Closed-Door Event - By Invitation Only
Book Seminar on ASEAN Regionalism and Security

ASEAN's Strategic Architecture: Navigating Between Great Power Competition and Regional Autonomy

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has developed multiple institutional frameworks to engage both China and the United States, addressing interconnected economic and security concerns through what scholars term a regional security complex. This complex incorporates both realist calculations of power balances and constructivist emphasis on normative dialogue, representing a distinct Southeast Asian approach to regional order.

The contemporary ASEAN security architecture emerges from the historical tension between universalism and regionalism that was crystallized during the 1945 San Francisco Conference. While delegates acknowledged the primacy of the United Nations alongside legitimate roles for regional arrangements in dispute settlement, the subsequent Cold War systematically undermined both the UN Security Council and regional organizations through bipolar competition. Today, the UN confronts dual pressures of expanding peacekeeping obligations and declining Official Development Assistance (United Nations, 2025), creating space for regional solutions.

ASEAN's institutional DNA reflects foundational principles that simultaneously enable and constrain its security role. The concept of ASEAN Centrality - positioning ASEAN as the primary vehicle for regional collective action - remains aspirational rather than fully realized, constrained by binding principles of musyawarah (consultation and consensus) and non-interference codified in the Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality Declaration (ZOPFAN, 1971) and the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC, 1976). Significantly, both the United States (2009) and China (2003) have acceded to the TAC, formally acknowledging these normative frameworks while pursuing their strategic interests.

Initially conceived as an economic organization, ASEAN underwent critical institutional evolution by formally incorporating security considerations during the Fourth ASEAN Summit in 1992. This transformation produced layered security mechanisms operating at different levels of engagement. The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF, established 1994) provides the broadest platform for security dialogue, while the East Asia Summit (EAS, initiated 2005) and the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus, launched 2010) offer more focused venues for addressing collective security challenges. The ASEAN Plus Three framework (APT, formed 1997), though primarily economic, contributes to what scholars characterize as "ASEAN+" institutional architecture - a complex web facilitating member states' engagement with multiple dialogue partners while maintaining strategic autonomy amid intensifying Sino-American competition.

This institutional complexity reflects ASEAN as a vehicle for dialogue with multiple major powers, avoiding rigid alignment while maximizing engagement opportunities. However, the effectiveness of this approach faces mounting pressure as great power competition intensifies, particularly in maritime domains where sovereignty disputes intersect with strategic rivalry.

To examine these evolving dynamics, three distinguished scholars will provide critical analysis. Professor Dr. Bilveer Singh from the National University of Singapore will offer comprehensive examination of ASEAN regional security, analyzing both emerging threats and strategic opportunities within the current geopolitical context. Professor Dr. Lai Yew Meng will investigate the resilience of ASEAN centrality against the proliferation of minilateral security arrangements that potentially bypass traditional ASEAN mechanisms. Associate Professor Dr. Ramli Dollah will analyze trilateral cooperation in the Sulu-Celebes Seas, a maritime domain where transnational security threats - including violent extremism and maritime piracy - test ASEAN's collective response capacity. The ASEAN security architecture thus presents a paradox of institutional abundance amid operational scarcity. While multiple forums provide diplomatic flexibility and normative coherence, their effectiveness ultimately depends on member states' political will to transcend narrow sovereignty concerns - a challenge magnified by intensifying great power competition and emerging non-traditional security threats.