Abstract:While the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) may be seen as an A SEAN attempt to expand to the wider region its approach to co-operative security, its establishment also involved power-balancing considerations. The Forum was created with the denial of hegemony in mind but not in a conventional sense. In deed, the constraining of power was expected to be dependent on political rather than military means. The ARF was conceived as an instrument for ensuring a continued American involvement in the region and to encourage China in the practice of good international behaviour. Beyond the founding moments of the ARF, the role of the balance of power factor has carried over to the working of the institution. Significantly, China has perceived the Forum as a vehicle for promoting multipolarity in the Asia-Pacific to counter America's unipolar status in the post-Cold War world. Introduction This article attempts to analyse the influence of the balance of power factor on the formation and working of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). The balance of power factor within co-operative security involves a denial of intramural hegemony. This consideration is intended to contain a disposition to hegemony on the part of a rising power by integrating it within a rule-based arrangement that provides sufficient incentive to constrain hegernonic ambitions. It will be claimed that the ARF was conceived as an instrument for ensuring a continued U.S. involvement in East Asia, and for including the People's Republic of China (PRC) in a rule-based arrangement to encourage it in the practice of good international behaviour. The relevance of the balance of power factor will also be examined through the workings of the ARF and the existence among some participants of alternative views on the role of the institution. This article consists of three sections. The first briefly introduces an understanding of the balance of power factor within co-operative security. The second section discusses the role of the balance of power factor in the formation of the ARF, noting, in particular, the chairman's statement at the ASEAN-PMC Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) in May 1993. Beyond the founding moments of the ARF, it is considered how the role of the balance of power factor has carried over to the workings of the institution. It is suggested that the ARF may have failed as an instrument for constraining China in a corresponding way to ASEAN's degree of success with Indonesia. Finally, attention is given to the existence of different perceptions within the framework of the ARF, and specifically to China's preference for multipolarity in the Asia-Pacific that may be defined with particular reference to the United States. The Balance of Power Factor within Co-operative Security Beyond its conventional understanding, the balance of power may also be interpreted in political terms. This is based on the premise that potential hegemonic dispositions can be restrained through political and institutional means and without the use of war, the traditional instrument of the balance. Attention needs to be given to the differences between balance of power in its conventional interpretation and practice and the balance of power factor within co-operative security arrangements. This factor may be defined as the disposition to promote countervailing arrangements to deny hegemony within co-operative security even if devoid of direct military content. The necessity to focus on the constraining of power through political channels results from the fact that co-operative security arrangements remain diplomatic associations lacking any form of common military power. As a result, the method by which power is constrained within co-operative security distinguishes the balance of power factor from a more c onventional application of the concept. The balance of power factor within co-operative security needs to be identified in the context of norms and principles promoted by an associative arrangement. …

Boundary Work, Overlapping Identities, and Liminality in Communities of Practice: Diplomacy within and beyond ASEAN

The Polysemy of Security Community-Building: Toward a “People-Centered” Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)?

Applied linguistics communities of practice: Improving the research-practice relationship

Cultural Diplomacy and Co-operation in ASEAN: The Role of Arts and Culture Festivals

Issue-Based Cooperation on Conflict Resolution in the South China Sea: Exploring Roles for ASEAN Beyond the Code of Conduct 1

Differential Interaction: Development of Cross-border Data Flow Governance Mechanisms In Asean

A new perspective on the work of boundary organisations: Bridging knowledge between marine conservation actors in Pacific Small Island Developing States

ASEAN, COVID-19 and Myanmar crisis: Dealing with critical juncture

The intimacies of cultural studies and area studies: The case of Southeast Asia

Human Mobility and Dismantling Cultural Dominance

A journey through communities of practice: How and why members move from the periphery to the core

Connectivity and Order: an Analytical Framework

Identity dynamics in international collaborations

Questioning The Existence Of Asean Political Security Community In South China Sea Conflict

Multilateralism and East Asian transitions: the English School, diplomacy, and a networking regional order

ASEAN and the Regime Complex for Digital Trade in the Asia-Pacific

ASEAN as network governance: An alternative lens to evaluate policymaking and performance

Global research collaboration: Networks and partners in South East Asia

Challenges to ASEAN centrality and hedging in connectivity governance—regional and national pressure points

The Influence of the Balance of Power Factor within the ASEAN Regional Forum

Border praxis: Negotiating and performing ‘Hong Kongeseness’ and ‘Taiwaneseness’ in contemporary, political ‘Chinese’ art practices