Skip to main content

Asian Security Architectures

By Nick Bisley

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This chapter examines the current status and possible evolution of Asian efforts to develop cooperative multilateral approaches to regional security.

Main Argument

  • Asian states participate in a complex array of multilateral, bilateral, and unilateral mechanisms to advance their security interests. Despite the recent growth in multilateral processes, most states still focus the majority of their bureaucratic and fiscal resources on bilateral and unilateral military approaches.
  • Asia’s current political and strategic circumstances preclude the possibility of applying a strongly institutionalized European approach to the construction of a regional security architecture.
  • Palpable mistrust among the major powers and divergent views as to the nature and character of the key threats the region faces block efforts to make any meaningful change to regional security policy.

Policy Implications

  • The most significant barriers to the creation of a more effective regional security architecture are the entrenched sense of mistrust and suspicion among the major powers and divergent conceptions of the nature and character of security threats.
  • The recent growth in multilateralism reflects a clear demand for more cooperative approaches to regional security. The U.S. has an opportunity to capitalize on this interest in ways that can advance its interests.
  • The U.S. will not be well served over the medium to longer term by maintaining the bilateral military structure of its presence in Asia.
  • Asia’s proliferation of regional institutions and multilateral processes hinder effective policy cooperation. States attempting to construct a regional architecture would best be mindful of this problem and either reform existing institutions or find a better division of labor among existing entities.
 Source:  The National Bureau of Asian Research

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

India-Malaysia ties and the future

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is on his first official visit to India. The main aim of this visit is to seek support for Malaysia’s application to join Brics and to fortify bilateral ties, as the country is keen to improve its connections with one of the rapidly expanding economies in Asia. In light of the increasing crumbling of the global order, particularly stemming from trade disputes between the United States and China, as well as the proxy conflict involving the United States and Russia, Malaysia is encouraged to reassess its foreign policy to uphold its neutral stance. Given India’s status as the largest democracy and the fifth-largest economy globally, along with its notable advancements in indigenous space and defence technologies, it is proposed that India emerge as Malaysia’s key partner in the years ahead. Why India is important for Malaysia The historical ties between India and Malaysia extend back several centuries, with significant Indian cultural, religious, and administ...

THE HISTORY OF TERRORISM: MORE THAN 200 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

The history of terrorism dates back at least 1500 years when Jewish resistance groups (66 - 72 A.D.) known as Zealots killed Roman soldiers and destroyed Roman property. The term assassin comes from a Shi'ite Muslim sect (Nizari Isma'ilis - also known as hashashins "hashish-eaters") fighting Sunni Muslims (1090 - 1275) and during Medieval Christendom resisting occupation during the Crusades (1095-1291). The hashashins were known to spread terror in the form of murder, including women and children. The brotherhood of Assassins committed terror so as to gain paradise and seventy-two virgins if killed and to receive unlimited hashish while on earth. The modern development of terrorism began during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror (1793 - 1794). During this period the term terrorism was first coined. Through the past two hundred years, terrorism has been used to achieve political ends and has developed as a tool for liberation, oppression, and i...

The by-election in Kuala Kubu Baharu (KKB) and the Indian electorate

  I was born in Malaysia, belonging to the Indian ethnic group, which constitutes approximately 7% of the country's total population. My durable credence is that I am Malaysian first and foremost, and only then do I identify myself as Indian. Regrettably, it saddens me to witness and hear about the actions of certain politicians who question my loyalty to Malaysia. What is even more disheartening is that some Malaysians have been influenced by the manipulative rhetoric of these self-serving politicians. Recently, I have observed numerous discussions on both mainstream and online news platforms regarding the recognition and inclusion of Indians by ruling parties. Surprisingly, even the opposition has displayed a significant interest in the welfare of Indians. Upon contemplating the reasons behind this sudden surge in attention towards Indians, it becomes evident that it is primarily driven by the upcoming Kuala Kubu Baharu (KKB) by-election. It is noteworthy that such ...