五十嵐 誠一

This paper aims to provide a critical reflection on existing security studies in Northeast Asia, which is dominated by the state-centric and status-quo theory and approach, and explore the new approaches, prescriptions, and landscapes toward improving the regional security order; in doing so, the paper attempts to focus on the activities and ideas of transnational civil society (TCS) from the perspective of critical international relations theory. The TCS actor examined by the paper is the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict Northeast Asia (GPPAC NEA), which was formed in February 2004 by the nongovernmental organizations of Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Mongolia, and Russia. Since its inception, GPPAC NEA has been vigorously engaged in promoting the idea of conflict prevention and thereby in transforming the regional security order in Northeast Asia. This paper adopts transnational framing, which has been elaborated in the TCS research, as an analytical concept to verify the activities of GPPAC NEA. Overall, this paper will reveal the true picture of GPPAC NEA, still largely unexplored, while through the critical thinking backed by GPPAC NEA's practices, it will find ways to improve the gloomy security order and extract a theoretical implication that urges the redefinition of security as well as the reflection of state-centric security studies.

The regional order in Southeast Asia has undergone a rapid change in the context of the end of the Cold War and the spread of economic globalization. The mainstream theories such as neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and constructivism have offered competing explanations of this transformation. However, recently, a new phenomenon that cannot be grasped by these state-centric theories has arisen&mdash;the movement toward constructing a regional order from below by transnational civil society actors.<br>As ASEAN made a full-fledged start in constructing the ASEAN Community after the late 1990s, the transnational civil society actors began to engage in its decision-making process. Such engagements were specifically observed in the process of drafting the ASEAN Charter starting from 2006. Even after the establishment of the charter, these actors continue to remain involved in the panel and committee related to the framework of the ASEAN Community.<br>This article attempts to empirically analyze the activities of such transnational civil society actors, and to explore the scope and limits of alternative regionalism advocated by them. Furthermore, it seeks to examine the embryonic change toward the establishment of a new regional order in Southeast Asia from the bottom-up perspective.<br>Section I focuses on a theoretical analysis. After an overview of the New Regional Approach, which is one of the critical international theories and has a vested interest in civil society, it develops a theoretical perspective on transnational civil society in the context of regionalization. Using such a perspective, it also extracts the characteristics of new regionalism in Southeast Asia. Section II describes the basic features of transnational civil society actors, and explores the configuration of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic actors in transnational public space. By focusing on the process of drafting the ASEAN Charter, Section III analyzes the alternative regionalism advocated by the transnational civil society actors. Section IV highlights the two issues that these actors have given special emphasis to after the establishment of the ASEAN Charter: the terms of reference of the human rights body and the rights of migrant workers.<br>In conclusion, the article proves that by engaging with transnational civil society actors, ASEAN is gradually moving from an &ldquo;elite club&rdquo; to a peoplecentered organization, but given the predominance of neoliberal discourse, alternative regionalism has not enough led to the realization. As regarding the establishment of a new regional order, although the Westphalian system has not yet dissolved, as symbolized by the &ldquo;ASEAN way&rdquo; that the nationstates still adhere to, the transnational public sphere has been more rapidly expanded by transnational civil society actors. Furthermore, they have attempted to transform the &ldquo;ASEAN way&rdquo; by tackling with issues such as human rights. Such issue-oriented movement would give some impetus to the realization of a post-Westphalian system.

Electoral governance that secures the implementation of free and fair elections has been largely sustained by nonpartisan civic organizations in the Philippines. However, in recent years, the electoral integrity that they have eagerly protected has been increasingly questioned, which has jeopardized democratic consolidation. In this situation, their activities need to be examined in detail in terms of democratic consolidation. By analyzing their major activities related to electoral governance, this article will prove that they have powerfully supported electoral governance and contributed to maintaining a certain level of electoral integrity. However, given the unfilled gap between democratic institutions and practices, the excessive dependence of electoral governance on civic organizations contains the potential risk of jeopardizing the integrity of elections due to the hegemonic interests of the dominant bloc supporting the organizations, and can thereby damage democratic consolidation. Nonetheless, the activities of these organizations will probably continue to be indispensable, because the Commission on Elections alone cannot protect free and fair elections, and their disappearance would therefore threaten democratic consolidation. This is a dilemma of democratic consolidation faced by the Philippines.

Electoral governance that secures the implementation of free and fair elections has been largely sustained by nonpartisan civic organizations. However, in recent years, the electoral integrity that they have eagerly protected has been increasingly questioned. Given such circumstances, their activities need to be examined in detail in terms of democratic consolidation. By analyzing the major activities of organizations such as NAMFREL, PPCRV, and NASSA, this article argues that such organizations have contributed to improving electoral governance while opening themselves at the same time to charges of partisanship and advancing their own political agenda. Nonetheless, their activities will continue to be indispensable because the COMELEC alone connot ensure free and fair elections. This is one problem of democratic consolidation faced by the Philippines.

論文

論文

論文