东亚金融区域主义的兴起及其地缘安全影响

2008年全球金融危机以后,国际货币金融体系持续动荡,以地区金融安全合作为导向的金融区域主义逐步兴起,且成为一种显著的地缘政治经济现象。金融区域主义对地缘安全的影响主要有两个方面:一是地区金融安全,地区金融主义有助于构筑地区金融安全网络,推动地缘经济整合;二是地缘政治安全,地区金融主义会扩大地区大国的地缘政治影响力以及增加地区排斥外围国家干涉本地事务的能力。金融区域主义产生的这些地缘安全影响对不同的行为主体而言,具有不同的意义。首先,东盟作为地区性的经济共同体,会极力反对东亚大国利用金融区域主义将东盟纳入其势力范围之下,威胁东盟的地缘政治安全环境。其次,作为最大出资方,中日对地区货币金融领导权的争夺变得日趋激烈,且形成了持续的冲突性关系,从而削弱了东亚金融安全合作的政治前景。最后,东亚作为美元回流机制中的关键一环,如果将美国排斥在外,无疑会增加东亚地区与美国的地缘政治矛盾。因而,东亚金融区域主义在兴起的过程中,不仅要看到其稳定地区货币金融秩序的一面,同时也要看到其有可能制造地缘政治安全问题的一面。     

Regionalism's multiple negotiations: ASEAN in East Asia

This article explains East Asian regionalism as the product of two sets of negotiations. The first negotiation is between East Asia on the one hand and global forces and structures on the other. The second negotiation is intra-regional and includes a critical negotiation between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-Southeast Asia and East/Northeast Asia, which also provides the primary focus of this article. This article details ASEAN's extensions into East Asian regionalism as part of interdependent efforts to adapt transitioning global and regional systems. Conceiving these regional negotiations to be not just economic and utilitarian but first and foremost normative, this article details the opportunities and dilemmas represented by ‘East Asia’ for ASEAN, ASEAN-Southeast Asia and Southeast Asia as a meaningful organizing principle. Dilemmas associated with the ASEAN Plus Three process, an East Asia free-trade area and the ASEAN Charter provide illustrations of East Asia's understood challenges for Southeast Asia in addition to the ways that Southeast Asian agencies have been shaping the form and content of recent East Asian efforts and also how regional-global and intra-ASEAN negotiations continue to provide key constraints.     

Regional and multi-level governance: East Asian leadership after the global financial crisis

Although the economies of East Asia emerged from the global financial crisis of 2008 in comparatively strong positions, they remain structurally embedded within global markets. The degree of regional integration that has occurred within East Asia is thus predicated on the on-going interdependence with the economies of Europe and North America. Moves to advance East Asian regional cooperation in the wake of the crisis reflect this global interdependence, as well as intra-regional differences in interests and a lack of strong leadership within the region. Modest cooperation on an East Asian basis has continued since 2008 but the region is very far from realising a substantive regional governance model on economic and financial issues and does not appear to be pursuing a distinctive governance agenda. This article examines recent developments in East Asian regional cooperation, with a view to assessing the significance of current achievements and explaining the mixed and sometimes contradictory nature of initiatives for regional governance in East Asia.     

东亚地区主义:源起、动因及未来走向

真正意义上的东亚地区主义萌芽可以追溯到20世纪90年代,东亚国家间不断增长的经济上的相互依赖,来自地区外的多重压力、地区内认同力量不断增强以及东亚各国对权力平衡的追逐等共同推动了东亚地区主义的发展。但由于东亚地区的现实环境与客观条件,东亚地区主义只能选择通过采取务实合作,实现和维护地区的和平与发展。     

Whither East Asian economic integration? Korea��s regionalization cum globalization strategy

The recent regionalization in East Asia can be defined in terms of regionalization cum globalization. In the case of Europe, regionalization was originally intended to create a preferential and protected area. From its inception, however, regionalization in East Asia emphasized open membership and global liberalization. This so-called open regionalism was then adopted as a fundamental principle of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Given that APEC is an inter-regional institution, however, the concept of open regionalism is not applicable to characterize exclusively Asian integration process that gained momentum on the basis of the ASEAN + 3 framework. For many East Asian countries, a regionalization initiative, especially after the 1997 financial crisis, was a natural response to cope with globalization. Indeed, although East Asian economies are increasingly regionalized, the global market remains crucial and exclusively Asian arrangements are still rare. Globalization and regionalization processes are mutually reinforcing. Singapore is one example that developed into a regional economic hub through the regionalization cum globalization strategy. Given that Korea concluded recently two important free trade areas with the USA and the EU, Korea is also capable of building such a regional economic hub. The first step is to strengthen a cooperation network between the three Northeast Asian countries, China, Japan, and Korea. This network, together with ASEAN, is expected to catalyze the regional integration in East Asia and shape its future evolution.     

近期美元汇率走势及其对东亚经济的影响

随着国际金融危机的持续深化，近期国际市场上不管是美元汇率，还是原油、黄金和有色金属等大宗商品期货价格，都在频繁波动，这种金融市场的剧烈震荡，意味着美元本位的国际货币体系正在经受严峻的考验，世界经济形势不容乐观。     

竞争性地区主义与亚洲合作的现状及未来

2008年世界金融危机之后,竞争性地区主义的兴起成为亚洲合作中的一个非常值得注意的现象。不过,竞争性地区主义对于亚洲来说并非一个新事物,而是长期孕育在本地区合作的历史进程中。伴随着特朗普的上台和中美竞争的加剧,亚洲竞争性地区主义出现了新的变化趋向:以经济为出发点的合作导向逐渐让位于安全,国际制度日益成为大国权力博弈的工具,制度竞争的内容也从表面的规范之争迈向背后的理念价值之争。这种变化对中美关系发展、地区中小国家的战略选择、东盟在地区合作中的主导地位以及亚洲合作的前景都造成了不小的冲击。为了防止亚洲竞争性地区主义的发展滑向恶性竞争,包括中美在内的泛亚各国,应努力促使"印太战略"和"一带一路"倡议两大机制之间形成某种程度的兼容共存,避免两者成为完全对抗的国际机制,并在部分特定领域共同为亚洲各国提供必要的公共产品。     

东亚货币金融合作的深化:从“清迈倡议”到“清迈倡议多边化”

2008年的全球金融风暴对东亚国家的货币金融稳定带来了严峻的挑战,并促使东亚国家加强区域货币金融领域的合作.东亚"10+3"的财长们于2009年12月发表了有关"清迈倡议多边化"(CMIM)的联合声明,决定成立采取自我管理的区域外汇储备库安排(SRPA)作为"清迈协议多边化"的具体形式.从2000年以双边货币互换为特征的"清迈倡议"(CMI)到以自我管理的区域外汇库安排为特征的"清迈倡议多边化"过渡与发展,表明了东亚"10+3"货币金融合作进一步走向深化.     

后金融危机下的区域货币合作

东南亚金融危机中,东南亚各国在盯住美元的汇率制度下付出了沉重的代价。危机过后,我国实行有管理的浮动汇率制度,然而金融风暴再次袭来又对我国经济产生了较大影响。综合各种因素,本文阐述了后金融危机时期保持人民币汇率稳定是现实选择。而近期人民币汇率的稳定也充当了区域汇率政策协调的稳定器。只有进一步推进东南亚货币合作进程,才能最为有效地防止危机再次发生,保证东南亚地区经济的稳定。     

东亚贸易演变与产业结构调整

一、东亚经济发展政策的转变 （一）进口替代政策 从二战后到20世纪60年代末，东亚地区整体上处于恢复经济、完善经济结构阶段，重点发展工业，实行进口替代型的工业发展道路。经过20多年的发展，东亚地区建立了比较完整的工业体系，摆脱了对外国产品的严重依赖，     

ASEM and the future of Asia-Europe relations: Background,characteristics and challenges

The article mainly discusses the background and implications of Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), from an Asian perspective. It will be clarified that the ASEM process was a by-product of increasing tensions between multilateralism and regionalism. As a comprehensive cooperation forum between the EU and 10 East Asian countries, comprising political, economic and cultural agenda, ASEMs approach so far was multi-purposed and multi-faceted. The Asian members of ASEM have shown different strategic behavior in approaching ASEM, which is the result of their diverse geopolitical positions. However, the Asians, especially since the financial crisis of 1997, are well aware of the utility and necessity of their own regionalism, and many initiatives have already been brought into effect, negotiated or even feasibility-studied. The ASEM process may, therefore, find itself in increasing tension with this increasing regionalist tendency in East Asia. It is an immediate task for both European and Asian members of ASEM to revitalize the dynamics of ASEM cooperation.     

The challenge of institution-building in Asia and its implications for Asia-Europe relations

  East Asia, including Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia, has developed tightly-linked production/distribution networks through globalizing corporate activities. The vertical chain of production in East Asia has been even more sophisticated than economic integration in East Europe or Latin America. However, the political environment of East Asia for trade and investment has been far from borderless. The integration effort at the policy level has been very much limited so far, due to the historical background as well as geopolitics surrounding East Asia. The Asian currency/financial crisis provided these countries a historical turning point. After the burst of the crisis, East Asians realized that they have to take care of themselves in their difficulties, not depending on outside forces. A natural choice for them was to step into the realm of regionalism. In 1998, Japan and Korea officially announced that they would discard the long-lasting GATT/WTO-only approach and adapt the multi-layered approach, including both regionalism and multilateralism. The ultimate goal of regionalism would be a region-wide integration including ASEAN+3. As a steppingstone, Japan signed the Japan-Singapore Economic Partnership Agreement (JSEPA) in January 2002. In a parallel move, the ASEAN and China Leaders announced in November 2001 the establishment of an ASEAN-China Free Trade Area (ACFTA) within 10 years. This article will follow up the most recent advancement of regional institutional building in East Asia with the emphasis on peculiar characteristics of economic integration in the region and discuss its implications for Asia-Europe relations. This paper is heavily drawn from Kimura (2002, 2003).     

论东亚货币基金的创建

亚洲金融危机使得东亚地区的货币合作提上日程。《清迈协议》的达成 ,即“10 +3”(东盟 10国加中、日、韩 )框架下的双边货币互换协议的陆续签定 ,标志着东亚区域货币合作迈出了具有历史意义的第 1步。然而 ,货币互换只是货币合作的最初形态 ,随着东亚区域经济一体化的进展 ,货币互换合作必将向更高层次的货币基金合作的方向发展。东亚货币基金的创建不仅是必要的 ,也是可行的。不久的将来EAMF一定会展现在世界人民面前     

Japan, China and East Asian regionalism: implications for the European Union

East Asia is becoming an increasingly coherent regional entity in political economic terms, and remains a region of enormous geo-strategic significance for the European Union. Europe’s links with China and Japan are especially important, and moreover these two countries are looking in various ways to exercise various forms of regional leadership in East Asia. This has critical implications for the EU’s relations with the East Asia region generally, and also for the wider international system. Similar and related impacts maybe construed from deepening East Asian regionalism, involving processes where both Japan and China play vitally important roles. The analysis presented here examines the both micro and macro level developments in East Asian regionalism, and issues relating to Japan, China and regional leadership. It concludes by discusses the implications of these matters for the European Union, and recommends that the EU should pay particularly close attention to emergent exercises of regional leadership in East Asia, most likely to be performed by Japan and/or China.

---

The New Economic Bilateralism in Southeast Asia: Region-Convergent or Region-Divergent?

A new pattern of bilateralism is evident in Southeast Asianeconomic diplomacy, and this may be broadly viewed from extra-regionaland intra-regional perspectives. Regarding the former, an increasingnumber of states from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN) group have engaged in the Asia-Pacific's new bilateralfree trade agreement project trend, and two ASEAN member states– Singapore and Thailand – have been at its forefront.Regarding the latter dimension, recent developments in intra-ASEANdiplomacy have revealed the emergence of a Singapore–Thailandbilateral axis or alliance on matters of Southeast Asian economicregionalism. These two dimensions of economic bilateralism arestudied in relation to their implications for Southeast Asianor ASEAN-led regionalism. In this context, region-convergentbilateralism can make positive contributions to the developmentof regionalism, whereas region-divergent bilateralism essentiallyundermines regional community-building endeavours. This formsthe conceptual framework for studying the impact of Singaporeand Thailand's active bilateral economic diplomacy upon ASEAN'sown regional economic projects, such as the ASEAN Free TradeArea (AFTA), and also on ASEAN as an organization for fosteringSoutheast Asian economic regionalism generally. It is contendedthat based on both the deeper strategic intentions behind Singapore'sand Thailand's foreign economic policies and wider internationalpolitical economy considerations the region-divergent outcomesare more likely to arise within Southeast Asia from the economicbilateralism they are currently championing.     

亚洲债券基金与亚洲金融合作

2005年5月12日,东亚及太平洋中央银行行长会议组织(简称EMEAP)宣布了其认定的第二期亚洲债券基金(ASIAN BOND FUND2,简称ABF2) 的管理人、托管人及指数提供机构,同时宣布完成注资20亿美元,ABF2正式进入实施阶段。这是推动亚洲债券市场发展的又一重大举措,也表明了亚洲地区金融合作的新进展。     

地区主义与东亚秩序的转型趋向

冷战结束后,东亚地区主义的兴起已成为推动该地区秩序重构和转型的重要推动力。在地区主义的影响下,东亚的内聚力和地区性不断增强、共同理念和地区规范逐渐形成,新的权力结构开始确立,这些因素不断解构着美国主导的"轴心—轮辐式"东亚霸权秩序,并使之呈现出向地区整合背景下"多元共同合作"秩序转变的发展态势。     

新现实主义视野下的东亚地区主义发展路径

作为主流的国际关系理论,新现实主义也被运用于地区层面,成为很多国内外学者阐释东亚地区主义的主要理论范式之一。在新现实主义者看来,东亚国家对于均势体系或结构的追逐由来已久,无论是东盟的成立,大国平衡战略的实践,还是由于中国崛起而引发的"中国威胁论"以及中日之间的矛盾和竞争等都彰显了东亚地区结构的不断变动,显示出东亚地区国家间追逐权力平衡的过程。     

建立中韩自由贸易区推动东亚经济一体化发展

东亚地区经济一体化合作中呈现了多种机制和路径并存的局面,主要原因是该地区缺乏可以主导地区经济合作的力量和机制。这就为该地区次等力量、次等双边合作关系充分发挥推动地区经济一体化的作用创造了条件、提供了广阔空间,也凸显了它们推动地区经济合作的作用。建立中韩自由贸易区必将激起区域内各种双边关系的调整,推动中、日、韩三边合作、东盟与东北亚 3国的进一步联合,从而促进地区经济一体化发展。当前,中韩政治关系良好,经贸相互依赖关系加强,在地区经济一体化合作上有共同利益,建立中韩双边自由贸易区的条件基本成熟。     

论东亚社会发展合作

在东亚地区，社会发展合作对于推进东亚一体化具有重大意义，它能够消除东亚一体化进程中所面临的社会障碍，为东亚共同体的建设打下坚实的社会基础。目前东亚社会发展合作已有一定基础，但仍存在一些问题，东亚国家还须为深化社会发展合作做进一步努力。