| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
167703
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Noida, Turning Point Publishers, 2019.
|
| Description |
xv, 291p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9788193783153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 059710 | 327.54/KHA 059710 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
071624
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/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 radiolog-ical (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 Asias 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
128612
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper examines the involvement of new modes of governance (NMoG)/new actors, in establishing new regional regulatory frameworks in Southeast Asia. The basis for this discussion is a framework suggested by Kanishka Jayasuriya who argues that the activities of NMoG can facilitate the establishment of such regional regulatory frameworks. Concentrating on maritime services provided by one new actor, Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs), this paper suggests that the current activities and working practices of PMSCs in Southeast Asia are more likely to undermine regional security cooperation and regional governance, thus challenging some of the tenets of Jayasuriya's framework.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
110198
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
African regional organizations play a significant role in maintaining peace and security on their continent. This article looks at how
China, as an emerging power in Africa, has incorporated these organizations into its policies on African security crises. It asserts that China has
explicitly endorsed regional conflict resolution mechanisms, which it
perceives as having a less intrusive impact on third world countries' sovereignty than have initiatives taken under the global collective security
system led by the UN Security Council. Moreover, China strengthening
cooperation with African regional organizations and aligning its stance
with the views emerging from these regional bodies is an important way
in which China has tried to respond to the rising security challenges and
political demands it is faced with in Africa. The article briefly considers
what influence China's increased attention to African regional bodies is
having on efforts by Africa's traditional donors to help build - but also
shape - Africa's emerging peace and security architecture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
183897
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Why do some regional powers collectively threatened by a potential hegemon eagerly cooperate to ensure their security, while others appear reluctant to do so? I argue that robust security cooperation at the regional level is less likely when an unbalanced distribution of power exists between the prospective security partners. In such situations, regional security cooperation tends to be stunted by foot-dragging and obstructionism on the part of materially inferior states wary of facilitating the strategic expansion of neighbours with larger endowments of power resources, anticipating that much of the coalition's gains in military capabilities are likely to be achieved through an expansion of the materially superior neighbour's force levels and strategic flexibility. Evidence drawn from primary material and the latest historiography of France's postwar foreign policy towards West Germany provides considerable support for this argument. My findings offer important correctives to standard accounts of the origins of Western European security cooperation and suggest the need to rethink the difficulties the United States has encountered in promoting cooperation among local allies in key global regions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
052923
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
061965
|
|
|