Member-states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) support the norms of nuclear disarmament and nuclear security through diplomatic efforts at the global level and regional efforts to promote nuclear safety and security. This is demonstrated in how ASEAN helped push for negotiation of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and its eventual passage, as well as ongoing efforts to promote regional cooperation in advancing nuclear security and nuclear safety. Regional frameworks and mechanisms like the ASEAN Network of Regulatory Bodies on Atomic Energy (ASEANTOM), the ASEAN Regional Forum, and the East Asia Summit provide the platforms for ASEAN to advance its diplomacy in promoting the norms of nuclear governance.

East Asia has been dominated in theory and practice by state-centric policy considerations heavily influenced by the great powers. This perspective is threatened by the rise of non traditional security (NTS) challenges and undermined by great power irresponsibility. These challenges can also, however, represent avenues of opportunity for other actors. The central research question addressed by this article, therefore, is what role can and should be played by newly empowered or recognized actors in addressing NTS challenges, according to policy prescription from more reflectivist approaches to international relations theory? This article utilizes social constructivism and related perspectives to identify how regional middle powers and civil societies can be empowered as agents with a responsibility to innovate in the construction of institutions responsive to NTS challenges.

This study illustrates collaborative platforms and diversifying partnerships for South-South and triangular cooperation in development. The English School’s pluralism-solidarism spectrum is applied as a tool to explain transformative features of the changing international society in times of crisis. The study focuses on the intermediary pluralist-solidarism phase that shows dynamics of middle power coalitions using nation branding and collaborative governance as key strategies. The transitional phase is exemplified by two approaches. One is the bilateral approach to coalition shown through the case of China, whereas the other is the inclusivemultilateral approach demonstrated through the case of South Korea. Implications are given toward relatively loose networks that have the potential to evolve into platforms with institutional grounds, especially for middle powers seeking opportunities in the new normal.

This article examines the outcomes of collective forms of engagement in the ASEAN region. By examining how convening power in these south-south engagements has worked since the Bandung Conference, the paper reviews how the mode of consensus building adopted in 1955 has been channelled into regional cooperation. In particular, the paper considers the implications of these forms of cooperation for the consensus building that characterizes ASEAN today. The paper uses the processes evident in the ASEAN Development Outlook to set out the consequences of these findings for how the UN system can set out more effective criteria for global South cooperation. This has direct implications for institutional mechanisms for advancing capacity and expertise in new forms of cooperation between the global North and global South.

In light of recent efforts by the UN to more firmly embed SSC and TrC in all its institutions, this paper examines the challenges that lie ahead by first tracing the emergence of the terms SSC and TrC on a discursive level in the UN system. Second, it reflects theoretically on the concepts of solidarity and development to show that voices from the Global South are suggesting alternative understandings that may do more justice to the poor and disadvantaged. Third, it explores what can be learned from various interlinked health crises and the recent COVID-19 pandemic regarding the flaws of SSC and TrC. Fourth, it sketches a way forward by looking at ways in  which a more human rights based democratization of global health can be achieved.

Various parts of the United Nations (UN) system have been part of the definition and implementation of technical cooperation among developing countries (TCDC), South-South cooperation (SSC) and triangular cooperation (TrC) over the years since the Buenos Aires Plan of Action of 1978 (BAPA). This paper will take the view that there is a perception that South-South and triangular cooperation have not achieved their potential to be transformative because accompanying changes needed for the modalities have not been pursued fully and thus these development modalities seemingly remain largely cosmetic. To respond to this perception, the authors will review what was expected of the United Nations development systems (UNDS) from Bandung to Buenos Aires and what has been achieved since noting the constraints of lack of data and measurement.

United Nations (UN) entities have repeatedly been asked to mainstream their support for South-South and triangular cooperation (SSTC). However, there is hardly any systematic evidence on whether and how they have done so. This article contributes to addressing this gap. The analysis focuses on organizational efforts over the last two decades to integrate SSTC support into institutional processes across the UN development system. It centers around a scorecard of fifteen UN entities that maps the levels and contours of their organizational focus on SSTC. In light of a highly diverse SSTC support landscape and the complex political dynamics behind mainstreaming efforts, the article discusses the way ahead for UN engagement with SSTC, including the potentials and challenges of a continued focus on mainstreaming itself.

This special issue discusses, in-depth, the embedded conundrum of South-South and triangular cooperation (SSTC) whose frontiers are shifted from collaboration to contention within the United Nations (UN) development system and beyond. This introductory article provides the conceptual framework—the contentioncollaboration spectrum—that guides all the contributors and serves as the collective starting point for this project. The moving frontiers of SSTC reflect the shifting historic relationships between the global South and North as well as Southern partner countries. The framework enables the six articles of this special issue to investigate the paradoxical structure of contrasting dynamics of SSTC, which has always been exposed to historical transformations at multi-levels of analysis: global governance, regional engagements, middle power perspectives, and the UN development system and beyond.

Deforestation is a severe environmental problem in North Korea. Beginning in 2001, the government implemented ten-year reforestation projects with few positive outcomes. Inter-Korean forestry cooperation began in 1999. Local governments and NGOs were the main implementers of cooperative projects from South Korea. The two Koreas had also been seeking financial and technical support from international organizations. This study examines the cooperative networks between government agencies, NGOs, and international organizations and financing possibilities to identify the reasons why so little has been accomplished. It also provides a meaningful contribution to the understanding of comparative relationships among the stakeholders and practical recommendations to improve the effectiveness of cooperative forestry programs in North Korea.

This article examines Iran-Uzbekistan relations within the regional security context, and the new efforts undertaken in 2019 to solve the security problems via bilateral and regional multinational institutions. It argues that the aggravation of the existing security situation, including geopolitical tensions in the region, contributes to the consolidation of the Iran-Uzbekistan partnership. The anti-Iran measures facilitate the process of reintegrating the region along the historical lines as part of the response to the growing global challenges. There are signs of positive regional dynamics, which can further boost Iran-Uzbekistan cooperation, and presuppose future regional connectivity among all pacified neighbors.

This article examines the prospects for the realization of the agreement signed at the 2007 inter-Korean summit to transform the conflict-susceptible Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the West Sea into a border area where South and North Korea jointly promote peace and prosperity. To realize this agreement the two Koreas must integrate new ideas and plans by viewing the NLL as a space of common benefit rather than a line of military confrontation. The establishment of the West Sea Special Zone for Peace and cooperation focuses on security and economic issues. Implementation of the agreement requires particular attention to development of a comprehensive plan, including promotion of ecological, environmental, historical, and cultural assets, as well as inter-Korean fishery cooperation.

Distinguished colleagues from government, university, NGOs, and students; The Republic of Korea (South Korea) is a fitting host for this meeting on refugee rights, given the example it has shown by ratifying the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (the 1951 Refugee Convention) in 1992 and for enacting its amended Refugee Act just last month. In today’s global village, people are constantly leaving their homes in search of new opportunities. In public debates, however, the distinction between refugees and other people on the move is often blurred. It is important to remember that refugees have a distinct legal status. Refugees are people who have been forced to leave their country because their lives are in danger. Migrants and other groups on the move make a conscious decision for economic and other reasons. Refugees do not have this choice. Refugees are forced to leave and need international protection. This is why 147 countries across the world have signed the 1951 Refugee Convention and thus have granted refugees a unique legal status. It is shameful that Asia remains the largest refugee hosting region with the fewest signatories; large populations of refugees are hosted by neighbouring states that have not even ratified the Refugee Convention. The extent to which Korea’s asylum policy is an example of good practice will no doubt be among the subjects for extensive analysis, dialogue, and debate throughout this week. There are an estimated sixteen million refugees in the world today and 80% of them are hosted by states in the Global South, where the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of most countries is below 3,000 US dollars. South Korea’s GDP per capita is 32,000 US dollars!