WIMAYA  Vol.01/No.01, January-June 2020 

 41 

Book Reviews 
 

 (Re)Negotiating Southeast Asia and 
Northteast Asia. Region, Regionalism, and the 
Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Alice 
D.Ba. Singapore: NUS Press, 2009, xiv + 325 
pp. ISBN-13: 978-9971-69-491-3 (pbk.) 
 

The notion of ‘resilience’ is one of the 
most underlines adaptive capability owns by 
ASEAN  in facing challenges and opportunities. 
In essence, the formula of ‘regional resilience’ 
remain relevant to ASEAN nowadays, 
especially facing the rising trends of China-US 
competition in the region. In many scope, this 
manifests ASEAN’s recent goals and 
aspirations. Differ from what Acharya’s 
arguments on regional (dis)order, this book 
prefer to see Southeast Asia as the subject of 
its own regional entity, rather than just an 
object to be ‘ordered’ by outsiders. 
Notwithstanding,  there is a distinct culture 
which the countries in the region embrace 
after the long period of power influence. 
Southeast Asia do learn and pay for their own 
distinction on ‘unity in diversity’ to later form 
an ‘ASEAN way’ as ASEAN centrality in 
Southeast Asian region, even beyond that in 
East Asia. 

Focuses on Southeast Asia and 
ASEAN’s development in relation to the wider 
regions of East Asia and the Asia Pacific, Ba 
looks at the ideational factors on ASEAN’s 
evolution. By using the social constructivism, it 
frames the process of regionalism in Southeast 
Asia as the form of their ‘regional resilience’. 
She argues that the regions and regionalism in 
Asia are resulted from cumulative dialogue or 
series of social negotiations on the material 
and normative foundations or regional order. 
This also part of their nature of intraregional 
ties, as well as their relationship between both 
major powers and minor powers. Also she 
notice that the appropriateness occurred from 
the great power guarantees and their 
intervention within the region (p.8). 

ASEAN for the 10 members states 
were seen as both regional organization and 
main regionalism efforts in the region. Despite 
the differences on viewing the value of 
Southeast Asia and various efforts on their own 

national building, the 10 member states 
strugling to keep ASEAN runs well. This part, Ba 
mentions as ‘regional resilience’ (p.29-32), the 
efforts from ASEAN members to reconcile their 
diverse situations and values to maintain the 
resilience of Southeast Asia. Through this 
book, Ba explains the material realities faced 
by this regionalism of SEA countries which also 
bring the so called re-making of new norms in 
the region. By realizing the threats of major 
power influence and internal fragmentation, 
ASEAN already pushed many efforts on 
spinning off their regionalism into some 
‘enlargement’ to manage their ‘regional 
resilience’(p.240). Although those ‘spin off’ 
process were debatable in terms of the 
centrality of ASEAN, but this book tries to view 
that this is at least has shown the struggle of 
ASEAN to realize the ASEAN Way in the region 
of East Asia or even greater in Asia-Pacific. 

It is good to understand that there 
were not only material gains like common 
interest or common threats able to tight and 
moreover maintain a regionalism in Southeast 
Asia. Like many argues that ASEAN as 
Southeast Asian regionalism is ineffective and 
inefficient, even some called this as ‘too much 
talks’ without concrete result in the end. Those 
arguments were answered nicely by using the 
perspective of social constructivism by seeing 
those many talks as part of ‘ideational 
exchanges’ which resulting the new ideas 
which able to maintain the relations and its 
foundation on regionalism in the area. 
However, talking mostly on the process of 
cumulative ideational exchange, makes the 
reader bias on their judgement on Southeast 
Asian countries behavior. There were of 
course, material gains as factors of those 
ASEAN members to move closer or away from 
certain cooperation or regional arrangements. 
In terms of economical or security gains, the 
power capabilities (as many realists scholars 
view) drive the renegotiating process of 
regionalism. 

Published in 2009, this book is still 
relevant to understand the happening 
moments of ‘negotiation process’ as 
‘cumulative ideas’ which resulted norms within 
the organization as well as the region. This 
book surely benefited for those who wants to 



WIMAYA  Vol.01/No.01, January-June 2020 

 42 

understand the form of ‘regional resilience’ 
that ASEAN’s members could pursue by ASEAN 
regionalism. ASEAN formation were not as 
simple as gathering all Southeast Asian states 
in an organization. As from the beginning, 
regional concern of ASEAN countries was to 
formed a strategic way in dealing with global 
conflict between the two superpower rivalries. 
Nevertheless, this book already filled the niche 
on understanding Southeast Asian regionalism 
from a different angle. Even though the author 
did not mention too much about material gains 
of each countries within the ASEAN as 
organization but by descripting the narrative 
on each circumstances of regional moments 
helps the reader to guess what kind of material 
gains possible received by countries. 
 
Sarah Anabarja 
Ph.D Student 
International Doctoral Program in Asia Pacific 
Studies (IDAS), National Chengchi University 
(NCCU), Taiwan.  
sarah.anb86@gmail.com  

mailto:sarah.anb86@gmail.com