Vanguard state threat perception, competitive intervention of major powers and ASEAN conflict management behavior patterns

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2025.08.20240326

Abstract

Abstract:

ASEAN has adopted different management models for different regional conflicts. There are three modes of conflict management in ASEAN: silent management, normative advocacy management and power intervention management. The choice of conflict management modes in ASEAN is mainly influenced by two factors: the threat perception of vanguard states and the competitive intervention of great powers.When vanguard countries have weak awareness of the threat of conflict and the competitive involvement of major powers outside the region, ASEAN choose the silent management mode. When the threat perception of the vanguard ASEAN countries is strong and the competitive involvement of the major powers outside the region is weak, ASEAN tends to choose the normative and advocacy management model. When the vanguard countries of ASEAN have a strong threat perception and the competitive involvement of major powers outside the region, ASEAN choose the power intervention management mode. On the one hand, the exploration of this issue can enrich the theoretical research of ASEAN conflict management behavior, better analyze and master the model and law of ASEAN conflict management behavior, on the other hand, it helps to understand the laws of ASEAN in depth, so as to manage regional conflicts more effectively. Based on the above theoretical analysis, this paper conducts an empirical analysis of the behavioral patterns of ASEAN's conflict management by taking the 1975 East Timor conflict, the 2008 Thailand- Cambodia conflict, and the 1978 Cambodia conflict as examples.

Key words: ASEAN, conflict management, vanguard state, threat perception, great power competitive intervention

摘要：

东盟对不同的地区冲突采用的冲突管理模式有3种，即静默管理模式、规范倡导管理模式和权力干预管理模式，冲突管理模式选择主要受到先锋国威胁认知和大国竞争性介入这两大因素的影响。当先锋国对冲突威胁的认知程度弱且域外大国的竞争性介入程度弱时，东盟会选择静默管理模式；当东盟先锋国对威胁的认知程度强且域外大国的竞争性介入程度弱时，东盟倾向于选择规范倡导管理模式；当东盟先锋国对威胁认知程度强且域外大国的竞争性介入程度强时，东盟则选择权力干预管理模式。在以上理论分析的基础上，本文以1975年东帝汶冲突、2008年泰柬冲突和1978年的柬埔寨冲突为例，对东盟冲突管理的行为模式进行了实证分析，一方面可以丰富对东盟冲突管理行为的理论研究，分析和掌握东盟冲突管理行为的模式与规律；另一方面有助于深入认识东盟的行为规律，从而更有效地管理地区冲突。

关键词: 东盟, 冲突管理, 先锋国, 威胁认知, 大国竞争性介入

Yajuan SHEN, Hong WEI. Vanguard state threat perception, competitive intervention of major powers and ASEAN conflict management behavior patterns[J]. World Regional Studies, 2025, 34(8): 29-40.

申亚娟, 韦红. 先锋国威胁认知、大国竞争性介入与东盟冲突管理行为模式[J]. 世界地理研究, 2025, 34(8): 29-40.

References 29

[1]	曾晓祥.东盟国家在国际冲突管理中的行为选择.世界经济与政治论坛,2015(4):19-28.
	ZENG X.Behavior choice of ASEAN countries in international conflict management.World Economic and Political Forum, 2015(4):19-28.
[2]	KAMARULZAMAN A, JACOB B, MIKIOO. The ASEAN way of conflict management: Old patterns and new trends. Asian Journal of Political Science, 2002, 10(2):21-42.
[3]	MUTHIAH A. Regionalism and the quest for security: Asean and the Cambodian conflict. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 1993, 47(2):189-209.
[4]	王孜.东盟与地区冲突管理——以柬越、柬泰冲突为例.国际研究参考,2021(4):32-38.
	WANG Z. ASEAN on regional conflict management: A case study of Cambodia-Vietnam and Cambodia-Thailand conflicts. International Research Reference, 2021(4):32-38.
[5]	ANNA G. The association of Southeast Asian Nations' narratives of non-compliance with norms: Shaming and escaping a narrative trap. Media, War & Conflict, 2021(16):1-19.
[6]	KYU-DEUG H. The historical evolution of ASEAN and regionalism in Southeast Asia: With a special reference to ASEAN's role in the Cambodian Conflict (1978-1989). International Journal of African and Asian Studies, 2019(58):109-119.
[7]	HE J. Normative power in the EU and ASEAN: Why they diverge. International Studies Review, 2016(01):92-105.
[8]	朱陆民、董琳.从柬泰边境冲突看东盟管理的困境与出路.东南亚纵横,2011(12):60-65.
	ZHU L, DONG L.The predicaments and outlets of ASEAN's conflict management on the analysis of border conflict between Cambodia and Thailand.Crossroads:Southeast Asian Studies, 2011(12):60-65.
[9]	MIKIO O. Contemporary Conflicts in Southeast Asia: Towards a New ASEAN Way of Conflict Management.Singapore:Springer, 2016.
[10]	YUKIKO N. The "ASEAN Way" and Asian regional security.Politics & Policy,2007, 35(1):42-56.
[11]	ALAN D. ASEAN's response to the East Timor crisis. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2000, 54(2):163-170.
[12]	MELY C, Regional Security in Southeast Asia: Beyond the ASEAN Way. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2005.
[13]	JACOB B, JUDITH F. Regional Guide to International Conflict and Management from 1945 to 2003. Washington D.C:CQ Press, 2003.
[14]	陈岳.国际政治学概论.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2020.
	CHEN Y.Introduction to International Politics.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2020.
[15]	FRANK R, CHRISTOPH R. National and International Conflicts, 1945-1995: New Empirical And Theoretical Approaches.London & New York:Routledge, 2000.
[16]	AZAR, EDWARD, JOHN W.International Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1986.
[17]	刘俊波.冲突管理理论初探.国际论坛,2007(1):38.
	LIU J. A preliminary study of conflict management theory.International Forum,2007(1):38.
[18]	HERVE C.The practice of risk management: Silence is not absence. Risk Management, 2009(11):285-304.
[19]	MUTHIAH A. Regional institutions, The UN and international security.Third Word Quarterly, 1997,18(3):421-441.
[20]	阿米塔·阿查亚.建构安全共同体:东盟与地区秩序.冯怀信, 译.上海:上海人民出版社,2004.
	AMITAV A, Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order. Translated by FENG H. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Press, 2004.
[21]	LAURA S. ASEAN Resistance to Sovereignty Violation: Interests, Balancing and the Role of the Vanguard State. Bristol: Bristol University Press, 2019.
[22]	DAVID B. Thinking about threat. Journal of Conflict Resolution,1971,15(1):71-78.
[23]	吴士存.南海缘何再度成为大国角逐的舞台.人民论坛·学术前沿.2021(3):17-19.
	WU S.Why has the South China Sea become a competing arena for the Great Powers? Renming Luntan· Xueshu Qianyan.2021(3):17-19.
[24]	RAVIPRASAD N.The East Timor Crisis.China Report, 2000(1): 93-99.
[25]	DEWI F. Indonesia in ASEAN: Foreign Policy and Regionalism, New York:St. Martin's Press, 1994.
[26]	MARTIN W. Lessons from Preah Vihear: Thailand, Cambodia, and the nature of law-intensity border conflict. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 2011, 30(3):27-59.
[27]	CAPT P. Thailand's Policy Towards the Vietnam-Kampuchean Conflict: Issues on Thai national interest.Bangkok: Institute of Policy Studies, 1985.
[28]	LESZEK B. Soviet Foreign Policy and Southeast Asia: Prospects for the Gorbachev Era, California: University of California Press,1986.
[29]	DOUGLAS P. Communist vs communist in Southeast Asia. International Security,1979, 4(1):20-38.