The establishment of the ASEAN Political and Security (APSC) in 2015 mimics the notion of a security community where member states are imbued with deep habits of cooperation, mutual trust, a sense of ‘we-feeling’ and the ability to manage security problems together with no prospects of any member going to war with another. But does a security community provide sufficient foundation for security governance in Southeast Asia? The idea of security governance, defined as a set of processes and arrangements carried out by a range of state and non-state actors across multiple levels from the local to the international that are aimed at defining and managing security challenges, requires a movement beyond state-centric approaches to one that is more participatory and inclusive. Despite the APSC’s people-centred rhetoric, there are inherent tensions in security practices in ASEAN as states hold on to the principles of non-interference and state sovereignty, while having to respond effectively to address a host of non-traditional threats. These tensions have led to the emergence of multiple sites of governance that are changing the nature of security governance in the region. In analysing the cases of civilian protection in times of humanitarian crises and forced migration, the paper argues that multiple sites of governance point to the need to reassess the APSC as a mechanism for security governance and explore the idea of having fragmented but more inclusive and participatory security communities that work together towards the shared goal of more secure region.

中文翻译：

---

安全治理和东盟的政治安全共同体：支离破碎但包容各方的安全共同体？

2015年成立的东盟政治与安全（APSC）模仿了一个安全社区的概念，在该社区中，成员国具有深厚的合作习惯，相互信任，“我们的感觉”以及共同管理安全问题的能力没有任何成员会与其他人交战的前景。但是，安全社区是否为东南亚的安全治理提供了足够的基础？安全治理的概念被定义为由一系列国家和非国家行为者从本地到国际的多个层次上进行的一系列过程和安排，旨在定义和管理安全挑战，它需要超越国家以中心为中心的方法，使之更具参与性和包容性。尽管APSC以人为本，当国家坚持不干涉和国家主权的原则时，东盟在安全实践中存在固有的紧张关系，同时必须有效应对以应对一系列非传统威胁。这些紧张关系导致出现了多个治理场所，这些场所正在改变该地区安全治理的性质。在分析人道主义危机和强迫迁徙时期的平民保护案件时，该论文认为，多个治理场所都需要重新评估APSC作为安全治理机制，并探索分散但更具包容性和参与性的想法共同致力于实现更安全区域的共同目标的安全社区。同时必须做出有效反应以应对许多非传统威胁。这些紧张关系导致出现了多个治理场所，这些场所正在改变该地区安全治理的性质。在分析人道主义危机和强迫迁徙时期的平民保护案件时，该论文认为，多个治理场所都需要重新评估APSC作为安全治理机制，并探索分散但更具包容性和参与性的想法共同致力于实现更安全区域的共同目标的安全社区。同时必须做出有效反应以应对许多非传统威胁。这些紧张关系导致出现了多个治理场所，这些场所正在改变该地区安全治理的性质。在分析人道主义危机和强迫迁徙时期的平民保护案件时，该论文认为，多个治理场所都需要重新评估APSC作为安全治理机制，并探索分散但更具包容性和参与性的想法共同致力于实现更安全区域的共同目标的安全社区。