. This article aims to examine the contemporary political space navigated and contested within ASEAN and to define the problems inherent in finding a collective action solution to this complex dynamic set of issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the possible links between regional governance and global governance from a regional perspective. It presents and develops a typology of linkages that include: (1) irrelevance; (2) conflict; (3) cooperation; and (4) harmonic relations. Moreover, it suggests three alternative explanations to make sense of the linkages as a function of the nature of the issue area of regional and global governance, the role of pivotal states, and the importance of ideational factors and the diffusion of norms. It succinctly refers to the Latin American experience as an illustration of the nexus between regional governance and global governance in a comparative perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tip O'Neill famously claimed, "All politics is local." As global governance falters and US leadership wanes, will "all politics" become regional with emerging powers (China, Russia, Brazil) taking responsibility for leadership at the regional level? While regional powers are providing effective leadership on free trade and financial stability, they have made much less progress on security issues where their approaches to certain problems, such as human security, diverge from those adopted by the West. Their ability to provide regional leadership is hampered by the increasing complexities of the modern world, including the conflicting dynamics of regionalism itself. The emergence of a centralized system of regional governance based on the hegemony of regional leaders is therefore unlikely. Instead, we are seeing the emergence of a complex and dynamic system of governance that includes a broad range of actors operating on multiple and overlapping levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

State sovereignty is a fundamental organizing principle of international relations. Although always imperfectly respected, the sovereignty norm-set—territorial integrity, sovereign equality, and noninterference—carries enormous weight. It is not, however, static or monolithic, and this article seeks to historicize and contextualize sovereignty in the Global South by examining one of its essential components, the norm of noninterference. Making use of qualitative and quantitative evidence, it argues that the norm of noninterference, held sacrosanct in developing regions during the postdecolonization era, has eroded in important ways in Latin America and Africa as regional interference practices in response to domestic crises have gained legitimacy in the post-Cold War era. Noninterference has meanwhile been upheld and protected to a much greater degree in Southeast Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the Americas have witnessed an unprecedented surge in the number and scope of regional integration agreements, resulting in a complex "spaghetti bowl" of trade and economic relations. What are the consequences of this proliferation of overlapping and parallel institutional commitments among countries in the region? How has this increasing regime complexity affected the dynamics of cooperation among Latin American countries? And what does the case of overlapping regional agreements in the Americas tell us about the effects of regime complexity on regional governance? Drawing on the literature on international regime complexity, I identify three mechanisms through which the proliferation of regional agreements have undermined the effectiveness of cooperation in the Americas: by introducing legal fragmentation and rule ambiguity; by facilitating cross-institutional political strategies that allow countries to behave in opportunistic ways; and through competition and other feedback effects that work to erode regional unity. The article has implications for two broader literatures in international relations: work on international regime complexity and scholarship on regionalism and regional trade agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two trends have historically competed in the Latin American region: a strong nationalist vision that originates in the nineteenth century with the construction of the nation-state, and the idea of a unifying project in the face of an "external enemy." This article first provides an overview of these two notions by addressing the performance of the Southern Common Market in the past decade and highlighting the emergence of Mercosur's collective identity. Then, the role of ideas and identity is examined to analyze how it configures and constrains the decisionmaking process and how this role conditions the regional identity. Finally, a reflection on the collective identity as it relates to Mercosur is offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that the long-term sustainability of the trilateral partnership established in 2003 between India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) rests on a more conscious engagement with their regional partners. The construction of a strong regional leadership role for IBSA based on its members' strategic positions in South Asia, South America, and southern Africa is the proper common ground to legitimize a diplomatic partnership between the IBSA states. This is even more pressing as China is actively competing for markets and influence with the IBSA trio within their respective regions, particularly in Africa. The paradox, though, is that while Northern powers have welcomed the regional leadership role of IBSA's members, most of their neighbors are not convinced of the actual intentions of New Delhi, Brasilia, and Pretoria. As a result, leadership within IBSA is defined in global terms as a claim to lead the developing world. At the regional level, however, IBSAclaim for leadership is less clear, less acceptable, and therefore remains constrained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of the Economic & Social History of the Orient is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Lusotopie is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article provides a thematic and theoretically informed introduction into this EJEAS issue on East Asian regionalism. Its point of departure is the obvious paralysis of East Asian regionalism during and after the Asian financial crisis. It examines as to what extent the subsequent efforts towards damage control and revitalization have lead to a re-invention of East Asian regional institutions as frequently urged in the region. By reviewing the more recent literature and the contributions assembled in the issue, the article notes that despite the crisis the trend towards institutionalist and constructivist theoretical approaches continues. These approaches however often tend to exhibit a certain cooperative bias which may blur the proclivity of foreign policy-makers in the region for political realism. Subsequent sections examine the cohesion of regional institutions and horizontal institutional differentiation. The article concludes that despite a proliferation of regional institutions, there has been no marked deepening of regional groupings and that regime building, as a approach to the management of inter-dependence, has not made noteworthy progress in a broad array of policy areas contending with border-crossing policy problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the concept of cooperative energy security in the context of the Caspian region. Political implications of predictable energy supplies in international regions; Outline of an international public policy initiative concerning energy sustainability; Emphasis on multilateralism in European energy security policies; Political conditions in the Caspian region; Conclusions.

Discusses the effects of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expansion on debate surrounding regional security and environmental issues in the Baltic region. Common themes in the literature on Baltic regional security issues; Changing contexts of regional security; Impact of Russian interests and concerns on Baltic environmental security.