本文以新古典現實主義的角度出發，首先回顧東協擴大結盟的歷史過程。其次，東協要稱為「安全共同體」尚言之過早，因為「共識」規範常遭違背，「集體認同」又顯現不足。另外，「東協方式」並非以「解決」衝突為目的，而是以「管理」衝突為其風格。第三，東協區域論壇(簡稱東協論壇)尚未發展到集體安全體系的地步，只是作為「談話的場所」而已，因為美、中、日等大國並不想以東協論壇作為實際解決安全問題的關鍵所在。第四，東南亞非傳統安全的威脅已日益增高，包括國際恐怖主義、分離主義、不穩定的民主化、非法國際性遷徙、環境惡化等。最後，本文的結論是，東協主張「不干涉」規範和推動「不具約束力的共識」，無論是在東協內或在更廣泛的東亞區域中，都反而阻礙了彼此間更進一步地整合。至於對抗非傳統安全威脅方面，在堅持國家主權不容侵犯的原則下，東協各國的合作則是未能達到立竿見影的效果。

This paper adopts a Neoclassical Realist view to examine the ASEAN and
ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). First of all, the process of enlargement of
membership within ASEAN has not been proved smoothly. Secondly, it is immature to call ASEAN a security community, because its “consensus” norm has often been violated and the “collective identity” within ASEAN has not yet been well-constructed.Moreover, while the purpose of the so-called “ASEAN Way” is not to “resolve” the conflicts among the member-states, the “management”of the conflicts can be symbolized as its typical style. Thirdly, the ARF has not yet developed itself into a collective security system. And it is only treated as a talk shop, because the great powers in the region such as the US, China and Japan, would not like to use this forum to solve the hotly-debated security issues such as North Korea’s nuclear weapons.Fourthly, the threats from non-conventional security have increased recently in Southeast Asia. These threats include international terrorism, separatism, fragile democratization, international illegal immigration, the devastation of the environments and the exacerbation of climate such as global warming, … etc. Finally, this paper concludes that ASEAN’s norm of noninterference and its practice of nonbinding consensus prevented deeper integration either within ASEAN or the wider East Asian region. As to the non-conventional security, the insistence of non-intervention in state sovereignty stops ASEAN states from further cooperation with each other. As a result, the threats from non-conventional security are highly conceivable in Southeast Asia.