Neo-Functionalist Regional Integration Theory Put to Test in Asia: New Regionalism around India and ASEAN.

• Author: Dedeoglu, Beril

Introduction and Initial Questions

Regional integration studies have emerged in order to understand and analyze the burgeoning European integration in the wake of the Second World War. To explain why and how European integration unfolded, among other regional integration theories, the neo-functionalist model developed mainly by Ernest B. Haas has proven particularly useful. Neo-functionalism has systematically analyzed the evolution of European integration since the 1960s. While doing so, neo-functionalists have also asked whether or not this model could be put in motion elsewhere than the European context. (2)

Neo-functionalism is sometimes considered "obsolete" in the European Union context, because of the ever-enlarging and deepening integration that has taken place there. (3) Still, it is a dynamic and evolutive model, capable of providing a useful tool in order to analyze and compare regional integration attempts and initiatives.

The neo-functionalist model, which prioritizes common actions and concrete achievements (4) among state actors, preferably neighboring ones (5) that are willing to create an integrated entity, is based on "common solidarity" among those states. Members of such an integration movement must create common institutions toward which they are supposed to transfer progressively more competence. The neo-functionalists suggest that a will of cooperation between states or governments will not suffice to realize the integration, as the nations' political and economic elites must encourage the rapprochement at the societal level as well, bearing in mind that, in a democratic environment, citizens must support the integration effort.

Neo-functionalism was developed by Ernst B. Haas, in the line of David Mitrany's functionalist approach, and subsequently improved by Leon Lindberg and Joseph Nye. (6) The theory places major emphasis on the role of the supranational organizations established to provide the dynamic for further integration. Neo-functionalism suggests that the direction and extent of the integration cannot be known or programmed in advance. Rather, a complex mechanism of spill-over makes sure that states progressively assign more supranational responsibility to the existing organization. (7) In fact, the entire logic of the neo-functionalist model is based on the spill-over effect.

The emergent integration will not be built from scratch instantly, according to a pre-meditated and detailed timetable. On the contrary, modest achievements are supposed to encourage progressively more integration, the economic rapprochement encouraging a political rapprochement and all this process creating the need for a flourishing institutionalization, (8) i.e. a virtuous circle leading to full integration in all domains, even perhaps reaching the stage of a federation. Even though this theory may be seen as too deterministic, one must keep in mind that the neo-functionalist model is based on the historical evolution of the European Union.

By devolving more authority to the supranational organizations they have created, states make sure that their citizens will begin shifting more and more of their expectations to the "union." The economic and social integration will then "spillover" into political integration. The neo-functionalist approach identifies a number of causal factors that interact and create an integration stimulus between nation-states: growing economic interdependence between involved nations, organizational capacity to resolve regional disputes and the capacity to build an international legal regime through commonly accepted judicial bodies, supranational market rules that replace national regulatory regimes, mutual perceptions between societies and the development of common political and social values. (9) The size of the populations, the level of economic transactions and the economy of scale that those generate as well as complementarity of political and economic elites, are also among the important conditions. (10) Moreover, nations involved in regional integration must accept the transferring of their loyalty from their own national government to the newly created supranational bodies. Henceforth, these institutions must enjoy some sort of autonomy and legitimacy because, within those institutions, nations will decide on their common future. It is obvious that in order to enjoy this level of legitimacy, people must feel they are represented in those bodies and must accept, in principle, to have a common destiny, for mutual benefits and in order to preserve themselves from common economic and political threats.

The neo-functionalists believe that integration is a continuous process, thus they study the favorable initial conditions allowing an integration movement to start. Therefore, when studying an integration effort in other parts of the world, for instance in Southeast Asia or the Asian continent as a whole, it may be useful to start by assessing whether similar conditions, to those in Western Europe at the beginning of the European integration movement, exist. If the common feeling for a shared future and legitimacy is lacking, the process may be blocked or encapsulated, the European Unions multiple institutional crises being good examples of these challenges. The progress and the success of the political integration depend on the success of the economic integration and the willingness of -supposedly rational--political elites in persuading their nations to move forward. (11) It is worth remembering that economic integration will undoubtedly be more successful in the case of already developed countries; while in Southeast Asia, or in Asia as a whole, one is talking also about developing countries which haven't yet resolved many of their underdevelopment-related problems.

The neo-functionalist theory is a dynamic and predictive model, which has been adapted and modified in different periods of the European integration. Its flexibility compared to other integration theories is the reason why it is a useful tool and a relevant method in assessing the burgeoning integration movements in other geographies. (12) Yet its application elsewhere remains problematic because of the important number of factors involved in the process.

In the post-Cold War period, the number of regional integration movements and cooperation initiatives has multiplied. The vast and vibrant Asian continent offers, in this context, possible cases for the studies of regional integration. There already exists a promising and burgeoning- regional integration movement, namely the Association of South Asian Nations (ASEAN). Established in 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, ASEAN currently brings together all ten states of the Southeast Asia region, as the organization's membership has expanded to include Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. As a result, ASEAN brings together not only the Asian continent's several important economic and political players, but also some others who are still struggling with underdevelopment issues thereby pushing forward its integration. Therefore, this article will try to test whether the neo-functionalist model of integration, developed regarding the European integration context may be valid in Southeast Asia, too. The purpose is not to predict whether or not ASEAN will one day become a union like the EU, but to see what may be the conditions that will allow it to enhance its integration and whether India's contribution, in one way or another, may play a positive role in this process, despite their distant geographic location.

It is well known that ASEAN has two economic and political giants at its doorsteps, namely China, one of the two biggest economies in the world with the United States; and India, one of the most prominent countries amongst the emerging economies. In fact, India has been showing an interest in reinforcing ties with ASEAN since the 1990s, not only with its members individually, but also with the organization, as an entity. The rapprochement between these two players, ASEAN and India, has the potential to impact Asia's, and therefore, the entire international system's economic and political evolution. Consequently, this article is focusing on India and ASEAN, as the analysis will address the possible consequences of this rapprochement over the vast surrounding region.

In 1992 India, as part of its economic liberalization policy, launched in the first half of the 1990s in order to heal the effects of the financial crisis it was subjected to, decided to develop its relations with ASEAN. Diplomatic relations have been established between the two sides in this period. As for the European Union, the fact that ASEAN, as a regional body, has become a legitimate diplomatic interlocutor of nation-states is noteworthy.

India's interest to its economic environment was not limited to ASEAN, as New Delhi had diverging attempts toward its immediate neighbors, too--with contradictory outcomes. Because of huge economic disparities and complicated historical baggage, India's attempts for deepening economic and political relations with its neighbors are, from time to time, perceived as "expansionist" behavior, limiting its success. On the contrary, the rapprochement between India and ASEAN doesn't provoke the same perception amongst the players involved, even though India and ASEAN are far apart in terms of international relations, norms and practices. Nevertheless, some parallels may be drawn between the role the Soviet threat played at the beginning of the European integration under the Cold War conditions and the growing threat perception emanating from China's actions in South-East Asia, including the territorial conflicts in the South China Sea. Therefore, in order to balance China's growing presence in the region, India may appear as a counterbalance, or at best, a less threatening power, with which developing...