Administration needs its time, but that is no reason to bother about anything, the important news is in the line above and the result is also good, so now I can lean back and enjoy it, in the meantime I will apply for jobs and wait for the graduation ceremony (still not sure if I can make it).

For all of you who are interested, my Master disseratation is also available now: Study & Research

I’m sorry that I haven’t kept you more up-to-date, but the dissertation craziness kept me busy, it’s been less a joiurney then expected at least on the blog. Overall it was very enriching and gave me a lot of insights on a topic and areas of study I haven’t been so familiar until now.

I will post another short notice when I put the dissertation online, but I don’t expect that to be before the beginning of November.

Thus far I want to give an update about the current state of my dissertation. I’m done with my theoretical framework and the introduction, I still need to introduce the GMS more in detail which will be part of this afternoons work.

The introduction is mainly based on a historical review of the regions past, whereas the theoretical framework really takes a look at theoratical approaches. Therefore I introduce the main IR theories and give some information about cooperation and integration, before I describe the concept of a ‘Security Community’. The literature I’ve used therefore is all mentioned in the posts before, and even for the section where I explain leadership I only have to add on major source I haven’t blogged about yet.

Leadership is a very intersting topic, and especially regional leadership. There is not too much out there about the topic or put it that way, it is very hidden. Most intersting about leadership is from my perspective the termonolgy, because the line between hegemonic leader, leadership, co-operative hegemon are very thin. I’ve came up with an intersting setting, starting off with the benefits for a state or a group of states to be lead, this is followed by definition of terms where I hopefully succeded in giving the ‘traditional terms’ a modern twist before I finally end up to explain why it is beneficial for a leader to be part of a instituionalised setup.

Thus far, I’m at the point where I finished my ‘Theoretical Framework’, which should point to the fact, that I would like to analyse the process. And thereby also considerate to which extend leadership has an impact on the development of the GMS Region and the relationship among the member states.

Destradi, S. (2008). Empire, Hegemony, and Leadership: Developing a Research Framework for the Study of Regional Powers. GIGA Working Papers, No. 79.

“Even constructivism is often viewed as a theory of global peace and harmony, but it should, and can, explain both cooperation and conflict” (Acharya, 2009, p. 39)

Acharya, A. (2009). ‘Constructing a security community in southeast Asia : ASEAN and the problem of regional order’ (2nd Ed.), Routledge, London.

I had a good time, and also made us of the oppertunity to meet scholars and researchers to support my MA Dissertation. Now, I’m in Germany and from tomorrow on I gonna continue the work on my dissertation.

So there is more to come …

The Introduction is done & I’ve started off with the theoretical framework. I’m still about to develop my knowledge on Security Communities, but reading Acharya was therefore very useful. But so far I have summarised the IR theories and explained why I opted for an constructivist approach. There is still a lot of work ahead, but after spending some time with the topic it’s great to see how I have developed an understanding for it.

The next weeks will be quite busy, busy with travelling, but therebye I will meet people for my research, stop by libraries and see how I could best advance my research

“China, Japan and Leadership in East Asia” (Dent, 2008) – at special interest for me are Chapter 1 & 13:

Ch1: “What region to lead? Developments in East Asian regionalism and question of regional leadership” (Dent)

Ch13: “Regional leadership in East Asia: towards new analytical approaches” (Dent)

Both give an theoretical insight, and I guess that is what I was looking for

Resources:

Dent, C. (2008) Ed., ‘China, Japan and Leadership in East Asia’. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Where I am?

I have read a lot about the Security Concept of Karl W. Deutsch and now it is time to put it on the paper.
I wrote the general introduction about International Relations Theory and the part which follows, it covers cooperation, integration, regionalisation and regionalism.

Where I need to get?

I need to gather information about the historical context of mainland Southeast Asia, as I am aiming to link these days happenings to the past where trade from China down to Bangkok on the “road” was part of day to day life.
I need to develop my thoughts on regional leadership.

… if I would get all of this done, till next week Friday, that would be really amazing!

This morning I went to get me “Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia” written by Acharya (2009), which I got out to develop a better understanding of the whole concept in light of ASEAN. While looking through the shelf, I found a little treasure (or at least I expect it to be one), “The Asia-Pacific Security Lexicon” (Capie & Evans, 2002), it has not only a chapter covering my topic but also give loads of other useful definitions for my work. I might buy the 2nd edition, it seems to be a really good handbook for the weeks ahead.

Resources:

Acharya, A. (2009). ‘Constructing a security community in southeast Asia : ASEAN and the problem of regional order’ (2nd Ed.), Routledge, London.

Capie, D. & Evans, P. (2002). ‘The Asia-Pacific Security Lexicon’, ISEAS, Singapore.