| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
112793
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
|
| Description |
viii, 215p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780230285279
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 056613 | 341.247/ARI 056613 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
104350
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is an established player in Southeast Asia, while the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is an emergent force in Central Asia. This article comparatively assesses ASEAN and SCO to investigate the nature of each organization's model of cooperation and their utility in the contemporary political landscape in Asia. It argues that SCO differs from ASEAN on a few significant points: its composition and level of institutionalization. At the same time, both organizations have similar agendas and models of cooperation, emphasizing a common spirit, flexibility and a focus on regime security. The paper concludes that ASEAN's model of cooperation continues to be relevant to the contemporary Asian landscape, and its brand of loosely codified, informal and norm driven multilateralism continues to be durable and robust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
114744
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The proclaimed function of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is regional security management. Nonetheless, it has never conducted a conventional peacekeeping operation, in spite of incidents of mass violence and instability within its region. This is in large part because regional elites consider state/regime security as paramount and that the SCO's central principle of non-interference takes precedence over intervention on humanitarian grounds. This article investigates the debate within the SCO about the relative salience of non-interference against the need for peacekeeping operations, examining the case of its non-action during the Osh Riots 2010. It concludes that considerations of political reassurance and inter-regime mistrust at a regional level and serious practical limitations in capacity dissuaded the most prominent member states from acting, via the SCO, Collective Security Treaty Organisation or independently, in what was perceived as an internal Kyrgyz affair because it did not directly threaten the security of the other members' regimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
087817
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines how, despite the initial scepticism about its viability, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) has become the primary security organisation in Central Asia. Two major factors are identified. Firstly, the focus of the SCO on tackling the so-called 'three evils' (terrorism, extremism, separatism) has won it favour with the prevailing leaderships of its member states. Secondly, the specific organisational framework adopted is appropriate for the region. The article concludes that the SCO is best characterised as a regional organisation concerned with non-traditional security and not as a hostile new 'Warsaw Pact' as suggested by some.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|