Following decades of rapid development，Pacific Asia，and in particular China，now represents the conduit for our global network of relations. This effect does not simply made the region more integrated with the “world-out-there”，but within itself，we are seeing an increasingly coherent region emerging. As social and trade links criss-crossed the region，the erstwhile fractured region rose from its colonial and Cold-War pasts to slowly develop a stronger sense of the “region”，as shared discourses and experiences，such as the “Asian values” debates in the 1990s and the emergence of regional institutions to deal with common issues，consolidated to a stronger regional identity amidst global trends. Given this unique conditions，China’s President Xi Jinping’s call to “building a Community of Common Destiny” came in an opportune moment when the region in search of political leadership as it is crystalising into a more coherent entity. The call certainly has its international appeal，especially given the recent rise of anti-globalisation discourses emerging out of the United States and parts of Europe. Xi’s discourse links up with the “global”—a strong movement since the end of the Second World War—and projects China’s commitment to the cause. Arguably，China has been the largest beneficiary of the movement for the past three decades，and Xi’s vision to perpetuate this trend is totally wise.However，enormous challenges remain，as the region continues to be stretched between its tendencies to devolved into its nation-state denominations and the higher calling for a more integrated regional outlook. This paper seeks to examine closely one particular challenge：the rise of nationalist politics in the region，and how these sentiments are posing as a powerful impediment to the successful creation of a “Community of Common Destiny” of Xi’s vision. It argues that nationalisms in Asia is a largely extends from Gellner’s（1983）model of nationalism. As nation-states in Asia are by-and-large a product of post-war decolonisation and are not natural to the region，the “Nation” is inherently non-natural episteme that requires consistent intervention and nurturing by the State or regime that it represents. This creates a situation whereby states constant pitted their encompassing nations against “the others”. Furthermore，the emphasis on using history in nation-building complicated the creation of a more unified regional outlook，given the complex overlapping historical narratives that every state or regime tries to promote.To make its case，this paper is divided broadly into two sections. The first section will briefly examine the idea of nationalism vis-à-vis a short discussion of the “historian” models presented by Gellner（1983）and Anderson（2006）. The relevance of these models links up with the decolonialisation process in Asia. The pressing need to “create a nation out of a state” makes each state’s nation-building project a highly contestable process with each other. The second section discusses nationalist movements across the region as examples of the contestations involved. Due to their contestable natures，nationalisms in Asia are beasts that states and regimes both adore and fear：they are the bases of regime legitimacy and actions，at the same time they are creatures that will turn the table in a heartbeat to bite the hands that feed them when something goes awry.