FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2093662705> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2093662705 endingPage "145" @default.
• W2093662705 startingPage "123" @default.
• W2093662705 abstract "Introduction This article uses the term institution as defined by James G. March and Johan P. Olsen: a general way, an 'institution' can be viewed as a relatively stable collection of practices and rules defining appropriate behaviour for specific groups of actors in specific situations. (March and Olsen 1998, p. 948). Against this backdrop, security institutions are institutions that have an impact on the special field of security (Keck 1997, p. 35). Haftendorn (1997, p. 16) points out the following impacts that make security institutions relevant: * Like all institutions security institutions have the general function of influencing the action of their members towards continuing cooperation by installing accepted rules of behaviour despite competing interests. * In addition, security institutions have the specific function of facilitating cooperation among their members in the provision of security, that is, territorial integrity, political self-determination and economic well-being, against any military threat. Applying these conditions the ARF, we will examine its suitability foster regional security cooperation determine its relevance. According Haftendorn, national security is defined in the dimensions of territory, sovereignty and economy. The explicit notion of military threat as the main danger national security is very important because it rules out the far broader notion of comprehensive security (Dewitt 1994, p. 9), whose operationalization lies outside the scope of this article. As any institution will only be relevant if it does not harm the core interests of its member-states too much in an overall cost-benefit calculation, (1) this analysis of the relevance of the ARF first has examine whether the interests of its central members are opposed the ARF's agenda and raison d'etre. The three most powerful national actors (United States, People's Republic of China, and Japan) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) all have an interest in supporting the ARF. Because both China and the ASEAN states fear that foreign investment might shy away from their economies if there is regional instability, they favour an environment that is as peaceful and calculable as possible. Furthermore, China has participate in the ARF because it cannot risk confirming the anxieties of its neighbours, who might gang up in a regional institution against the country (Leifer 1996, p. 29; Foot 1998, p. 439; Umbach 2002, p. 254). China hoped overcome its international isolation after 1989 by joining international fora like the ARF (Johnston 1999, p. 296). For Japan the ARF is a possible way to deepen its political relationship with ASEAN [...] and solidify its strategic position toward China. Such a strategy is an insurance policy, supplementary the U.S.-Japanese alliance, in case China changes into an actual adversary (Kawasaki 1997, p. 490). Second, a multilateral framework is the sole possibility for Japan gain more political leverage in East Asia as its militant past still limits Japan's room for manoeuvre. Third, it is in Japan's interest have a multilateral structure in place address the Korean and the Taiwan conflicts in its vicinity. The United States was willing embrace the forum as soon as it became clear that the ARF would not affect its close alliances with South Korea and Japan (Wanandi 1998, p. 59). To integrate these two key allies into a common cooperative framework was a major incentive for the United States support the ARF (Leifer 1996, p. 28). Both do not have a habit of easy cooperation due their past conflicts and existing territorial disputes. Furthermore, the ARF was seen as a good way ease the worries of many governments in the region that the United States would withdraw troops (Takur 1998, p. 12) and therefore increase the strategic standing of China in the region (Gob and Acharya 2003, p. …" @default.
• W2093662705 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2093662705 creator A5042218001 @default.
• W2093662705 date "2005-04-01" @default.
• W2093662705 modified "2023-10-03" @default.
• W2093662705 title "The Relevance of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) for Regional Security in the Asia‑ Pacific" @default.
• W2093662705 cites W187147491 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W1975337012 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W1978918752 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2000166927 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2011105761 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2026637686 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2043234688 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2108935876 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2143283546 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W2484647534 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W4242536418 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W4249697083 @default.
• W2093662705 cites W4249795321 @default.
• W2093662705 doi "https://doi.org/10.1355/cs27-1g" @default.
• W2093662705 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2093662705 type Work @default.
• W2093662705 sameAs 2093662705 @default.
• W2093662705 citedByCount "46" @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052012 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052013 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052014 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052016 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052017 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052019 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052021 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052022 @default.
• W2093662705 countsByYear W20936627052023 @default.
• W2093662705 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2093662705 hasAuthorship W2093662705A5042218001 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C148383697 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C155202549 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C158154518 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConcept C3018858268 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C144133560 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C148383697 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C155202549 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C158154518 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C17744445 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C199539241 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C205649164 @default.
• W2093662705 hasConceptScore W2093662705C3018858268 @default.
• W2093662705 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2093662705 hasLocation W20936627051 @default.
• W2093662705 hasOpenAccess W2093662705 @default.
• W2093662705 hasPrimaryLocation W20936627051 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W1792656587 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2056764773 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2121631638 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2369051429 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2792950971 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W3145621851 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W3150165923 @default.
• W2093662705 hasRelatedWork W572108291 @default.
• W2093662705 hasVolume "27" @default.
• W2093662705 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2093662705 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2093662705 magId "2093662705" @default.
• W2093662705 workType "article" @default.