Laura Allison

ASEAN's ‘people-oriented’ aspirations: civil society influences on non-traditional security governance

ABSTRACT Since the Asian financial crisis, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has sought to reorient itself towards becoming a ‘people-oriented’ association. Democratic transitions in the region and increased demands from civil society to be actively involved in regional governance have prompted ASEAN to develop forms of participatory regionalism. In practice, however, the rhetorical aspirations of ASEAN have not often matched the level of participation or support expected by civil society organisations. It has often been the case that ASEANs decisions, especially those related to sensitive issues, have been influenced by external pressure as opposed to participatory mechanisms. The aim of this article is to determine to what extent participatory mechanisms impact ASEANs approach to non-traditional security. By doing so, the authors combine two key elements central to a ‘people-oriented’ approach to regionalism: the incorporation of deliberative and participatory processes and the acknowledgement of transboundary security issues which require cooperation to move beyond state-centric approaches. This article explains that despite the rhetorical emphasis on participatory regionalism, it continues to be the case that regional civil society organisations and non-state actors have limited capacity to influence ASEAN. By providing a critical analysis of influences on ASEANs non-traditional security policies, the authors offer a modest yet valuable contribution to the emerging literature on ASEANs ‘people-oriented’ regionalism and advance a nuanced understanding of ASEANs participatory mechanisms.

Ambitions of Actorness

The European Union’s (EU’s) ambition to be an international actor by promoting its regionalism experience to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is currently encountering significant challenges. Its ability to be an influential actor in international affairs, and particularly the notion that regional integration provides prosperity and security, have been queried by citizens and political parties within the EU’s member states and also by many beyond its borders (Longo and Murray, 2011).

The EU, ASEAN and Economic Integration

The EU’s endeavours to create a single market have resulted in the creation of a distinct economic entity. The level of economic integration of the EU has not been matched elsewhere and continues to require and provide innovative approaches to economic governance. This distinctiveness, however, has both advantages and disadvantages for the EU when it attempts to export or promote its experience beyond its borders. The EU’s relevance to the development of ASEAN’s economic community and its ability to be viewed as an international actor are heavily influenced by this distinctiveness.

Drivers of Interregionalism: EU-ASEAN Engagement

The EU and ASEAN are drivers of regionalism in their own geographical and political contexts and supporters of regionalism within their own regions and elsewhere. In addition, they are both advocates of interregional dynamics and relations, to which their willingness to be dialogue partners attests. Since the establishment of an official cooperation agreement between the EU and ASEAN, with the signing of the Cooperation Agreement between the Member Countries of ASEAN and the European Community on 7 March 1980 (ASEAN-EU, 1980), the relationship between ASEAN and the EU has changed considerably. In 1980, the relationship primarily focused on affording each other most-favoured nation status as stated in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and development cooperation between the EU and ASEAN.

The Implications of Regionalism Support and Norm Diffusion on EU Actorness

Conceptualising the EU as a certain type of power does not provide an accurate conceptualisation of the EU’s impact on international affairs. Rather than basing an assessment of EU actorness on principles supported by the EU and which frame its foreign policies, this book has primarily based its analysis on EU norm promotion and the evaluation of internal and external perceptions. By doing so, it has avoided an analysis excessively influenced by normative formulations of how EU foreign policy should be devised and implemented and instead relied principally on perception analysis.

Seeking to Reconceptualise the EU as a ‘Power’

Both EU official documents and academic literature have made reference to the EU’s ambitions to be a visible and consequential actor that actively pursues foreign policies in the interest of the EU. This book aims to reconceptualise the EU as an international actor by drawing on frameworks of norm diffusion and utilising a set of criteria for the assessment of international actorness based on previous scholarly research. In this chapter I examine and critically assess the literature on international actorness to establish the set of criteria questions I use to determine the EU’s actorness regarding its policy of promoting regionalism to ASEAN. I also analyse norm diffusion frameworks and devise an analytical framework with which to assess the processes of norm diffusion occurring as a consequence of the EU’s promotion of regionalism to ASEAN.

The EU, ASEAN and Institutionalisation

Attempts by the EU to promote institutionalisation, which include governance structures, decision-making processes and legal frameworks, to ASEAN have had a moderate and fragmentary impact.

The EU, ASEAN and Political Norms

Although the aim to promote values such as human rights is seen as an important element of the EU’s normative framework and an integral part of its foreign policies and relations with other actors,1 in the context of ASEAN, economic interests have taken priority. Furthermore, the EU’s promotion of economic integration has experienced more results than its promotion of political norms, which has had relatively less recognition. In Chapter 4 I argued that the EU’s distinctiveness affected ASEAN’s ability to view the EU’s efforts to promote economic integration as relevant to the Southeast Asian region. Again, in the context of political norms, the EU’s distinctiveness plays a role in its ability to promote the political norm of human rights. However, although the EU views the promotion and protection of human rights as essential norms upon which its policies are based, because human rights is not necessarily a norm specific to the EU, the EU’s relevance in respect of this norm is not strong enough for it to have a robust norm entrepreneurship role in the area of political norm promotion.