Writing a thesis is like writing a story book, this book is a story of the 17-year-old Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). It serves as a case-study of inter-regionalism, one of the newest cooperative mechanism in today’s international arena. Among a variety of cooperative frameworks, namely, multilateral global governance, effective multilateralism, regionalism, regionalisation, inter-regionalism is much less explored. This research determines how the rise of inter-regionalism influences the actors in the international arena and vice-versa. The key actors in inter-regionalism and their interaction are explored. Existing studies in the field of inter-regionalism in general and on the ASEM process in particular have been theory-led. There is a significant deficit of empirically-driven research in the field. In order to comprehensively understand inter-regionalism and the ASEM process, this research incorporates a substantial empirical focus. An unprecedented array of primary data is used. A variety of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis methods are employed to generate this unique and comprehensive empirical analysis of ASEM. Ultimately, this thesis demonstrates the persistent state-centrism and lack of actorness of regions and regional organisations as independent actors in the ASEM process. Nation-state remains the primary actor in inter-regionalism; yet, they turn to bilateralism when more concrete cooperation or affairs have to be handled. The proliferation of sideline meetings, although as by-product, becomes one of ASEM’s key added-value to international relations. The empirical analysis also finds that inter-regional fora like ASEM offer participants regular information and views updates and promote socialisation among government officials in the official track and among the involved individual from civil society in the unofficial track.

The main objective of our doctoral thesis is to evaluate the role of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) and its political, economic and socio-cultural pillars as a political process in interregional (multilevel) governance in Eurasian relations. We have conducted a unique case study that is based on a holistic qualitative interpretation by means of a postpositivist perspective and discourse analysis. Given the transitional and multidimensional nature of interregionalism as a political process, we are applying the (neo)realist balancing with elements of (neo)liberal multilateralism and social constructivism as the basic theoretical approach. Based on this structure, we have come to the conclusion that (1) ASEM as an interregional policy framework is too flexible (in terms of its scope and agenda-setting) and too inclusive (in terms of its enlargement). (2) Given the inability of ASEM to actively respond to various challenges and to implement properly its policies through its currently available instruments, this Eurasian interregional process cannot be regarded as a fully-fledged contribution the global (multilevel) governance. (3) Therefore interregionalism as part of the ASEM process will not lead to a creation of an "Eurasian Century", despite the undeniable need to identify corresponding supranational political regimes that will efficiently promote a balance of power between Europe, Asia and America. (4) Interregionalism as a political approach cannot be demoted to a loose and informal interaction of nation states or regions only because the current challenges in international relations require an organized and results-oriented framework for cooperation. (5) Additionally, the existing bilateral relations between individual countries in Asia and Europe will continue to be the key and most efficient form of solving various issues and challenges between the states.