In the more than five decades since the founding of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, relations among its member states have remained generally peaceful, and major interstate conflict has been all but eliminated. Yet, ASEAN now faces significant challenges, not least from competition between the United States and China that threatens to draw individual ASEAN countries into taking sides. This report discusses ASEAN’s role in maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia and how it can adapt to a rapidly evolving geopolitical climate to meet future challenges.

The ASEAN logo seen at the association’s Business and Investment Summit (ABIS) in Nonthaburi, Thailand, on November 2, 2019. (Photo by Aijaz Rahi/AP)
The ASEAN logo seen at the association’s Business and Investment Summit (ABIS) in Nonthaburi, Thailand, on November 2, 2019. (Aijaz Rahi/AP)

Summary

  • ASEAN was designed as a trust-building mechanism for its members rather than as a platform for mediating disputes.
  • Historically, ASEAN has been able to minimize interstate conflict because of an adherence to the principles of consensus, non-interference, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Its many meetings and informal social gatherings build interpersonal trust, enabling many disputes to be settled without resort to formal legal mechanisms.
  • This emphasis, however, prevents it from effectively intervening in intrastate conflicts considered domestic issues. Nor is it equipped to handle interstate disagreements that cannot be solved on the sidelines of meetings.
  • Pressure on ASEAN to reform its structure and culture comes from the changing security dynamic and the influence of external actors in the region, particularly China and the United States.
  • One of the most pressing issues for consideration is the continued relevance and feasibility of ASEAN’s principle of consensus-based decision making in light of the emerging challenges presented by increasing U.S.-China competition.

About the Report

This report examines the evolving role that ASEAN has played in maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia. It is the outcome of a joint collaboration between the Centre on Asia and Globalisation at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, and the United States Institute of Peace.

About the Authors

Drew Thompson is a visiting senior research fellow at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore. He was formerly the director for China, Taiwan, and Mongolia at the U.S. Department of Defense from 2011 to 2018. Byron Chong is a research associate at the Centre on Asia and Globalisation at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.

Related Publications

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

Thursday, April 11, 2024

By: Sarhang Hamasaeed

Ten years after ISIS’ genocide against them, the wounds of the Yazidi community in Iraq’s Sinjar district remain fresh as thousands remain displaced and even more await justice for the crimes perpetrated against them. Meanwhile, despite living in peaceful coexistence prior to ISIS’ campaign, the conflict planted seeds of division among Sinjar’s various tribes and communities — resulting in tensions that threatened to tear the district apart even after ISIS’ defeat.

Type: Blog

Mediation, Negotiation & DialoguePeace Processes

Report of the Expert Study Group on NATO and Indo-Pacific Partners

Report of the Expert Study Group on NATO and Indo-Pacific Partners

Monday, February 19, 2024

By: USIP Expert Study Group on NATO and Indo-Pacific Partners

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its four partner countries in the Indo-Pacific—Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and New Zealand—have entered a period of increased engagement. This engagement is taking shape in the context of the war waged by the Russian Federation (Russia) against Ukraine, NATO’s growing awareness of the security challenges posed by the People’s Republic of China (China), and important structural changes in the international system, including the return of strategic competition between the United States and China and Russia. It is occurring not only in bilateral NATO-partner relations but also between NATO and these Indo-Pacific countries as a group.

Type: Report

Conflict Analysis & PreventionCivilian-Military RelationsGlobal PolicyMediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Why Now? The Tortured History of Iran’s Hostage Seizures

Why Now? The Tortured History of Iran’s Hostage Seizures

Wednesday, September 20, 2023

By: Robin Wright

In January 1981, I stood at the foot of the Air Algerie flight that flew 52 American diplomats to freedom after 444 days as hostages in Iran. Some of them were my friends. I still remember their gaunt appearances after being caged and cut off from the world for so long as they quietly disembarked. That original hostage crisis was a turning point in U.S. history in the 20th century — and has shaped angry American views of the Islamic republic ever since.

Type: Analysis

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

70 Years After the Armistice, the Korean Peninsula Still Struggles for Peace

70 Years After the Armistice, the Korean Peninsula Still Struggles for Peace

Monday, September 11, 2023

By: Bong-geun Jun

On July 27, 1953, military commanders from the United States, North Korea and China signed an armistice agreement that ended the hostilities of the Korean War. The parties agreed to a “complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force until a final peaceful settlement is achieved.” They also recommended holding a “political conference” within three months for “the peaceful settlement of the Korean question.” After 70 years of truce, however, peace on the Korean Peninsula is still elusive.

Type: Analysis

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

View All Publications