Advertisement

Conceptions of Democracy and Human Rights in Southeast Asia

  • Avery PooleEmail author
Chapter
First Online:
  • 188 Downloads
Part of the The Theories, Concepts and Practices of Democracy book series (PSTCD)

Abstract

Southeast Asia is a vast, populous and diverse region. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to provide regional order and a basis for economic and security cooperation. It promotes democracy and human rights as central to this order. However, most ASEAN members are not democratic and have poor or questionable human rights records. Moreover, ASEAN has traditionally treated democracy and human rights as sensitive issues to be omitted from regional dialogue. This chapter introduces the key question of why and how political elites—member state representatives—in a regional institutional context construct a particular rhetoric around democracy and human rights. It explores this rhetoric in the context of the objectives of ASEAN regionalism and the domestic political contexts of individual member states.

Keywords

Southeast Asia ASEAN Democracy Human rights Regionalism 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Acharya, Amitav. 1997. “Ideas, Identity, and Institution-Building: From the ASEAN Way to the Asia-Pacific Way?” Pacific Review 10, no. 3: 319–346.Google Scholar
  2. Acharya, Amitav. 2004. “How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and International Change in Asian Regionalism.” International Organization 58, no. 2 (Spring): 239–275.Google Scholar
  3. Acharya, Amitav. 2006. “Multilateralism, Sovereignty and Normative Change in World Politics.” In Multilateralism Under Challenge? Power, International Order, and Structural Change, edited by Edward Newman, Ramesh Thakur, and John Tirman, 95–118. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Acharya, Amitav. 2009. Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. ASEAN. 1976. Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia. Bali, Indonesia, February 24, 1976. http://asean.org/treaty-amity-cooperation-southeast-asia-indonesia-24-february-1976/.
  6. ASEAN. 2007. Charter of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations. Singapore, November 20, 2007. http://www.aseansec.org/21069.pdf.
  7. Ba, Alice D. 2013. “The Association of Southeast Asian Nations: Between Internal and External Legitimacy.” In Legitimating International Organizations, edited by Dominik Zaum, 132–161. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bermeo, Nancy. 2016. “On Democratic Backsliding.” Journal of Democracy 27, no. 1 (January): 5–19.Google Scholar
  9. Capie, David, and Paul Evans. 2007. The Asia-Pacific Security Lexicon. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  10. Checkel, Jeffrey T. 2007. International Institutions and Socialization in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Coicaud, Jean-Marc. 2001. “Conclusion: International Organizations, the Evolution of International Politics, and Legitimacy.” In The Legitimacy of International Organizations, edited by Jean-Marc Coicaud and Veijo Aulis Heishanen, 519–552. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Coleman, Katharina. 2007. International Organisations and Peace Enforcement: The Politics of International Legitimacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Collins, Alan. 2003. Security and Southeast Asia: Domestic, Regional, and Global Issues. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, Alan. 2013. Building a People-Oriented Security Community the ASEAN Way. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Davies, Mathew. 2012. “The Perils of Incoherence: ASEAN, Myanmar and the Avoidable Failures of Human Rights Socialization?” Contemporary Southeast Asia 34, no. 1 (April): 1–22.Google Scholar
  16. De Clercq, Geert. 2007. “Myanmar Set to Sign ASEAN Rights Charter.” Reuters, November 17, 2007. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-asean-myanmar-idUSSIN624520071117.
  17. Diamond, Larry. 1999. Developing Democracy: Towards Consolidation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Emmerson, Donald K. 2005. “Security, Community, and Democracy in Southeast Asia: Analyzing ASEAN.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 6, no. 2 (August): 165–185.Google Scholar
  19. Emmerson, Donald K. 2008. “Critical Terms: Security, Democracy and Regionalism in Southeast Asia.” In Hard Choices: Security, Democracy and Regionalism in Southeast Asia, edited by Donald K. Emmerson, 3–58. Stanford, CA: Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center.Google Scholar
  20. Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52, no. 4 (Autumn): 887–917.Google Scholar
  21. Fitri, Nurul, and Haeril Halim. 2017. “Democracy ‘Gone Too Far’: Jokowi.” The Jakarta Post, June 7, 2017. http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/02/23/democracy-gone-too-far-jokowi.html.
  22. Goldstein, Judith, Miles Kahler, Robert O. Keohane, and Anne-Marie Slaughter. 2000. “Introduction: Legalization and World Politics.” International Organization 54, no. 3 (Summer): 385–399.Google Scholar
  23. Gomez, James, and Robin Ramcharan. 2014. “Introduction: Democracy and Human Rights in Southeast Asia.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 33, no. 3: 3–17.Google Scholar
  24. Haacke, Jürgen. 2005. “‘Enhanced Interaction’ with Myanmar and the Project of a Security Community: Is ASEAN Refining or Breaking with Its Diplomatic and Security Culture?” Contemporary Southeast Asia 27, no. 2 (August): 188–216.Google Scholar
  25. Kahler, Miles. 2000. “Legalization as Strategy: The Asia-Pacific Case.” International Organization 54, no. 3 (Summer): 549–571.Google Scholar
  26. Katsumata, Hiro. 2004. “Why Is ASEAN Diplomacy Changing? From ‘Non-interference’ to ‘Open and Frank Discussions’.” Asian Survey 44, no. 2 (March/April): 237–254.Google Scholar
  27. Keohane, Robert O. 1988. “International Institutions—Two Approaches.” International Studies Quarterly 32, no. 4 (December): 379–396.Google Scholar
  28. Legro, Jeffrey W. 1997. “Which Norms Matter? Revisiting the ‘Failure’ of Internationalism.” International Organization 51, no. 1 (Winter): 31–63.Google Scholar
  29. Linz, Juan, and Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America and Post-communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore. 2007. “Statement by ASEAN Chair, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo in New York.” September 27, 2007. https://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/overseasmission/washington/newsroom/press_statements/2007/200709/press_200709_03.html.
  31. Narine, Shaun. 2018. The New ASEAN in Asia Pacific and Beyond. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  32. Pevehouse, Jon C. 2005. Democracy from Above: Regional Organizations and Democratization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Poole, Avery D. H. 2009. “Visions and Realities: ASEAN’s Efforts to Institutionalize Cooperation.” In Collaboration Under Anarchy: Functional Regionalism and the Security of East Asia, edited by See Seng Tan, 63–75. RSIS Monograph No. 15. Singapore: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.Google Scholar
  34. Price, Richard M. 1997. The Chemical Weapons Taboo. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ruggie, John Gerard. 1998. “What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge.” International Organization 52, no. 4 (Autumn): 855–885.Google Scholar
  36. Severino, Rodolfo C. 2006. Southeast Asia in Search of a Community. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  37. Suchman, Mark C. 1995. “Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches.” Academy of Management Review 20, no. 3 (July): 571–610.Google Scholar
  38. Tannenwald, Nina. 2007. The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-use of Nuclear Weapons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Thomas, Daniel C. 2001. The Helsinki Effect: International Norms, Human Rights, and the Demise of Communism. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  40. United Nations. 1945. Charter of the United Nations. San Francisco, June 26, 1945. 1 UNTS XVI (Entered into Force on October 24, 1945). http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/index.shtml.
  41. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG)CarltonAustralia

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options