東南アジアの新しい地域秩序とトランスナショナルな市民社会の地平

ASEAN共同体の形成過程における「下」からのオルターナティブな地域主義に注目して

抄録

The regional order in Southeast Asia has undergone a rapid change in the context of the end of the Cold War and the spread of economic globalization. The mainstream theories such as neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and constructivism have offered competing explanations of this transformation. However, recently, a new phenomenon that cannot be grasped by these state-centric theories has arisen—the movement toward constructing a regional order from below by transnational civil society actors.
As ASEAN made a full-fledged start in constructing the ASEAN Community after the late 1990s, the transnational civil society actors began to engage in its decision-making process. Such engagements were specifically observed in the process of drafting the ASEAN Charter starting from 2006. Even after the establishment of the charter, these actors continue to remain involved in the panel and committee related to the framework of the ASEAN Community.
This article attempts to empirically analyze the activities of such transnational civil society actors, and to explore the scope and limits of alternative regionalism advocated by them. Furthermore, it seeks to examine the embryonic change toward the establishment of a new regional order in Southeast Asia from the bottom-up perspective.
Section I focuses on a theoretical analysis. After an overview of the New Regional Approach, which is one of the critical international theories and has a vested interest in civil society, it develops a theoretical perspective on transnational civil society in the context of regionalization. Using such a perspective, it also extracts the characteristics of new regionalism in Southeast Asia. Section II describes the basic features of transnational civil society actors, and explores the configuration of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic actors in transnational public space. By focusing on the process of drafting the ASEAN Charter, Section III analyzes the alternative regionalism advocated by the transnational civil society actors. Section IV highlights the two issues that these actors have given special emphasis to after the establishment of the ASEAN Charter: the terms of reference of the human rights body and the rights of migrant workers.
In conclusion, the article proves that by engaging with transnational civil society actors, ASEAN is gradually moving from an “elite club” to a peoplecentered organization, but given the predominance of neoliberal discourse, alternative regionalism has not enough led to the realization. As regarding the establishment of a new regional order, although the Westphalian system has not yet dissolved, as symbolized by the “ASEAN way” that the nationstates still adhere to, the transnational public sphere has been more rapidly expanded by transnational civil society actors. Furthermore, they have attempted to transform the “ASEAN way” by tackling with issues such as human rights. Such issue-oriented movement would give some impetus to the realization of a post-Westphalian system.