ASEAN’s dialogue mechanism has been evolving from consensus-seeking to strategic means, to use the Habermas distinction. This consensus norm was maintained during the Cold War because of rapport among ASEAN leaders and the presence of an external threat. However, ASEAN expansion to 10 countries, the emergence of non-traditional threats to security, and democratization have weakened this norm.

This paper reviews and compares three deliberative approaches to conflict, and applies the deliberative approach to the Tibet issue. It examines the case of a deliberative workshop, its achievements and limits. Deliberative dialogue appears to have improved knowledge and mutual understanding, enhanced mutual trust and deliberative capacities, and produced moderating effects.