The Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ narratives of non-compliance with norms: Shaming and escaping a narrative trap

Abstract

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has been responding to external demands and expectations, including moderate steps towards becoming a more norm-oriented organization, and developing its image as a responsible actor engaging in international and regional relations. For example, it has been issuing statements addressing relevant challenges, most often by criticizing them. A growing body of literature proves that this type of critical communication may bring desirable outcomes, e.g. the name and shame strategy. This strategy, however, does not align with ASEAN’s silent diplomacy. Thus, the aim of the article is to analyse how ASEAN structures its communication when criticizing others and their actions. Does ASEAN, considering its ‘uniqueness’, name and shame? And, if so, what is the pattern of the criticism? The author argues that ASEAN produces three types of critical narratives: universal shaming, reasonable criticism and considerate affirmation resulting from a narrative trap of responding to international and regional pressure. Each narrative explains and improves the organization’s image, although not comprehensively, and is utilized to strengthen its role as a peace promoter. But this image is tarnished by the questionable performance of ASEAN in the area of peace promotion. The article’s argument is substantiated by an analysis of ASEAN’s narratives of non-compliance with norms.

Keywords

ASEAN name and shame narratives norm compliance peace promotion shaming

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acharya

(2001) Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order. London: Routledge.

Acharya

(2011) Can Asia lead? Power ambitions and global governance in the twenty-first century. International Affairs 87(4): 852–869.

Acharya

(2014) Rethinking Power, Institutions and Ideas in World Politics: Whose IR? Abingdon: Routledge.

Acharya

(2017) The myth of ASEAN centrality? Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 39(2): 273–279.

Allison

Taylor

(2017) ASEAN’s ‘people-oriented’ aspirations: Civil society influences on non-traditional security governance. Australian Journal of International Affairs 71(1): 24–41.

Anwar

(2020) Indonesia and the ASEAN outlook on the Indo-Pacific. International Affairs 96(1): 111–129.

ASEAN (2006) Joint Communiqué of the 39th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting. Available at: https://asean.org/joint-communique-of-the-39th-asean-ministerial-meeting-amm-kuala-lumpur/ (accessed 10 September 2020).

ASEAN (2008) Chairman’s Statement of the 15th ASEAN Regional Forum. Available at: https://asean.org/chairman-s-statement-of-the-15th-asean-regional-forum-singapore/ (accessed 10 September 2020).

ASEAN (2011) ASEAN Community in a Global Community on Nations. Jakarta.

10.

ASEAN (2015) The ASEAN Community Vision 2025. Jakarta.

11.

ASEAN (2017a) ASEAN Chairman’s Statement on the Rakhine State. Available at: https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/1.ASEAN-Chairmans-Statement-on-the-Rakhine.pdf (accessed 10 September 2020).

12.

ASEAN (2017b) Joint Communiqué of the 50th ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting. Manila.

13.

ASEAN (2018) Chairman’s Statement of the 13th East Asia Summit. Available at: https://asean.org/storage/2018/11/East_Asia_Summit_Chairman_Statement_Final.pdf (accessed 10 September 2020).

14.

ASEAN (2019) ASEAN Communication Master Plan 2018–2025. Jakarta.

15.

ASEAN (2020) ASEAN holds virtual consultation on ASEAN Identity narrative. Available at: https://asean.org/asean-holds-virtual-consultation-asean-identity-narrative/ (accessed 10 September 2020).

16.

ASEAN Charter (2007) Charter of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Singapore.

17.

Auerbach

Silverstein

(2003). Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis. New York, NY: NewYork University Press.

18.

(2009) (Re)Negotiating East and Southeast Asia: Region, Regionalism, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

19.

Beeson

(2009) Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC, and Beyond. London: Routledge.

20.

Beeson

(2016) Can ASEAN cope with China? Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 35(1): 5–28.

21.

Caballero-Anthony

(2014) Understanding ASEAN’s centrality: Bases and prospects in an evolving regional architecture. Pacific Review 27(4): 563–584.

22.

Collins

(2013) Building a People-Oriented Security Community the ASEAN Way. London: Routledge.

23.

Collins

(2019) From commitment to compliance: ASEAN’s human rights regression? Pacific Review 32(3): 365–394.

24.

Coticchia

Catanzaro

(2020) The fog of words: Assessing the problematic relationship between strategic narratives, (master) frames and ideology. Media, War & Conflict. DOI: 10.1177/1750635220965622.

25.

Cronin-Furman

(2019) Human rights half measures: Avoiding accountability in postwar Sri Lanka. World Politics 72(1): 121–163.

26.

DeMeritt

JHR

(2012) International organizations and government killing: Does naming and shaming save lives? International Interactions 38(5): 597–621.

27.

DeMeritt

JHR

Conrad

(2019) Repression substitution: Shifting human rights violations in response to UN naming and shaming. Civil Wars 21(1): 128–152.

28.

Duxbury

Tan

H-L

(2019) Can ASEAN Take Human Rights Seriously? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

29.

Emmerson

(2009) Critical terms: Security, democracy, and regionalism in Southeast Asia. In: Emmerson

(ed.) Hard Choices: Security, Democracy, and Regionalism in Southeast Asia. Singapore: ISEAS, 3–56.

30.

Esarey

DeMeritt

JHR

(2017) Political context and the consequences of naming and shaming for human rights abuse. International Interactions 43(4): 589–618.

31.

Finnemore

Sikkink

(1998) International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization 52(4): 887–917.

32.

Friman

(2015) Introduction: Unpacking the mobilization of shame. In Friman

(ed.) The Politics of Leverage in International Relations: Name, Shame, and Sanction. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–29.

33.

Gerard

(2014) ASEAN’s Engagement of Civil Society: Regulating Dissent. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

34.

Gilpin

(1981) War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

35.

Glas

(2021) Positionality, power, and positions of power: Reflexivity in elite interviewing. PS: Political Science & Politics. DOI: 10.1017/S1049096520002048.

36.

Glas

Balogun

(2020) Norms in practice: People-centric governance in ASEAN and ECOWAS. International Affairs 96(4): 1015–1032.

37.

Gustafsson

(2015) How to make former aggressors repent through shaming and praising: The case of Sino-Japanese relations. Global Affairs 1(3): 315–224.

38.

Haacke

(1999) The concept of flexible engagement and the practice of enhanced interaction: Intramural challenges to the ‘ASEAN Way’. Pacific Review 12(4): 581–611.

39.

Hafner-Burton

(2008) Sticks and stones: Naming and shaming the human rights enforcement problem. International Organization 62(4): 689–716.

40.

Hammond

(2018) When frames collide: ‘Ethnic war’ and ‘genocide’. Media, War & Conflict 11(4): 434–445.

41.

Heller

(2005) The relevance of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) for regional security in the Asia Pacific. Contemporary Southeast Asia 27(1): 123–145.

42.

Human Rights Council (2017) Resolution Adopted by the Human Rights Council, 24 March, UN Doc A/HRC/RES/34/22.

43.

Human Rights Council (2019) Detailed Findings of the Independent International Fact Finding Mission on Myanmar, 16 September, UN Doc A/HRC/42/CRP.5.

44.

Jetschke

Rüland

(2009) Decoupling rhetoric and practice: The cultural limits of ASEAN cooperation. Pacific Review 22(2): 179–203.

45.

Jones

(2008) Security and democracy: The ASEAN charter and the dilemmas of regionalism in South-East Asia. International Affairs 84(4): 735–756.

46.

Jones

Smith

MLR

(2007) Making process, not progress: ASEAN and the evolving East Asian regional order. International Security 32(1): 148–184.

47.

Jones

(2010) ASEAN’s unchanged melody? The theory and practice of ‘non-interference’ in Southeast Asia. Pacific Review 23(4): 479–502.

48.

Katsumata

(2009) ASEAN’s Cooperative Security Enterprise Norms and Interests in the ASEAN Regional Forum. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

49.

Keck

Sikkink

(1998) Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

50.

Kivimäki

(2012) Southeast Asia and conflict prevention: Is ASEAN running out of steam? Pacific Review 25(4): 403–427.

51.

Koga

(2018) ASEAN’s evolving institutional strategy: Managing great power politics in South China sea disputes. Chinese Journal of International Politics 11(1): 49–80.

52.

Koliev

(2020) Inter-state shaming: Shaming and democracy: Explaining inter-state shaming in international organizations. International Political Science Review 41(4): 538–553.

53.

Lee

Ducci

(2020) No humanitarian intervention in Asian genocides: How possible and legitimate? Third World Quarterly 41(9): 1575–1594.

54.

Liu

(2020) The recalibration of Chinese assertiveness: China’s responses to the Indo Pacific challenge. International Affairs 96(1): 9–27.

55.

Loh

DMH

(2018) The disturbance and endurance of norms in ASEAN: Peaceful but stressful. Australian Journal of International Affairs 72(5): 385–402.

56.

Miskimmon

O’Loughlin

Roselle

(2013) Strategic Narratives: Communication Power and the New World Order. London: Routledge.

57.

Nah

(2017) ASEAN and North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs. North Korean Review 13(2): 66–73.

58.

Nair

(2019) Saving face in diplomacy: A political sociology of face-to-face interactions in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. European Journal of International Relations 25(3): 672–697.

59.

Narine

(2002) Explaining ASEAN: Regionalism in Southeast Asia. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

60.

Nasu

, et al. (2019) The Legal Authority of ASEAN as a Security Institution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

61.

Nguitragool

Rüland

(2015) ASEAN as an Actor in International Fora: Reality, Potential and Constraints. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

62.

Patterson

Monroe

(1998) Narrative in political science. Annual Review of Political Science 1(1): 315–331.

63.

Poole

(2019) Democracy, Rights and Rhetoric in Southeast Asia. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

64.

Risse

Ropp

Sikkink

(2013) The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From Commitment to Compliance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

65.

Roselle

Miskimmon

O’Loughlin

(2014) Strategic narrative: A new means to understand soft power. Media, War & Conflict 7(1): 70–84.

66.

Rüland

(2014) The limits of democratizing interest representation: ASEAN’s regional corporatism and normative challenges. European Journal of International Relations 20(1): 237–261.

67.

Rüland

(2019) Good global citizen? ASEAN’s image building in the United Nations. Asia Pacific Business Review 25(5): 751–771.

68.

Rüland

(2020) ASEAN as an actor in the United Nations: How cohesive is it? In: Smith

Laatikainen

(eds) Group Politics in UN Multilateralism. Leiden: Brill, 115–134.

69.

Schisslera

Waltonb

Phyu Phyu Thic (2017) Reconciling contradictions: Buddhist Muslim violence, narrative making and memory in Myanmar. Journal of Contemporary Asia 47(3): 376–395.

70.

Simpson

Farrelly

(2020) The Rohingya crisis and questions of accountability. Australian Journal of International Affairs 74(5): 486–494.

71.

Snyder

(2020) Backlash against human rights shaming: Emotions in groups. International Theory 12(1): 109–132.

72.

Spandler

(2020) Saving people or saving face? Four narratives of regional humanitarian order in Southeast Asia. Pacific Review. DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2020.1833079.

73.

Squatrito

Lundgren

Sommerer

(2019) Shaming by international organizations: Mapping condemnatory speech acts across 27 international organizations, 1980–2015. Cooperation and Conflict 54(3): 356–377.

74.

Squire

Andrews

Tamboukou

(2008) Introduction: What is narrative research? In: Squire

, et al. (eds) Doing Narrative Research. London: Sage, 1–26.

75.

Stubbs

(2014) ASEAN’s leadership in East Asian regional-building: Strength in weakness. Pacific Review 27(4): 523–541.

76.

Stubbs

(2019) ASEAN sceptics versus ASEAN proponents: Evaluating regional institutions. Pacific Review 32(6): 923–950.

77.

Tang

, et al. (2020) The State of Southeast Asia: 2020. Singapore: ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute.

78.

UNGA (2017) United Nations General Assembly, UN Doc A/HRC/RES/34/22, 24 March.

79.

United Nations (2018) Statement by Ambassador U Hau Do Suan, Permanent Representative of Myanmar to the United Nations at the United Nations High-level Conference of Heads of Counter-Terrorism Agencies of Member States. Available at: https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/ctitf/sites/www.un.org.counterterrorism.ctitf/file/S2-Myanmar.pdf (accessed 10 September 2020).

80.

Whitehead

(2020) Regional organizations and democratic conditionality: Family resemblances and shaming. International Political Science Review. DOI: 10.1177/0192512120937474.

81.

Yates

(2017) ASEAN as the ‘regional conductor’: Understanding ASEAN’s role in Asia- Pacific order. Pacific Review 30(4): 443–461.

82.

Yukawa

(2018) The ASEAN Way as a symbol: An analysis of discourses on the ASEAN Norms. Pacific Review 31(3): 298–314.