Is deficient norm compliance in the decision-making process of significance, given ASEAN’s ability to display a high degree of cohesion in external relations when it matters? The answer is that it could well be. ASEAN co-operation in foreign policy has not been based on a community idea, or a shared vision. Instead, it has in most cases centred on the behavioural norms of the TAC. However, agreement on fundamental principles cannot be taken for granted. Recent debates within ASEAN about the continued relevance of the non-interference principle, particularly at the AMM in July 1998, indicate that consensus about at least one fundamental principle, non-interference has weakened if not disappeared. The disagreement on the occasion of Myanmar’s and Cambodia’s entry into ASEAN in 1997 and 1999 respectively has also shown the potential for such issues to drive a wedge between the ASEAN members. The fact that the East Timor crisis of 1999 did not strain intra-ASEAN relations should not invite complacency. In that instance, the Australian initiative to load a multinational task force to East Timor relieved ASEAN of the need to agree on a policy initiative itself. Moreover, Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s untimely announcement of leadership ambitions in the region provided a welcome rallying point for the ASEAN members. In the long run, a new consensus on the legitimacy and modalities of intervention in domestic affairs is needed, as it is difficult to see what new pillars of co-operation could emerge if agreement on fundamental principles is eroding. In the absence of principled agreement procedural norms become extremely valuable, as they create “stable expectations” of mutually acceptable behavior, an indispensable prerequisite for any co-operative undertaking.