Arms Control in Southeast Asia

  • Anne Gilks


Arms control seems to have little prospect in Southeast Asia. The region is particularly volatile and characterised by unstable inter-state relation-ships and the pervasive involvement of extra-regional powers. A kaleidoscopic pattern of conflict involving states with a broad range of security concerns has made arms control difficult to achieve. When arms control has been achieved it tends to be transient with little lasting impact on individual states’ security or on regional strategic stability.1


Armed Conflict Internal Conflict Territorial Dispute Paris Agreement Threat Perception 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    ‘Strategic stability is the diminution in the frequency of wars and, once they occur, their limitation’, Yair Evron ‘The Role of Arms Control in the Middle East’ in Christoph Bertram’ (ed.), Arms Control and Military Force, (London: IISS, 1980) p. 66.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Christoph Bertram, (ed.), Arms Control and Military Force, p. 1.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. I. Coffey, ‘New Approaches to Arms Reduction in Europe’ in Bertram ,(ed.), Arms Control and Military Force, op. cit., p. 6.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yair Evron, ‘The role of Arms Control in the Middle East’, Ibid., p. 102.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Richard Haas, ‘Arms Control and the Indian Ocean’ in Richard Burt (ed.), Arms Control and Defence Postures in the 1980s (Boulder, Col.; Westview Press, 1982) p. 145.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibid., p. 146.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Michael Leifer, ‘Conflict and Regional Order in Southeast Asia’, Adelphi Paper, no. 162 (London: IISS, Winter 1980) pp. 20–1.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ibid., p.4Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strategic Survey (London: IISS, 1979) p. 63.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    An American estimate of the cost of Soviet support for the Vietnamese war effort has been put at $3 -5million per day, Strategic Survey (1981–82) p. 98.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Strategic Survey (1980–81) p. 21; F. A. Mediansky, ‘Soviet Strategic Interests in Southeast Asia’, Southeast Asian Affairs (1984) Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore: p. 37.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerald Segal, ‘Sino-Soviet Relations After Mao’, Adelphi Paper, no. 202, (London: IISS, Autumn 1985) p. 39.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, FE/6755/A3/1 22 July 1981.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ibid., FE/7072/A3/3–4, 8 July 1982; FE/7080/A3/3, 17 July 1982.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ibid., FE/7772/A1/4–5, 12 October 1984.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Southeast Asian Affairs (1980) pp. 203–4.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Strategic Survey (1979) p. 61.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Michael Leifer, ‘Conflict and Regional Order in Southeast Asia’, op. cit., P. 7.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Southeast Asian Affairs, 1981, p. 27.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Southeast Asian Affairs, 1982, p. 17.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    SIPRI Yearbook (1985) pp.416, 420.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jonathan Alford ‘Confidence Building Measures’ in Bertram (ed.), Arms Control and Military Force, op. cit., p. 185.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    BBC SWB, FE/7074/A3/7–8, 10 July 1982.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Strategic Survey (1980–81) p. 127; (1984–5) p. 84.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barry Buzan, ‘A Sea of Troubles?: Sources of Dispute in the New Ocean Regime’, Adelphi Paper, no. 143 (London: IISS, Spring 1978) p. 6.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gerald Segal, ‘Sino-Soviet Relations’, op. cit., p. 20.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gerald Segal 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Gilks

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations