Process Of Regionalization And Regionalism

Regionalism has been a significant phenomenon in post-Second World War international relations. 1950s and 1960s witnessed the rise of many regional groups in different parts of the world – the European Economic Community in Western Europe, the Organization of African Unity in Africa, the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries in the Middle-East, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Southeast Asia, to name a few. The success of the EEC among these was the most spectacular, but the same was not repeated in other parts of the world. By 1980, many of these regional organisations had been weakened and some had even ceased to exist. However, regionalism received a renewed impetus after the end of the Cold War and with the push

The question whether the state is – and how long will it continue to be – the primary organizing unit of international system, is being debated much more seriously today than ever before. Since the mid and late 1980’s, regionalization began to re-appear in different parts of the world. This process coincided with the rise of globalization. The two processes, thus, need to be explained and analysed in the context of each other. Both globalization and regionalization lead to integration; but the two operate at different levels and do not necessarily complement nor contradict each other. The process of regionalization began in Southeast Asia since the 1960s. This led to the creation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in

The Cold War and the struggles for independence helped to polarize the region, and influenced the domestic politics of Southeast Asian states. Actually, the post-colonial era coincided with and was affected deeply by the Cold War and the determination of the United States to contain international communism. The decolonization process in Southeast Asia was marked by the increase of nationalism as the major political force in Southeast Asia during the first two decades of the post-war era. With the departure of the colonial powers from the region, the new governments of the Southeast Asia faced a serious challenge in ensuring domestic stability and regime legitimacy. Significant differences marked the development policies of Southeast Asian states in the post-colonial era. One area of divergence was the openness to the global economy. Until that moment Singapore was the most open and was the first to develop export-oriented industrialization ( EOI) (Acharya, Development, Legitimacy and Regional (Dis) order, 2012) None of the other Southeast Asian countries adopted Singapore 's approach. Most of the countries focused on primary production, with its dependence on two major exports of rubber and tin continuing for two decades after World War II. Moreover, Southeast Asian governments adopted different attitudes towards property rights. As a result, the differing economic philosophies of the Southeast