• Angela Pennisi di Floristella
Part of the New Security Challenges Series book series


In its earliest manifestation, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was not a security project. The Bangkok Declaration, which came to be known as the ASEAN founding document, gives the impression that the Association was created largely to forge economic growth and social progress in the Southeast Asian region.1 Looking back at ASEAN’s formative years, this is somewhat of a paradox. In fact, in 1967 security concerns were foremost in the minds of the five ASEAN founding fathers, foreign ministers Adam Malik of Indonesia, Narciso R. Ramos of the Philippines, Tun Abdul Razak of Malaysia, Sinnathamby Rajaratnam of Singapore and Thanat Khoman of Thailand, when they met informally at the quiet beach resort of Bang Saen in Thailand. On that occasion the idea of forming a regional grouping became a reality. It was later described in the memorable words of a British diplomatic telegram to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London using the expression sport-shirt diplomacy, as opposed to the more formal business-shirt diplomacy common in Western settings. However, no one could have imagined that in a few years this association would turn into one of the most suitable environments to facilitate interregional dialogue and new mechanisms of confidence building, designed to achieve peace and regional security.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    ASEAN Secretariat (1967) Bangkok Declaration, Bangkok, 8 August,, date accessed 15 April 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    A. Acharya (2011a) ‘The Future of ASEAN: Obsolescent or Resilient?’ in L. Y. Yoong (ed.), ASEAN Matters. Reflecting on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing), p. 286.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    A. Melchor (1978) ‘Assessing ASEAN’s viability in a changing World,’ Asian Survey, 18 (4), 422–34;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. P. Shee (1977) ‘A Decade of Asean,’ Asian Survey, 17 (8), 753–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Krasner (2001) ‘Rethinking the Sovereign State Model,’ Review of International Studies, 27 (5), 17–42;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. E. Newmann (2009) ‘Failed State and International Order: constructing a Post-Westphalian World,’ Contemporary Security Policy, 30 (3), 421–43;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. R. Väyrynen (2000) ‘Complex Humanitarian Emergencies: Concepts and Issues’ in W. Nalziger, F. Stewart, and R. Väyrynen (eds) War, Hunger and Displacement: The Origins of Humanitarian Emergencies, vol. 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), p. 9.Google Scholar
  8. 6.
    H. Nesadurai (2009) ‘ASEAN and regional governance after the Cold War: from regional order to regional community’ The Pacific Review, 22 (1), 91–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 7.
    H. Clinton (2010), Speech at the East — West Center, Hawaii, 28 October.Google Scholar
  10. 8.
    E. Bower and N. Arbis (2013) John Kerry to Attend ARF (Washington: CSIS),, date accessed 10 May 2014.Google Scholar
  11. 9.
    M. Leiter (1996) The ASEAN Regional Forum, Adelphia Paper 302 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 52–3.Google Scholar
  12. 10.
    S. Eaton and R. Stubbs (2006) ‘Is ASEAN powerful? Neo-realist versus constructivist approaches to power in Southeast Asia,’ The Pacific Review, 19 (2), 135–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 11.
    R. Jetly (2003) ‘Conflict management strategies in ASEAN: perspectives from SAARC,’ The Pacific Review, 16 (1), 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 12.
    N. Busse (1999) ‘Conctructivism and Southeast Asia security’ The Pacific Review, 12 (1), 39–60;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Y. Foong (2004) ‘Coping with Strategic Uncertainty: The Role of Institutions and Soft Balancing in Southeast Asia’s Post-Cold War Strategy’ in J. Suh, P. Katzenstein and A. Carlson (eds) Rethinking Security in East Asia: Identity, Power and Efficacy (Stanford: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  16. 13.
    A. Acharya (2009a) Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia. ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order, 2nd edn (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  17. 14.
    F. Attinà and Z. Ghuichang (2001) ‘Security Culture and the construction of security partnerships: the European Union and China compared,’ The Mediterranean Journal of Human Rights, 5 (1), 85–110;Google Scholar
  18. F. Attinà (2007) ‘The European Security Partnership: a comparative analysis’ in P. Foradori, P. Rosa, R. Scartezzini (eds) Managing Multi-level Foreign Policy. The EU in International Affairs (Lanham: Lexington Books);Google Scholar
  19. F. Attinà (2006) ‘The Building of Regional Security Partnership and the Security-Culture Divide in the Mediterranean Region’ in E. Adler, R Bicchi, B. Crawfard and R. Del Sarto (eds) The Convergence of Civilizations. Constructing a Mediterranean Region (Toronto: University of Toronto Press).Google Scholar
  20. 15.
    A. Acharya (2008) ‘Theoretical Perspectives on International Relations in Asia’ in D. Schambaugh and M. Yahuda (ed.) International Relations of Asia (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers), p. 68.Google Scholar
  21. 16.
    M. Beeson (2009) ‘Introduction: Making Sense of Southeast Asia’ in M. Beeson (ed.) Contemporary Southeast Asia, 2nd edn (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan), p. 11.Google Scholar
  22. 17.
    A. Acharya (2000) The Quest for Identity. International Relations of Southeast Asia (Singapore: Oxford University Press);Google Scholar
  23. T. Huxley (1996) ‘Southeast Asia in the Study of International Relations: the rise and decline of a region,’ The Pacific Review, 9 (2), 199–228;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. S. Narine (2002) Explaining ASEAN. Regionalism in Southeast Asia (Boulder: Lynne Rienner);Google Scholar
  25. M. Beeson (2009) ‘Introduction: Making Sense…Google Scholar
  26. 19.
    A. Wulan and B. Bandoro (2007) ASEAN’s Quest for a Full-Fledged Community (Jakarta: Center for Strategic and International Studies).Google Scholar
  27. 20.
    E. Haas, as cited in A. Acharya and A. I. Johnston (2007) Crafting Cooperation. Regional Institutions in Comparative Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  28. 21.
    R. Stubbs (2009) ‘Meeting the Challenge of Region-Building in ASEAN’ in M. Beeson (ed.) Contemporary Southeast Asia, 2nd edn (New York: Palgrave MacMillan), p. 235.Google Scholar
  29. 22.
    A. Sbragia (2008) ‘Review Article: comparative regionalism: what might it be?,’ Journal of Common Market Studies, 46 (1), 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 24.
    P. Katzenstein (2005) A World of Regions. Asia and Europe in the American Imperium (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
  31. 25.
    A. Acharya (2009b) Whose Ideas Matter? Agency and Power in Asian Regionalism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
  32. 26.
    P. Murray (2009) ‘Comparative regional integration in the EU and East Asia: moving beyond integration snobbery’ International Politics, 47 (3/4), 308–23.Google Scholar
  33. 27.
    D. Emmerson (2008) ‘Critical Terms, Security Democracy and Regionalism in Southeast Asia’ in D. Emmerson (ed.) Hard Choices: Security, Democracy and Regionalism in Southeast Asia (Shorenstein APARC, Brooking Institution Press), p. 21.Google Scholar
  34. 28.
    E. Kirchner and J. Sperling (2007) EU Security Governance (Manchester: Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
  35. 29.
    G. Marks and L. Hooghe (2001) Multilevel Governance and European Integration (Lahman: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers).Google Scholar
  36. 30.
    E. Kirchner and R. Dominguez (2011) The Security Governance of Regional Organizations (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  37. 32.
    E. Kirchner (2006) ‘The challenge of EU security governance,’ Journal of Common Market Studies, 44 (5), 947–68, p. 949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 33.
    T. Tavares (2008) ‘Understanding regional peace and security: a framework of analysis,’ Contemporary Politics, 14 (2), 107–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 34.
    S. Pitsuwan (2011a) ASEAN Taming the Cycle of Conflict and Misery, 3 May,, date accessed 15 June 2014.Google Scholar
  40. 35.
    A. Acharya and A. I. Johnston (2007) Crafting Cooperation… Google Scholar
  41. 36.
    M. Antolik (1990) ASEAN and the Diplomacy of Accomodation (New York: M.E. Sharpe), p. 90.Google Scholar
  42. 37.
    T. Dunne and N. Wheeler (2004) ‘“We the People” contending discourse on security in human rights, theory and practise,’ International Relations, 18 (9), 9–23, p. 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 38.
    R. Ullman (1983) ‘Redefining security’ International Security, 8 (1), 129–53; For the debate on the enlargement of the security agenda see also:CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. K. Krause and M. Williams (1996) ‘Broadening the agenda of security studies: politics and methods,’ Mershon International Studies Review, 40, 229–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 39.
    C. Monteleone (2000) ‘Sicurezza una Nuova Agenda per un Concetto in Evoluzione,’ Teoria Politico, XVI (2), 161–76.Google Scholar
  46. 40.
    M. Tuchman (1989) ‘Redefining security,’ Foreign Affairs, 68 (2), 162–77;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. T. Sorensen (1990) ‘Rethinking national security’ Foreign Affairs, 69 (3), 1–28;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Z. Brezinki (1992) “The Cold War and its aftermath,’ Foreign Affairs, 78 (4), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 41.
    B. Buzan, O. Waever and J. de Wilde (1998) Security A New Framework for Analysis (Boulder: Lynne Rienner).Google Scholar
  50. See also: B. Buzan (1997) ‘Rethinking security alter the Cold War,’ Cooperation and Conflict, 32 (1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 42.
    F. Longo (2013) ‘The relevance of security sector reform in humanitarian intervention: the case of the European Union in the Mediterranean,’ Democracy and Security, 9 (1–2), 177–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 43.
    A. Sàncez-Cacicedo (2010) Peacebuilding in Asia: Refutation or Cautious Engagement? (European Union Institute for Strategic Studies).Google Scholar
  53. 44.
    S. Seng Tan (2013) ‘Herding cats: the role of persuasion in political change and continuity in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN),’ International Relations of the Asia Pacific, 1–33, p. 3.Google Scholar
  54. 45.
    B. Johnston and A. Onwuegbuzie (2004) ‘Mix methods research. A research paradigm whose time has come,’ Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Angela Pennisi di Floristella 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angela Pennisi di Floristella
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations