Asia's Regional Security Order: Rules,Power and Status

East Asia's security order is experiencing significant change as it moves from a stable and peaceful geopolitical setting into one of increasingly open contestation. There is no scholarly consensus about the core character of East Asia's old security order, thus making analysis of this period of change especially challenging. The aim of this paper is two‐fold. Firstly, it seeks to provide some order to the broader debate about East Asia's regional security environment. Secondly, it provides a novel account of East Asia's security order that better captures the key dynamics at play in the region than the literature currently does. The paper's first part discusses the different types of security orders identified by scholars and analysts. The second examines the ways in which scholars have attempted to explain East Asia's security order and explores the key forces that they have argued shaped their form. The third part develops a distinctive account of Asia's security order which focuses on the interplay of domestic and international factors and argues that it was the political consensus that existed across the region about its structure and purpose that made the region stable and it is the breakdown of that consensus that is destabilising East Asia today.     

The European Union (EU) in Asian Security: Actor with a Punch or Distant Bystander?

The EU calls itself a “soft power,” making “soft power” contributions to Asian security. That is undoubtedly what the EU is and does in Asia and the track record of European contributions to Asian peace and stability through economic and financial as well as development aid and technical assistance over the decades is not unimpressive. As will be shown below, over recent years Brussels and the Union's individual member states have sought to increase their involvement and role in Asian “hard security,” attempting to get rid of its reputation of being security a “free-rider” enjoying but not sharing the burden of US regional security guarantees. While the EU will continue to be a “hard security” actor in Asian security within limits, it is advised to concentrate its security cooperation with like-minded partners such as Japan and the US as opposed to hoping that talking to Beijing on regional or global security issues produces tangible results. As will be shown below, it clearly does not as Beijing continues to conduct very assertive and at times aggressive regional foreign and security policies insisting on the “principle of non-interference” in Chinese domestic and foreign policies. Consequently, EU influence on Chinese foreign and security policies in general and its increasingly aggressive policies related to territorial claims in the East China and South China Seas will continue to exist on paper and paper only.     

Development of the Mekong Region as Part of Japan's Diplomatic Strategy for East Asia

Japan's active engagement in the development of the Mekong region since the 1990s needs to be understood not only from an economic but also from a diplomatic perspective. Japan seeks to collaborate with ASEAN in facilitating multilateral “political dialogue” in the Asia-Pacific region and building an East Asian order based on “universal values” such as democracy and the rule of law, and the Mekong region could be the “weakest link” of ASEAN. After outlining Japan's twenty-year undertaking to cultivate Mekong-Japan cooperation, the author suggests that it is time to broaden the scope of the cooperation and accelerate Japan's “proactive contribution to peace” policy to cope with the changing security environment.     

India's “Look East” Policy

A combination of economic, strategic, and domestic considerations has led India to pay greater attention to its eastern neighbours since the 1990s. India's steadily growing ties with East and Southeast Asian countries have become an increasingly important element of India's foreign policy. India is working with these countries bilaterally as well as through regional frameworks like the EAS, ASEM, and ASEAN, and sub-regional organizations like BIMSTEC and Mekong-Ganga Cooperation. The main driver remains economic, and India has many ongoing and planned FTAs with the countries of this region. Of late, defence and security ties too have grown. However, India's relations with China remain tense and troubled, with persisting differences over the border, Tibet, and China's patronage of India's South Asian neighbours, particularly Pakistan. Asia's major players will have to overcome internal rivalries and consciously evolve a cooperative paradigm for Asian security and cooperation to enable Asia to play a leading global role.     

A Middle Power's Roles in Shaping East Asian Security Order: Analysis of Japan's Engagement from a Normative Perspective

East Asia is currently in a transitional period. Recognizing the challenges presented by China's rise to the current regional order, existing literature analyses the security situation in Asia by focusing on the material aspects of power distribution between the US and China. Few works substantively discuss the roles played by middle powers such as Japan in shaping the regional order and how they can deal with the challenges of great power competition and threats to the global rules‐based order. By employing Japan's involvement in the South China Sea issues as a case study, this article examines how a middle power attempts to shape or underpin the regional security order and if such attempts are effective. The investigation of Japan's engagement illustrates that a middle power's practical support can indirectly and gradually contribute to sustaining and defending the regional “rules‐based order”.     

Hedging Strategies of the Middle Powers in East Asian Security: the Cases of South Korea and Malaysia

Many middle powers in East Asia—particularly South Korea and Malaysia—are affected by the strategic relationship between the USA (hereafter the USA) and China. Therefore, I would like to examine the strategic behaviors of the middle powers in East Asia from a hedging strategy perspective. The hedging strategy extends the logic of the traditional balance of power theory while maintaining a strong emphasis on structural incentives, which critics have found lacking in the soft balance approach. Most East Asian states have calibrated their security measures and strategies in response to the changing US-China relationship. The purpose of this article is to compare the hedging strategies of South Korea and Malaysia, which are middle powers, that affect the East Asian security order. This article, thus, aims not simply to explain specific instances of the hedging strategies of middle powers but also, based on this theoretical foundation, to establish a new frame of analysis for the hedging strategies of middle powers through objective and critical assessment.     

区域安全竞争中的东亚区域主义——基于对欧洲/北美区域主义的比较分析

区域主义的启动和深化受区域内外安全环境的影响。欧洲区域主义的启动和深化与其内外安全环境之间呈正相关关系,因而它得以历经冷战而不衰,并在冷战后进一步强化。比较而言,北美区域主义的深化与其内外安全环境总体上都是负相关关系,因而北美区域主义至今基本上仍仅限于经济领域。与北美区域主义类似,东亚区域主义的深化与东亚区域内外安全环境也基本上是负相关关系,但不同的是,由于东亚区域的内部安全环境是竞争性的,因此东亚区域的"共同体感觉"虽然呈日益强化之势,但总体上说是脆弱的。东亚区域主义的深化不仅受区域内部安全竞争的挑战,还受到区域外部的竞争性安全环境———区域间大国和全球大国安全竞争———的制约。     

Dynamics of Trade in Value-Added in “Factory Asia”

ABSTRACT

Trade patterns in East Asia are termed the “Factory Asia” model, whereby Asia functions as a “global factory” that imports intermediate goods from its regional networks and then assembles and exports them as finished goods to higher-income developed countries. In 2001, China’s accession into the World Trade Organisation consolidated this pattern by becoming the core economy in this model. However, is this pattern still valid after more than a decade of rapid development in East Asian countries? The main objective of this article is to examine the evolution of this pattern of trade in East Asian countries. Although the key findings of this study show that the Factory Asia model continues, it is changing as different East Asian countries capture more value in global value chains. The gaps in the rate of upgrading are identified and mainly attributed to differences in government policies and competition. However, the dependence on foreign inputs still remains an important part of high-technology production in East Asian countries. Hence, the idea that East Asia is evolving from a “factory” into a “Research & Development hub” remains far-fetched.     

The Japan‐US alliance and the Asia‐Pacific region

For the past fifty years the Japan‐US alliance has provided the framework for Asia‐Pacific security, says Jusuf Wanandi, Chairman of the Centre for Strategic International Studies in Indonesia and former research fellow at IIPS. The region's political and economic dynamics are changing, Wanandi says, and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) supports an increased Japanese security role, with regional organizations acting as a conduit. But before Japan will win the confidence of some Asian neighbors, he says, Japan must open its economy, reform its domestic politics, and come to terms with its militaristic past.     

“Tongpan”: An important event in Thai cinema

Abstract

Films being made in Asian countries are now beginning to express an Asian reality. This is happening in a small way, but it is happening. The scale of the movement to break away from Hollywood and Bombay-type extravaganzas, and from films as a kind of “celluloid LSD,” is still small, constrained as it is by film-makers and sellers out to make quick profits. One little ripple that has recently emerged from the stagnant waters of Asia's film world is called “Tongpan.” The work of a group of creative amateurs, “Tongpan” is not the result of a commercial venture, and is not a professionally-made film in the conventional sense. It is also not a film in the style of what has come to be known as the “New Wave Cinema,” for “Tongpan” is not an art film to be “museumed” for wealthy connoisseurs. But precisely for all these reasons it is important that a film called “Tongpan” has been made. Indeed an important event has occurred in Thai Cinema. Important because it shows what is happening to the Thai people in the name of ‘development’ and captures for posterity the tensions and strains of an important period in Thailand's recent history.     

Vietnam–Japan Relations in the Context of Building an East Asian Community

As the regionalism in East Asia has largely been characterized by networks of bilateral relations, the linkages between regional factors and bilateral relations in East Asia were clearly witnessed in the Cold War and the post-Cold War period. As a new period of regional cooperation has been ushered in under the so-called “East Asian Community” framework, it is essential to note that such interplay continues to be one of the most prominent characteristics in East Asia. The case study analysis of bilateral relations between Vietnam, a developing member in the Association for Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and Japan, the region's leading economic power in Northeast Asia, provides an insightful look at the positive relationship between the regional conditions and bilateral relations in the new East Asia context. More importantly, bilateral relations can make significant contribution to shaping the regional setting, instead of being passively affected as in the past.     

Security and Peace in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific

Abstract

Two recent books make significant contributions to the scholarly literature both in East Asian security studies and in international relations theory more generally. While developing international relations theory by drawing from the non-Western experiences of East Asia, these books complement the existing international relations theory that has been criticized for being overly West-centric. The books also develop some interesting East Asian, neopragmatic ideas on the “theory of theory” in international relations. These ideas have a potential of not only changing our answers to questions about East Asian security but also reformulating the questions we ask in our investigation of international security issues.     

Emerging New East Asian Regionalism

East Asian regionalism is emerging starting with a process of “ASEAN plus three” cooperation and moving to a final East Asian Community. The foundation of East Asian regionalism lies in increasing regional common or shared interests. The significance of East Asian cooperation and integration is its developing process. “10?+?3” framework is not just an economic cooperation process but also has political significance. The process of East Asian cooperation plays a dual role in community building: reconciliation among the countries, and cultivation of each member itself. The major role of regional institutional building is peace making through cooperation under a regional framework. The cooperation between China and Japan is crucial for East Asian Community building.     

Changing roles: China and the United States in East Asian security

Since the end of the cold war, many changes have been occurring in the East Asian strategic landscape. As the two most significant elements of the East Asian security equation, China and the United States share a special obligation to secure the present and future stability in the West Pacific. Both countries have to adjust their respective roles in response to the changing strategic environment: while China should take a more cooperative stance on regional security issues, the United States should be more sensitive and accommodative to regional demands. There exist several scenarios for the future of Sino-American relations, but it is desirable and possible for Beijing and Washington to form a constructive partnership with security cooperation as one underpinning pillar.     

Pyrrhic Victory in the “Tournament of Shadows”: Central Asia's Quest for Water Security (1991–2009)

Abstract

Central Asia's Soviet past continues to haunt the five successor sovereign states with water, a contentious issue. Although fundamental to survival and livelihood, regional cooperation over the precious resource remains a patchwork of short-term stop-loss agreements at best and an exercise in “frameworks without content” at worst. This article seeks to explain why this is so, based on a theoretical position derived from hydro-political discourse. The eclectic explanations include the hydro-hegemonic void created by the removal of Soviet authoritarianism; the securitization of the hydro-political complex in Central Asia; unilateral and bilateral substitutes for multilateral water resource cooperation; and the ineffectiveness of international law – all of which contribute to the impasse over water cooperation.     

The Asianization of East Asian security and the United States’ role

The Asianization of East Asian security has been unfolding in the forms of the emergence of a genuinely regional security complex, the Asian initiative of security dialogue, and the assertion of an Asian way of diplomacy. Ironically, the uncertainties surrounding the United States' role are a key factor driving regionalization and, at the same time, a critical security issue in the emerging regional security complex. The essentiality of the U.S. role provides Washington with key leverage to ensure a role commensurate with its centrality in East Asian security. In light of the danger and opportunities regionalization presents for U.S. policy, it is vital to distinguish rhetoric from reality and to discern paradoxical developments in the Asianization movement. By its continued commitment to working with other regional powers, and its activism in promoting security multilateralism through ASEAN-Regional Forum (ARF), the U.S. can ensure that regionalization leads to an Asia-Pacific security complex that contains threats wherever they arise.     

Getting the economic context right: the WWI analogy and contemporary East Asia

ABSTRACT

World War I has become the “go-to” analogy for understanding the contemporary security dynamic in East Asia, especially as it concerns US-China relations and the possibility of war. However, this analogy fails to account for the fundamental changes in economic flows in the current environment, specifically the growth and proliferation of foreign direct investment (FDI). Capital flows were primarily portfolio investments in 1914, while FDI flowed from great powers to secondary, allied states. This is not representative of East Asia today, where FDI flows between possible belligerents in any future conflict and global value chains link states within and across regions. Ultimately, World War I may no longer provide a satisfactory analogy for understanding the impact economic interdependence has on modern war given FDI’s importance in the global economic system.     

观念认同与地区秩序建构——兼谈中国新安全观在建构东亚秩序中的作用

观念认同对地区秩序建构有着重要意义。观念认同建构行为体的身份和利益,进而改变或影响行为体的行为,在地区秩序建构中起到了"路线图"和"粘合剂"的作用。地区行为体之间的观念认同决定了它们互动的形式和态度,界定了地区秩序的自我属性,框定了战后地区秩序的建构原则,因而成为建构地区秩序的重要因素之一。中国首倡的新安全观与东盟主张的地区规范产生了积极互动,推动东亚观念结构由洛克文化向康德文化演进。     

安全预期、经济收益与东亚安全秩序

冷战后,东亚地区不仅没有进入一个充满紧张和冲突的时期,反而维持了相对长时间的和平状态。有关东亚安全秩序的既有解释主要强调的是体系结构或过程,但不足以解释东亚安全秩序内部的动力和机制,以及这种秩序蕴含的内在不稳定性的主要原因。本文提出了一种功能论的解释,认为美国和中国分别为东亚地区提供了安全预期和经济收益两项最为重要的公共产品,是维系当前东亚安全秩序的基础。然而,在中国崛起和美国重返东亚带来的冲击下,这两种地区性公共产品的供给脱节和供给矛盾使既有东亚安全秩序面临内在的不稳定性。为了应对这种不确定性,达到稳定周边环境和缓解崛起疑虑的效果,中国在为本地区提供稳定的经济收益的同时也需要在政治和军事方面采取积极的安全保障措施,营造东亚安全秩序的新基础。     

China's Maritime Security and the “Malacca Dilemma”

Abstract

As maritime trading becomes an increasingly important element of the modern Chinese economy, concerns in Beijing are being raised about the safety of vital sea lanes. Central to this thinking has been Hu Jintao's explanation of the “Malacca Dilemma” in late 2003, which describes the problem of sea routes crucial to China's trade, especially the Malacca Straits, being subject to interdiction from another state. At the same time, the international war on terror has also raised the specter of economic terrorism aimed at disrupting commerce via the Straits. Due to the complex nature of these potential threats, there is the temptation for China to address the “Dilemma” unilaterally as the country modernizes its naval forces. However, it remains in Beijing's interests to work both with littoral states and other great powers in ensuring greater security in the Malacca region.