<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
      <Volume-Issue>Volume 1, Issue 1</Volume-Issue>
      <Season>Aug-Sep 2020</Season>
      <ArticleType>Regional/Country Studies</ArticleType>
      <ArticleTitle>Implications of Multitudinous Multilateral Institutions for Southeast Asia</ArticleTitle>
          <FirstName>Y Yagama</FirstName>
      <Abstract>The strategic location of Southeast Asia which served as a centripetal force all through the history has acquired primacy in all the geopolitical doctrines. With the initial attempts at regional integration ended in fiasco, ASEAN came into existence in 1967 for achieving regional cohesion and economic development. Following a prolonged hibernation, ASEAN has ultimately evolved onto the flank of ‘one region-one vision.’ In the context of the imperatives of new global order, there has begun the proliferation of regional organizations/groupings centering on Southeast Asia transgressing the political and regional boundaries. Besides APEC, ARF, BIMSTEC, MGC, ASEAN+3, ASEAN+1, AEM, EAS and CSCAP, there are a plethora of multilateral arrangements encompassing FTAs and RTIAs and other initiatives. There are also confidence-building and security mechanisms that could at the best cause further swelling to the heap of regional bodies. The constellation of regional bodies, by virtue of overlapping, would subscribe to the complexity and trust-deficit that may undermine the potential benefits and prospects. These multilateral mechanisms may likely to face rough weather in the context of their interests getting clashed with others and the threats from certain intrinsic weaknesses and dissensions. That the extra-regional powers hardly desist from their temptation of gaining access to this region’s resources and strategic advantages would certainly jeopardize the expected prospects of multilateral institutions. This proliferation of regional bodies reminds one of the European alliance systems preceding the First World War; and it is feared that Southeast Asia would meet the same fate as the Balkan states in the 19th century as if being qualified for the title of “Balkans of the East.”</Abstract>
      <Keywords>Regional Integration,ASEAN,conflict of interest,multilateral cooperation,Balkan States,European Alliance,Confidence building,FTA,RTIA</Keywords>
        <Abstract>https://ejsss.net.in/ubijournal-v1copy/journals/abstract.php?article_id=8086&amp;title=Implications of Multitudinous Multilateral Institutions for Southeast Asia</Abstract>
        <References>Acharya, Amitav (2000), “Regional Institutions and Security Order in Asia,” Presented at the Second Workshop on Security Order in the Asia-Pacific, Centre for Peace and Development Studies, Bali, 30 April – 2 May.&#13;
Acharya, Amitav and Tan, See Seng (2006), “Betwixt balance and community: America, ASEAN, and the security of Southeast Asia,” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 2006, 6(1): 37-59.&#13;
Bruce M. Russett (1967), International Regions and International Systems: a Study in Political Ecology, Rand McNally, Chicago.&#13;
Dutta, Ashok K. (1985), Southeast Asia: Realm of contrasts, third edn., Westview press, Boulder.&#13;
Fang, Yang (2011), South China Sea dispute: Why China takes a pragmatic stance, at http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2011/08/26/south-china-sea-dispute-why-china-takes-a-pragmatic-stance/ (Accessed 19 September 2011).&#13;
Fawcett, Louise (1995), “Regionalism in Historical Perspective,” in Louise Fawcett and Andrew Hurrell (eds.), Regionalism in World Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 9-36.&#13;
Fisher, Charles A. (1966), Southeast Asia: A Social, Economic and Political Geography, Methuen and; Co., London.&#13;
Higgott, Richard (1999), “The Political Economy of globalization in East Asia: The Salience of ‘region building’,” in Olds, Kris, Dicken P., Kelly, Philip F., Kong, Lily and Yeung, Henry Wai-chung (eds.), Globalization and the Asia-Pacific, Routledge, London.&#13;
Hurrell (eds.), Regionalism in World Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, London.&#13;
Job, Brian L. and Williams, Erin (2008), A Wake-Up to Southeast Asia: A Solution Call for Regional Multilateralism? at  (accessed 17 September 2011).&#13;
Kacowicz, Arie M. (1998), “Regionalization, Globalization, and Nationalism: Convergent, Divergent, or Overlapping?” Paper presented at the IPSA Study Group II: “New World Orders?” Workshop on Globalisms and Regionalisms, Center for Development and the Environment, University of Oslo, Norway, 7 August.&#13;
Kesavapany, K. (2005), “A New Regional Architecture: Building the Asian Community,” lecture presented at the Annual General Meeting of the Asian Institute of Transport Development, New Delhi, 31 March.&#13;
Koh, Tommy (2010), Building fraternity amongst East Asian states, 8 April 2010, at (Accessed on 12 September 2011).&#13;
Malik, Mohan (2007), “The East Asia Community and the Role of External Powers: Ensuring Asian Multilateralism is not Shanghaied,” The Korean Journal of Defense Analyses, XIX (4), winter, pp. 29-50.&#13;
Palmer, Norman D. (1991), The New Regionalism in Asia and the Pacific, (chap.1), D.C. Heath and; Co., Pennsylvania.&#13;
Rajan, D.S. (2011), East Asia Integration – China’s Reservations on India Playing a Leading Role, C3S Paper No.757, 13 March.&#13;
Richardson, Michael (2005), “Australia-Southeast Asia relations and the East Asian Summit,” Australian Journal of International Affairs, 59 (3), September, pp. 351-65.&#13;
Severino, Rodolfo C. (2011), ASEAN Regional Forum expected to take up vital regional issues, at (Accessed 18 September 2011).&#13;
Singh, Daljit (2011), South China Sea developments at the ASEAN Regional Forum, at (Accessed 27 September 2011).&#13;
Tan, See Seng (2011), ASEAN Regional Forum at 18: Dealing with Regional Flashpoints, at asean-regional-forum-at-18-dealing-with-regional-flashpoints&gt; (Accessed 25 Sepember 2011).&#13;
Terada, Takashi (2011), and;#39;ASEAN’s talk shop function and US engagement,’ at (Accessed 26 September 2011).&#13;
Yagama Reddy, Y. (2004), “Geographical Causation in Southeast Asian History,” Journal of Contemporary Asia and Europe, Vol.1, No.2, July-December, pp. 81-97.&#13;
Yagama Reddy, Y. (2005), “The Fossilized Indian Culture in Toponyms and the Enigmatic Etymology of the Term: Southeast Asia,” The Asianists’ Asia (Paris), Volume IV, spring.&#13;
Yeo, Lay Hwee, (2005), Realism and Reactive Regionalism: Where Is East Asian Regionalism Heading? UNISCI Papers, Singapore Institute of International Affairs, Singapore, May.&#13;
Wulf, H. (2009), “The Role of Regional Organizations in Conflict Prevention and Resolution,” in H. Wulf (ed.), Still Under Construction: Regional Organisationsand;#39; Capacities for Conflict Prevention, INEF Report, no. 97, Institute for Development and Peace, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, pp. 5-19.</References>