Abstract
This article explores the relationship between global and regional governance in tackling terrorism in Southeast Asia, with particular reference to the security of nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological (NBCR) materials. Part one describes the global multilateral non-proliferation instruments established since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 — particularly United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 — analysing the extent to which ASEAN members have been fulfilling the binding legal obligations that they entail. Part two assesses the role of three of Southeast Asia’s regional security frameworks (APEC, ARF, and ASTOP) in setting the regional non-proliferation and counter-terrorism agenda, charting their successes and failures in promoting compliance with global instruments, and in ensuring that pledges made by ministers in international and regional forums are followed through at the national level. It argues that ASEAN perceptions of West-centric security agendas, combined with frustrations that regional and global institutions are insensitive to local particularities, are undermining opportunities for achieving effective regional governance, even though concerted efforts are being made in the area of capacity-building. Bilateral security arrangements and single-issue multilateral discussions have been more successful than more ambitious regional frameworks at building trust and confidence and fostering genuine security cooperation.
PDF