Examining ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing South China Sea disputes

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2021-06-29 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2021.1934519
L. Hu
{"title":"Examining ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing South China Sea disputes","authors":"L. Hu","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1934519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract For the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the South China Sea (SCS) disputes between China and Southeast Asian claimant states (Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei) are a major concern. However, the dominant sceptics are pessimistic about ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing these disputes. This article contributes to the field by providing a systematic analysis on this topic, which is missing within the literature. Also, many of the arguments presented in this article challenge the dominant views and thus provide an alternative understanding of ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing the disputes. The arguments are as follows: First, ASEAN members do have shared interests and a common policy regarding managing the disputes. Second, China’s influence on individual ASEAN members is not as strong as the sceptics often argue. Third, the degree of ASEAN’s goal attainment is medium because it achieved essential goals while conceding important but non-essential ones. Fourth, compared with a legalistic and adversarial posturing approach, ASEAN’s approach is more effective in managing these disputes.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"119 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09512748.2021.1934519","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1934519","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Abstract For the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the South China Sea (SCS) disputes between China and Southeast Asian claimant states (Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei) are a major concern. However, the dominant sceptics are pessimistic about ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing these disputes. This article contributes to the field by providing a systematic analysis on this topic, which is missing within the literature. Also, many of the arguments presented in this article challenge the dominant views and thus provide an alternative understanding of ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing the disputes. The arguments are as follows: First, ASEAN members do have shared interests and a common policy regarding managing the disputes. Second, China’s influence on individual ASEAN members is not as strong as the sceptics often argue. Third, the degree of ASEAN’s goal attainment is medium because it achieved essential goals while conceding important but non-essential ones. Fourth, compared with a legalistic and adversarial posturing approach, ASEAN’s approach is more effective in managing these disputes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
考察东盟在处理南中国海争端方面的有效性
摘要对于东南亚国家联盟(东盟)来说,中国与东南亚声索国(越南、菲律宾、马来西亚和文莱)之间的南海争端是一个主要问题。然而,占主导地位的怀疑论者对东盟在处理这些争端方面的有效性持悲观态度。本文通过对这一主题进行系统分析,为该领域做出了贡献,这在文献中是缺失的。此外,本文中提出的许多论点挑战了主流观点,从而为东盟在管理争端方面的有效性提供了另一种理解。其论点如下:首先,东盟成员国在处理争端方面确实有共同的利益和共同的政策。其次,中国对东盟个别成员国的影响力并不像怀疑论者经常说的那样强大。第三,东盟的目标实现程度是中等的,因为它实现了基本目标,但放弃了重要但非必要的目标。第四,与法律和对抗性姿态相比,东盟的方法在管理这些争端方面更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pacific Review
Pacific Review Multiple-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Blue Pacific’ strategic narrative: rhetorical action, acceptance, entrapment, and appropriation? Beyond the ‘North’-’South’ impasse: self-effacing Japan, emancipatory movements of the Global South and West-Engineered aid architecture Deter together or deter separately?: time horizons and peacetime alliance cohesion of the US-Japan and US-ROK alliances The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia Informal governance and China’s influence in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1