Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- List of Abbreviations
- List of Tables
- 1 Introduction: Region, Regionalism and Regional Identity in the Making of Southeast Asia
- 2 Imagined Communities and Socially Constructed Regions
- 3 Imagining Southeast Asia
- 4 Nationalism, Regionalism and the Cold War Order
- 5 The Evolution of Regional Organization
- 6 Southeast Asia Divided: Polarization and Reconciliation
- 7 Constructing “One Southeast Asia”
- 8 Globalization and the Crisis of Regional Identity
- 9 Whither Southeast Asia?
- Bibliography
- Index
- Contributors
4 - Nationalism, Regionalism and the Cold War Order
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2015
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- List of Abbreviations
- List of Tables
- 1 Introduction: Region, Regionalism and Regional Identity in the Making of Southeast Asia
- 2 Imagined Communities and Socially Constructed Regions
- 3 Imagining Southeast Asia
- 4 Nationalism, Regionalism and the Cold War Order
- 5 The Evolution of Regional Organization
- 6 Southeast Asia Divided: Polarization and Reconciliation
- 7 Constructing “One Southeast Asia”
- 8 Globalization and the Crisis of Regional Identity
- 9 Whither Southeast Asia?
- Bibliography
- Index
- Contributors
Summary
The aftermath of World War II was a period of profound change in Southeast Asia. The main historical forces shaping Southeast Asia's destiny were nationalism and decolonization, and the struggle of the newly independent states to create stable political systems and viable national economies. In the international arena, Southeast Asia became progressively drawn into the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. A key feature of this period was the close nexus between domestic politics (including nationalism, national integration and democracy), prospects for regionalism and international relations. The Cold War helped to polarize the region, and influenced the domestic politics of Southeast Asian states. It contributed to the rise of authoritarianism in the non-communist states of Southeast Asia. At the same time, domestic problems, including weak national integration and regime survival concerns, had major consequences for the foreign policy orientation of the non-communist Southeast Asian states, especially their attitude toward regionalism. The early post-war period saw the first articulation of ideas about regional unity by Southeast Asia's nationalist leaders. Yet most of these were not concerned with a Southeast Asian identity, but instead focused on larger pan-Asian or Afro-Asian unity. And a range of domestic and international factors ensured the nonfulfilment of these aspirations.
The Nationalist Vision of Regionalism
In her diplomatic history of post-war Southeast Asia, C.M. Turnbull points out that “the two most important factors affecting regionalism and international relations in the immediate postwar years were the decolonization process itself, and the problems of creating national identity within the (often artificial) former colonial boundaries.” Nationalism was the major political force in Southeast Asia during the first two decades of the post-war era. But it had a mixed impact on regionalism. On the one hand, Southeast Asian nationalists recognized regionalism as an inevitable trend; something that was “bound to come” as a way of undoing the artificial divisions and separations among Southeast Asian peoples and territories brought about by colonial rule. Nationalist leaders such as Aung San of Myanmar and Elpidio Quirino of the Philippines were among the first people to lament that Southeast Asian countries maintained much closer economic, cultural and political links with their metropolitan powers than with each other.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Making of Southeast AsiaInternational Relations of a Region, pp. 105 - 148Publisher: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak InstitutePrint publication year: 2012