ASEAN, the United Nations and the Security of Southeast Asia: Problems, Prospects and Paradox

  • See Seng TanEmail author
Part of the United Nations University Series on Regionalism book series (UNSR, volume 3)


This chapter assesses the relationship between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the United Nations (UN) with respect to the peace and security of Southeast Asia. By and large cooperative in orientation, their partnership in conflict management is nonetheless defined by a paradox.


United Nations Security Council Conflict Management Regional Security ASEAN State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Acharya, A. (1992). Regional military-security cooperation in the Third World: A conceptual analysis of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Journal of Peace Research, 29(1), 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acharya, A. (2001). Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Acharya, A., & Tan, S. S. (2006). Betwixt balance and community: America, ASEAN, and the security of southeast Asia. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 6(1), 37–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldwin, K. (2009). ASEAN finds new purpose with Cyclone Nargis Response. AlertNet, May 1.
  5. Beeson, M. (2003). Sovereignty under siege: Globalisation and the state in southeast Asia. Third World Quarterly, 24(2), 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buzan, B. (2003). Security architecture in Asia: The interplay of regional and global levels. The Pacific Review, 16(2), 143–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caballero-Anthony, M. (2005). Regional security in southeast Asia: Beyond the ASEAN way. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  8. Capie, D., & Evans, P. (2002). The Asia-Pacific security lexicon. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  9. Desker, B. (2008, July 18). Is the ASEAN charter necessary? The Straits Times, Singapore.Google Scholar
  10. Emmers, R. (2003). Cooperative security and the balance of power in ASEAN and the ARF. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Emmers, R., & Tan, S. S. (2011). The ASEAN regional forum and preventive diplomacy: Built to fail? Asian Security, 7(1), 44–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Funston, J. (2000). ASEAN and the principle of non-intervention: Practice and prospects. In D. Dickens & G. Wilson-Roberts (Eds.), Non-intervention and state sovereignty in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 9–22). Wellington: Centre for Strategic Studies.Google Scholar
  13. Guo, X. (2008). Dealing with Myanmar: A unity of divided interests. Stockholm: Institute for Security and Development Policy.Google Scholar
  14. Haacke, J. (2003). The concept of flexible engagement and the practice of enhanced interaction: Intramural challenges to the ‘ASEAN Way’. In J. Haacke (Ed.), ASEAN’s diplomatic and security culture: Origins, development and prospects (pp. 165–190). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, L. (2010). ASEAN’s unchanged melody?: The theory and practice of non-intervention in southeast Asia. The Pacific Review, 23(3), 479–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Katanyuu, R. (2006). Beyond non-interference in ASEAN: The Association’s role in Myanmar’s national reconciliation and democratization. Asian Survey, 46(6), 825–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Katsumata, H. (2003). Reconstruction of diplomatic norms in southeast Asia: The case for strict adherence to the ‘ASEAN Way’. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 25(1), 104–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Koh, L. (2008a, July 20). Asean stepping closer to UN-like union. The Straits Times, Singapore.Google Scholar
  19. Koh, T. (2008b, July 21). Response to Barry Desker’s criticism of ASEAN charter. The Straits Times, Singapore.Google Scholar
  20. Kraft, H. (2000). The principle of non-intervention: Evolution and challenges for the Asia Pacific region. In D. Dickens & G. Wilson-Roberts (Eds.), Non-intervention and state sovereignty in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 23–41). Wellington: Centre for Strategic Studies.Google Scholar
  21. Leifer, M. (1989). ASEAN and the Security of South-East Asia (London: Routledge)Google Scholar
  22. Leifer, M. (1996a). The ASEAN regional forum: Extending ASEAN’s model of regional security. Adelphi Paper, 302. Oxford: Oxford University Press/IISS.Google Scholar
  23. Leifer, M. (1996b) France joins the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) in southeast Asia.
  24. Morley, J. W. (Ed.) (1999). Driven by growth: Political change in the Asia-Pacific region (Rev. ed.). Armonk/New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  25. Narine, S. (2002). Explaining ASEAN: Regionalism in southeast Asia. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  26. Osborne, M. (1970). Region in Revolt: Focus on Southeast Asia. Rushcutters Bay: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ramcharan, R. (2000). ASEAN and non-interference: A principle maintained. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 22(1), 160–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stubbs, R. (1988). ASEAN at twenty: The search for a new consensus. Behind the Headlines, 45(3).Google Scholar
  29. Sukma, R. (2003). The future of ASEAN: Towards a security community.
  30. Sukma, R. (2004). Indonesia and regional security: The quest for cooperative security. In S. S. Tan & A. Acharya (Eds.), Asia-Pacific security cooperation: National interests and regional order (pp. 71–87). Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  31. Than, M., & Gates, C. (Eds.). (2001). ASEAN enlargement: Impacts and implications. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  32. Weitz, R. (2008). Cyclone Nargis exacerbated ASEAN’s Myanmar dilemma. World Politics Review,

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rajaratnam School of International StudiesNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations