Search

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) joined the BRICS‐led New Development Bank (NDB) as part of its first expansion in terms of membership. Questions regarding the interests and rationale of the UAE in joining the Bank, on the one hand, and the NDB's logic in granting membership to the UAE, on the other, immediately jump out. This article sheds light on the BRICS' cautious move away from exceptionality via the expanded NDB in the context of its membership criteria and approach. It does so by also highlighting the UAE's exceptionality, with a focus on the combination of fiscal resources and strategic geography, in the context of shifting global distributions of power. It finds that the UAE's membership in the NDB dovetails with its memberships in other MDBs, which, in turn, are part of the country's ambition to be seen as a globally influential actor. In turn, the NDB was attracted to the UAE fiscal acumen, credit rating and its carefully cultivated culture of cutting‐edge, sustainable, infrastructure and connectivity projects, as well as innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In terms of institutional positioning, the quartet of Indo‐Pacific states – Australia, India, Japan, and the United States – firmly endorse ASEAN. 'ASEAN centrality' is clearly highlighted in all Quad statements. Yet, the Quad presents an organizational and substantive challenge to the core institutional model of ASEAN. This competitive dynamic, with respect to style of associational methods (the how) as opposed to organizational purpose (the why), has not received the scholarly attention it deserves. If the literature does focus on the comparative approaches of ASEAN and the Quad, the prism is for the most part targeted on the differences with respect to the engagement with China. Our analysis is different and emphasizes the contrast between two types of institutional informality exhibited by ASEAN and the Quad. By situating our analysis in the context of contested informality, we point out that both ASEAN and the Quad are signposts showing that the foundational privilege of formal international organizations is under stress, albeit from a wide range of institutional designs. Only by detailing and evaluating the critical divergence in modes of informality can an appreciation of the nature and impact of the contest between ASEAN and the Quad be fully understood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]