Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Trier, 2003.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Northern Illinois University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [371]-400).

No description available.

abstract: This dissertation seeks to theorize small state strategic culture with special reference to the attitude of the ASEAN states toward institutionalizing regional cooperative security architectures. The quantitative case studies show that in small states where historically rooted strategic preferences may be limited, material influences and situational considerations take precedence over ideational factors in the making of the state's strategic culture. Second, the content of small state strategic culture focuses primarily on foreign and security policy issues that originate in their neighborhood. Lastly, Small states' threat perceptions from the neighborhood over time dictate the formation of strategic culture (provocative vs. cooperative). The qualitative case studies demonstrate that small Southeast Asian states (Singapore, Thailand, and Malaysia) exhibit a higher tendency for conflict. Multilateral cooperation is at best selective. Bilateral means is still the preferred policy approach when dealing with other states. This dissertation concludes with a pessimistic remark on the prospects for the development and maturation of the ASEAN Political-Security Community. At its current stage, the APSC appears to be a policy instrument created only to reinforce ASEAN's centrality in charting the region's security architecture. This is no small accomplishment in itself nonetheless. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Political Science 2011

No description available.

The dissertation explores the relationship between identity and international security, and tests the effect of the former on the latter by analyzing a set of puzzling phenomena in East Asia—the emergence of mutual threat perception in Sino-Japanese relations; increasingly conflictual relations between Korea and Japan after Korea’s democratization; the establishment of a regional human rights mechanism by ASEAN; and the settlement of key territorial disputes by Southeast Asian nations. Coupled with the diverging frequency of militarized interstate disputes between both regions, these phenomena suggest that Northeast Asia (NEA) has become a region of conflict with high tensions, while Southeast Asia (SEA) has increasingly developed into a region of peace with decreasing tension. The dissertation advances a new theoretical framework, namely, identity distance theory, to understand these puzzling phenomena. Identity distance refers to perceived socio-psychological differences between groups, and its widening (narrowing) is hypothesized to increase (decrease) the likelihood of intergroup conflict. Using a variety of methods—content analysis of newspapers; political elite survey; and a controlled case study on territorial disputes—the dissertation shows that it is the contrasting evolution of identity distance in the two regions that is the key to explaining the cross-regional differences. The root cause of the widening identity distance in NEA is the rise of the so-called history problem (lishi wenti) in the 1980s, influencing China’s threat perception of Japan and altering the effect of Korea’s democratization on its relations with Japan. In contrast, the narrowing identity distance in SEA due to the construction of a regional identity and community since the 1990s enabled thorny issues such as human rights to be discussed more freely by raising the comfort level among regional countries, and resulted in the resolution of two key territorial disputes in SEA through the arbitration of the International Court of Justice. Identity distance theory proposes a connection between identity and security, and contends that identity-related issues are an important factor affecting different regional dynamics. The findings of the dissertation suggest that the relations of enmity and amity between states are socially constructed through interactions between actors, which engender certain social identities and relations favorable for peace or conflict. / Government

The South China Sea is a sea with strategically important shipping lanes, an abundance of maritime resources, and potentially large amounts of oil and gas deposits. Because of the significance of the sea, China has claimed almost all of it, which has caused the Association of Southeast Asian Nation members (ASEAN) whose countries surround the sea (Vietnam, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines) to take a stance against the encroachment. The most important non-Chinese claimant in the dispute is the Philippines, which shares a mutual defense treaty with the United States. The dispute has been analyzed from a bilateral perspective between China and the Philippines. A theoretical analysis of the dispute has been conducted through a Neorealist paradigm. How the two countries define international law and engage in diplomatic and military policies has also been closely examined. China has not sought foreign intervention whether from a nation or international organization, while the Philippines has preferred as much multilateralism as possible. A recent Scarborough Shoal dispute between the two countries has changed the dynamic of the dispute, and in examining the event and its outcome an inevitable conclusion of military action has been reached.

As long as the states of East Asia can keep the growing rate of their economies, they can become the centre of the world economy in oncoming years. China and India have potetial to become regional superpowers and to dominate the world economy and replace the USA in this position. The USA must not lose their influance in Asia to remain the world superpower and creator of the world order. They need to find allies in Asia, that can help them to become a part of asian regional integrations and have influence on their development. The US goal is to carry through their own trans-pacific integration, that could be basis for Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area. The success of this integration indipends on U.S.-China`s relations and on the way how they will be able to solve their mutual disputes (chinese currency policy, commitments to WTO, chinese indigenous innovation policy etc.).

The objective of this work is to analyze the phenomenon of regionalism in Southeast Asia with the emphasize on ASEAN and its impact on member states. The first part of the theses is theoretical and explains the development and characteristics of regionalism. The second part of the theses is practical and analyses impact of ASEAN in economical area, trade area and also area of diplomatic relations.

L’Association des nations de l’Asie du sud-est (ASEAN) est l’une des organisationsrégionales les plus anciennes en Asie. Créée en 1967 par la Déclaration de Bangkok, une déclarationinterétatique, l’ASEAN n’avait pas un statut juridique clair jusqu’en 2007, date de l’adoption de saCharte constitutive. A défaut d’une base conventionnelle, l’ASEAN ne manquait pourtant pas descaractéristiques d’une organisation internationale. Pendant les quarante années qui ont suivi sacréation, elle avait choisi un mode de fonctionnement fondé principalement sur les relations(relationship-based) et non sur les règles de droit. La prédominance du politique dans lefonctionnement de l’ASEAN a donc laissé aux règles de droit une place secondaire voire ambigüe.Cette spécificité, appelée ASEAN way, a fait de l’ASEAN une organisation au service des intérêtsindividuels de ses membres. En 2007, l’ASEAN s’est dotée d’une Charte constitutive, qui tente à latransformer en une organisation fondée sur des règles (rule-based). Cette Charte qui a ouvert unenouvelle ère pour l’ASEAN, l’a mise au rang d’organisation internationale, sujet dérivé du droitinternational. Elle semble remettre en cause la place du politique dans le fonctionnement de cetteorganisation. Néanmoins, la Charte a renforcé l’ASEAN way, ce qui démontre les limites de l’ASEAN.L’étude de l’institutionnalisation de l’ASEAN vise à démontrer les causes de la prééminence del’ASEAN way sur le droit et ses répercussions sur les relations entre les Etats. Cette présente étudeprocède à l’examen de l’articulation entre les objectifs et principes comme cadre axiologique del’ASEAN, son système institutionnel et son ordre juridique. / The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is one of the most ancient regionalorganizations in Asia. Created in 1967 by the Bangkok Declaration, an interstate declaration, ASEANdid not have a clear legal status until 2007, date of its constituent Charter adoption. Lacking aconventional basis, ASEAN however did not lack the characteristics of an international organization.During the 40 years following its creation, it had chosen a mode of functioning mainly based onrelationship and not on rules of law. The political predominance in the ASEAN functioning therefore leftonly a secondary place to the rules of law, somewhat ambiguous. This particularity, so-called ASEANway, has made ASEAN an organization geared towards the individual interests of its members. In2007, ASEAN adopted a constituent Charter, whose aim is to transform ASEAN into a rule-basedorganization. This Charter, opening a new era for ASEAN, raised it to the rank of internationalorganization – derived subject of international law. It seems to call into question the place of politics inits functioning. The Charter nevertheless reinforced the ASEAN way, which shows the limits of ASEAN.The study of the ASEAN institutionalization aims at proving the cause of the predominance of ASEANway on the law and its repercussions on interstate relationships. This present study carries out theexamination of the link between the aims and the principles as an axiomatical framework of ASEAN, ofits institutional system and its legal order.