Why is ASEAN not intrusive? Non-interference meets state strength
Why is ASEAN not intrusive? Non-interference meets state strength
复制标题
东盟为何不介入？
DOI：
10.1080/24761028.2019.1681652
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Suzuki Sanae
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
福田円;福田円;福田円;福田円;福田円;福田円;福田円;Madoka Fukuda;福田円（許コウ訳）;福田圓;福田円（許コウ訳）;福田円;福田円;Madoka Fukuda;福田円;福田円;Madoka Fukuda;福田円;福田円;福田円;FUKUDA Madoka;FUKUDA Madoka;福田円;福田円;FUKUDA Madoka;福田円;福田円;Madoka Fukuda;浜井和史;浜井和史;Madoka Fukuda;Suzuki Sanae
背景：东盟是一个非侵入性的区域组织。有人认为，不干涉原则优先于民主主义和人权，是因为一些成员国的不民主政权和“东盟方式”外交的成功。目的：本文表明，这些论点虽然在文献中占主导地位，但难以解释东盟的经验。它将辩称，从根本上说，东盟仍然是非干涉性的，因为其成员国都认为，国内问题应该在国内解决，因为成员国有足够的能力这样做。这种共识使他们每个人都能避免依赖东盟机构。主要论点：本文以非传统安全问题为例，认为不干涉原则是通过这种共识得以维持的。这一论点似乎与成员国有时主张东盟干预的时刻不一致。事实并非如此。相反，这样的要求是在符合各国自身利益的情况下提出的，但这种主张不会导致东盟基本做法的改变，因为成员国仍然认为国内问题应该在国内解决。结论：面对具有潜在溢出效应的国内挑战的成员说服组织，他们有足够的国家实力在内部应对挑战。所有成员国都已做好准备，相信他们可以依靠国家力量来解决国内问题。然而，到目前为止，各成员国已成功地使彼此相信，国内能力足以解决正在讨论的问题。
Background: ASEAN is characterized as a non-intrusive regional organization. It has been argued that noninterference principle was prioritized over democracy and human rights because of undemocratic regimes in some member states and the success of its “ASEAN Way” of diplomacy. Purpose: This article demonstrates that such arguments, although dominant in the literature, struggle to explain the ASEAN experience. It will argue that, fundamentally, ASEAN remains non-intrusive because its member states share an understanding that domestic issues should be managed domestically, since the members have sufficient capability to do so. This common understanding enables each of them to avoid relying on ASEAN institutions. Main Argument: Taking non-traditional security issues as cases, this article argues that the noninterference principle has been maintained via this shared understanding. This argument might seem to be inconsistent with the moments when member states sometimes advocate for an intrusive ASEAN. It is not. Rather, such requests are made when doing so is line with the states’ own interests, but such advocacy does not lead to changes in the basic ASEAN approach because the members retain their shared understanding that domestic issues should be managed domestically. Conclusion: Members facing a domestic challenge with potential spillover effects persuade the organization that they have enough state strength to manage the challenge internally. All members are ready to be persuaded from their shared understanding that they can rely on state strength to solve domestic issues. To date, however, members have successfully convinced one another that domestic capabilities are sufficient to address the issues under discussion.