Page 35 - AEI Insights 2018 Vol 4 Issue 1

Azman and Kumar, 2018

responses to the SCS dispute that are depending on the weight of its economic, social and
political-security benediction.

Research Background

The approach proposes that principled-pragmatism underpin two basic commitments which are
principled; "the rule of law or legal orientation towards the shared local experience that is basic
and necessary to the societal knowledge and action" (Snyder and Vinjamuri 2012:434). The
growing shift towards this approach can be seen through ASEAN procedural operation that is
becoming a more rule-based institution through the enforcement of ASEAN Charter in 2008
as well as the establishment of the current Blueprint for the three ASEAN core pillars.
While pragmatism, as understood from the political studies accentuates the credit system of
which "thoughts and actions should be readjusted accordingly just as our interaction with the
environment is impending and unavoidable" (James in Kloppenberg 1996:102). It is called as
being pragmatic when the "belief can be secured or even protected, in response to the
interference of the world" (Went 1994:384). For ASEAN to be more pragmatic it needs to be
using the means of multilateral networks to improve the bargaining chip when dealing with
one another and more critically, the Great Power.

In this context, by ASEAN being principled-pragmatic, the Association is challenging the tacit
presupposition of much of the critics by showing "the accurate representation of reality, rather
than "what is better for us to believe" which has been the automatic and empty excuses made
by the member-states when it comes to consolidating their interests (Tavits 2007:154). It is
important for ASEAN to make a sharp distinction between being principled-what is contributed
by ASEAN for regional security and being pragmatic- what is "decided and given" internally
and externally.

These insights lead us to further reflect on ASEAN's founding commitment on national
resilience in its economic and social factors to maintain the regional sovereignty, given the fact
that ASEAN itself is no stranger to confrontation and wars. Therefore, as understood in
ASEAN context, ASEAN Way tries to balance its normative and rule-based approaches
underlying the primary objective of developing the state resilience (Ba 2012:125, Acharya
2013:69).

Regarding its relation to the principles of ASEAN Way, principled-pragmatism is a method for
implementing policy and highly familiar within the realist or liberal strategists to find is a
middle way for addressing foreign policy and security. In this sense, principled-pragmatism
cannot be called a theory as it focuses on the process, the dynamics of internal change, rather
than ultimate objective. It is also worth mentioning that principled-pragmatism is by no means
the ultimate way for ASEAN to pursue its objective but rather using its limited material
resources to reconcile on a more justified, meaningful interactions.

In a much practical sense, principled-pragmatism may help ASEAN to decide its foreign policy
whether to balance, bandwagon or hedging in response to China and other major powers in the
South China Sea, taking into account the degree of threat perception and economic prospect in
each relationship. For this reason, the way ASEAN member state is being principled-pragmatic
in choosing their strategies in SCS relies on its expectation in regards to the extent of ‘cost' for
ASEAN and the extent of ‘benefit' for the great powers.
Principled-pragmatism is also realistic in the sense that it is not trying to apply a free security
concept- that ASEAN could be devoid of external enemies in such a critical case like SCS. It

35