The European Union’s trade and investment policy in Asia: new challenges and opportunities in a changing global environment – or: following individual roadmaps

Asia is Europe’s largest trading partner and EU-Asia trade relations have undergone a rapid change since the global financial crisis. On a global scale, the new multilateral trade agreements such as the now stalled Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) involving European Unions’ (EU) major trading partners such as Japan, Singapore and Vietnam also have the potential to change the trade equations. In this paper, we evaluate the new EU trade policy which has been designed to ensure that the EU benefits from the changing global trade scenario and also look at the steps which have been taken by the EU to promote trade relations with its major trading partners in Asia in the predicted ‘Asian century’. We look into the Free Trade Agreements, which are being negotiated with its Asian partners and seek to understand the reasons which have resulted in delays in their signing and negotiations. We evaluate new policies pushed forward by its Asian partners such as the One Belt One Road policy by China and Japan’s policy of securing a large number of trading agreements in the America. Moving ahead, we also shed light on the indirect factors that may influence the success of EU trade negotiations in Asia such as the EU policy on granting China market economy status and the commencement of the ‘Brexit’ process. Lastly, we try to present a list of immediate priorities for EU in Asia, which will ensure that it secures a toehold in trade with the region. All in all, it is shown that the EU has not one and the same approach for all Asian countries but it negotiates flexibly and individually country by country. Because of this “country by country approach” the EU is also not ready to enter into general EU-ASEAN trade negotiations again.     

A case of failed interregionalism? Analyzing the EU-ASEAN free trade agreement negotiations

In 2007, the European Union (EU) and the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) started interregional negotiations on a free trade agreement, which failed 2 years later. Relying on document analysis and elite interviews with officials from the EU and ASEAN’s members, this article addresses why and the extent to which the interregional negotiations failed. By rooting the theoretical model in a power-based approach, the analysis demonstrates that the EU has attempted to secure its economic and regulatory power in Southeast Asia. In striving for such power, interregionalism was initially the intuitive way because the EU perceived ASEAN as a cohesive bloc. However, the EU’s ambitious vision for comprehensive agreements clashed with the actual heterogeneity of ASEAN member states. The failure of the interregional approach is, thus, a result of the EU’s delicate balance between political and economic interests in Southeast Asia, which it pursues with trade-specific issues.     

Trade creation and diversion: effects of EU enlargement on agricultural and food products and selected Asian countries

Based on estimation of the gravity equation, this article aims to scrutinise the trade effects emanating from the economic integration of the European Union (EU) by focusing on the trade diversion and trade creation effects of the fifth EU enlargement on 12 groups of agricultural and food products. This paper analyses the changes due to the EU’s enlargement of trade patterns in the agricultural and food sectors among the EU member states and between EU and non-EU countries as well as the effects of the enlargement on exports of agricultural and food products from selected Asian countries to the EU market. Our analysis shows no decline in exports from EU to non-EU countries. Trade creation effects are significantly high for 4 product groups: seafood, woody plants, beverages and tobacco, and animal and vegetable materials. However, trade diversion effects are found in animal and vegetable oils and textile fibres. Moreover, the economic integration has had no significant effect on exports from Asian countries, namely agricultural and food products. The data of 38 countries cover the period 1999–2015.     

Anger and protest: referenda and opposition to the EU in Greece and the United Kingdom

The public image of the European Union (EU) has met increasingly negative evaluations since the economic and financial crisis hit its peak. Although opposition towards the EU has been pitched as a temporary phenomenon, it has now become a distinctive characteristic of European integration, described as ‘embedded’. Recent analyses on citizens’ attitudes towards the EU underline a rational utilitarian dimension, stressing that EU attachment is affected by future life expectations. Are rationalist perspectives the only possible explanation behind the rise of Euroscepticism, though? This article offers an alternative approach, by using discourse analysis, and examines how emotions, as embedded in Eurosceptic discursive frames and practices, may affect attitudes towards the EU. We argue that an analysis of citizens’ opposition through emotions when the salience of the EU increases can show how a Eurosceptic emotion-laden public discourse may become prominent at the domestic level.     

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 institutions: State withering or consolidation. the case of the Arab summits

The European Commission has spelled out its policy ambition for EU energy cooperation with the southern neighbourhood with plans for the establishment of an ‘Energy Community’. Its communications make clear that an Energy Community should be based on regulatory convergence with the EU acquis communautaire, much in the same vein as the existing institution carrying the same name; the Energy Community with Southeast Europe. It is puzzling that the Commission insists on repackaging this enlargement concept in a region with very different types of relationships vis-à-vis the EU, especially when considering the lukewarm position of key stakeholders in the field. According to them, any attempt to introduce a political integration model in this highly sensitive issue area in the politically fragmented MENA region might run the risk of hurting the incremental technical integration process that has slowly emerged over the past few years.     

Interregional relations and legitimacy in global governance: the EU in ASEM

This article explores the ramifications of the European Union’s (EU) internal legitimacy debate for its external relations. It applies the Asia–Europe Meeting (ASEM) as a case study to examine the EU’s attempts to promote legitimacy in global governance, more specifically in interregional institutions. The article’s theoretical framework draws from the EU’s legitimacy debate. It identifies three key sources of legitimacy, namely, (i) input legitimacy or democratic control and accountability, (ii) output legitimacy or performance and achievement of core purposes, and (iii) the degree of common identity as externalised through collective representation and the articulation of shared norms and values. The empirical analysis thereafter leads to three observations. First, the EU’s presence has contributed to an increased democratic involvement by ASEM’s different stakeholders including parliaments and civil society. Second, purely from an institutional legitimacy perspective ASEM achieves its purpose as a forum to ‘constructively engage’ with Asian countries and address issues relating to global governance. Third, ASEM reveals the EU’s dual identity as an intergovernmental grouping and an organisation with a gradually increasing capacity of collective representation. However, the advancement of the EU’s normative objectives through ASEM has been problematic, leading to a more interest-based and pragmatic policy path. The article concludes that the EU’s legitimacy debate has had a bearing on relations with Asia and, in particular, with ASEM. Importantly, and given the EU’s setbacks, some elements of the ‘EU’s way’ have proven successful in promoting democratic notions of legitimacy beyond the state.     

The European Union and Latin America: ‘Transformative power Europe’ versus the realities of economic interests

Relations between the European Union (EU) and regional subgroups in Latin America (Mercosur, the Andean Community and Central America) are clear examples of ‘pure interregionalism’ and provide evidence of the EU's active promotion of regional integration. Within the context of these cases, this article explores what type of international power the EU wields, how interregionalism is embedded in that power, and how it is deployed. Combining strands of literature on EU–Latin American relations, interregionalism, EU external policy and power provides a framework within which interregionalism can be understood as an important normative and practical tool for the EU's external power projection. Drawing on official documentation and interviews with key individuals, the paper highlights the EU's articulation of power in interregional relations and reflects upon its mixed success. It concludes that, while imperial qualities and aspirations can be observed in the EU's penchant for interregionalism, the transformative power of the EU remains limited.     

ASEAN and Northeast Asia: stakes and implications for the European Union–ASEAN partnership

During the immediate aftermath of the 1997 ASEAN crisis, instead of promoting a further “deepening” of the integration process, ASEAN has preferred enlarging its membership and has opened up to its Northeast Asian partners, Japan, China and South Korea. The mounting economic trade flows among those actors necessitates calls for the coherent creation of effective regional structures. China in particular, among the three mentioned countries, has come to the fore with its diplomatic strategies concerning the regional architecture. As results of these recent changes, the structure of power and the nature of the regional system are altering and ASEAN is going through a decisive transition. Taking into consideration the speed of the evolving framework with the enlargement of an East Asian Community, ASEAN would need a new political vision for the region, for the redefinition of its internal balance of power and for the elaboration of a clear approach toward external partners. Crucial problems affect the entire area such as deficit of democracy, wide development gaps among the East Asian countries, the widespread need for economic liberalisation and need for new human and regional security policies. The EU would play a fundamental role in addressing these problems and would be well inspired to avoid considering Southeast Asia as just a mere periphery of China.     

Democratization and foreign policy in Southeast Asia: the case of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus

Recent democratic transitions in Southeast Asia raise the question as to how we should theorize the relationship between democratization and foreign policy. Many scholars assume that more ‘democratic’ Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members pursue more ‘liberal’ policies than their less-democratic counterparts, but surprisingly little theoretical work investigates the connection. This article argues that such investigations tend to crumble under close scrutiny. Instead, it offers an alternative framework based on an analysis of how different socio-economic interests contend to shape foreign policy in ASEAN states and how these interests are able to organize politically to impose their preferences. The case study of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus, a regional network of legislators campaigning for liberal-interventionist policies on Myanmar, shows how it is these forces, and not the mere presence or absence of formally democratic institutions, that govern the political space available to those seeking to transform ASEAN states' policies.     

Europe’s engagement with China: shifting Chinese views of the EU and the EU-China relationship

This article discusses the dramatic recent shifts in Chinese policy perspectives on the European Union (EU) and on EU-China relations. Whereas for more than a decade, policy makers and Europe specialists in China had regarded the EU as an exemplar of regional integration and as a promising new ‘pole’ in the global order, a recent survey shows that today, in the wake of the Eurozone crisis, the refugee crisis, and the ‘Brexit’ referendum, many perceive the EU as a troubled actor unfit to deal with the existential challenges confronting it, let alone play a credible leadership role beyond its own borders. Despite this, Beijing’s ambitious international agenda at a time of increasing global uncertainty guarantees China’s ever-growing stake in building a reliable, long-term partnership with the EU, even though recent Chinese diplomatic and economic initiatives are gravitating toward the Union’s periphery, targeting subregional groupings of Member States along Europe’s re-emerging, traditional fault lines. Based on the research findings presented in this paper, the authors argue that the EU and the Member States need to rethink the basic assumptions underlying their China policies in the so-called ‘New Era’ and explore new approaches of engagement that match these shifting perceptions, policies and political realities.     

The EU's role in developing security cooperation with Myanmar at the ASEAN Regional Forum: 2004–2008

This article tracks the European Union’s efforts at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF), from 2004 to 2008, to encourage Myanmar directly or indirectly to engage in security cooperation. It, then, explores Myanmar and ASEAN's reactions to the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis to Myanmar’s Irrawaddy delta in 2008. It focuses on ARF as a forum whereby interactions take place. It examines whether the complementary of the analytical variables provided by the logic of consequences and appropriateness [March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P., 1998. The institutional dynamics of international political orders. Oslo, Arena Working Paper No. 5; 2004. The logic of appropriateness. Oslo, Arena Working Paper No. 9], social mechanisms [Checkel, J., 1999. Social construction and integration. Journal of European public policy, 6 (4), 545–560.] and observations derived from interviews (Southeast Asia and Brussels) can explain ASEAN and Myanmar’s reactions and, also, the EU’s behaviour in relation to the Myanmar-Nargis event. The EU’s role is explored through the co-chair’s summary reports of the meetings that the EU co-chaired with ASEAN. The article uncovers the EU’s efforts to encourage ASEAN to take up responsibilities and Myanmar to accept multilateral security options. It argues that, as the EU tried to inspire Myanmar to connect with cooperation, “Myanmar hit by Cyclone Nargis” motivated the EU Council to include the "responsibility to protect" as a new goal of the European foreign and security policy of December 2008.     

The EU's approach post-September 11: global terrorism as a multidimensional law enforcement challenge

In response to the threat of terrorism following 9/11, the European Union has opted for a clear cross-border law enforcement approach that is quite distinct from the putative ‘war on terror’. This choice has been determined by factors of history, divergent threat perceptions, relative value orientations and restricted competences. And yet, far from limiting itself to a traditional ‘internal’ law enforcement focus, the EU has developed an extensive multidimensional approach that combines legislative and operational, repressive and preventive, internal and external, as well as institutional, measures. But weaknesses persist: the preference given by member states to instruments of cooperation and coordination, rather than integration, as well as the poor implementation of many agreed-upon measures, negatively weigh against the effectiveness of the EU's multidimensional law enforcement approach. Legitimacy deficits also exist owing to limited parliamentary and judicial control. These deficits will need to be addressed to reinforce the credibility of the EU's approach as a viable ‘European’ alternative to the US ‘war on terror’.     

Chinese network diplomacy as a challenge for transatlantic partners

For decades, a prevailing view has been that a very limited number of global issues can be resolved without the USA and European Union acting together. But in recent years, we have seen a growing body of scholarship addressing the question of the ‘diffusion of power’, ‘the rise of the rest’ or ‘global zero’. With the financial crisis, questionable foreign policy choices and growing global competition from other international actors, both in terms of trade and ideas, the idea of the Western domination is increasingly questioned. At the same time, many international actors, including the European Union, are increasingly shifting—or ‘rebalancing’—their attention towards China and other Asian markets introducing new dynamics to old alliances and relationships. Borrowing from the network analysis scholarship, this paper looks at the EU relationship with China through a conceptual lens of ‘network power’ and ‘network diplomacy’. It applies this analytical lens to investigate the implications of EU–China relations for (1) the relations with the USA, (2) the relations with the ASEAN and (3) the effects of the trilateral EU–China–US cooperation on the region.     

Southeast Asian cooperation in health: a comparative perspective on regional health governance in ASEAN and the EU

Globalization has led to new health challenges for the twenty-first century. These new health challenges have transnational implications and involve a large range of actors and stakeholders. National governments no longer hold the sole responsibility for the health of their people. These changes in health trends have led to the rise of global health governance as a theoretical notion for health policy making. The Southeast Asian region is particularly prone to public health threats such as emerging infectious diseases and faces future health challenges including those of noncommunicable diseases. This study looks at the potential of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a regional organization to lead a regional dynamic for health cooperation in order to overcome these challenges. Through a comparative study with the regional mechanisms of the European Union (EU) for health cooperation, we look at how ASEAN could maximize its potential as a global health actor. Our study is based on primary research and semistructured field interviews. To illustrate our arguments, we refer to the extent of regional cooperation for health in ASEAN and the EU for (re)emerging infectious disease control and for tobacco control. We argue that regional institutions and a network of civil society organizations are crucial in relaying global initiatives, and ensuring the effective implementation of global guidelines at the national level. ASEAN’s role as a regional body for health governance will depend both on greater horizontal and vertical integration through enhanced regional mechanisms and a wider matrix of cooperation.     

Introduction: the EU,East Asian conflicts,and the norm of integration

The promotion of regional integration is a core objective of the European Union’s (EU) foreign policy and has been seen as part of its attempt to transform international society and to make the world a more peaceful place to live. However, the success of this regionalization strategy has been limited and East Asia has been a particularly problematic case. This introduction raises some fundamental questions by first presenting some basic concepts so that the overall studies of the special issue can be systematically undertaken. The underlying questions are the following: How bleak is the picture with regard to regionalism in East Asia and the roles of the EU? Has the EU had no effect on the development of East Asian regionalism? And what potential does regional integration have in helping the transformation of conflicts in East Asia? In addition to these questions, it also discusses and conceptualizes underlying discourses on regional integration, conflict transformation, and regionalism in East Asia. By doing so, it aims to point out that the East Asia region is changing, the EU does play a role in this, and regionalization cannot be ignored as an institutional context that has the potential to assist conflict transformation, especially if windows of opportunity for such engagement arise in the future.     

New Security Challenges and the Need for New Forms of EU Cooperation: The Solidarity Declaration against Terrorism and the Open Method of Coordination

Abstract

The new transnational security threats, such as terrorism, challenge traditional methods of European Union cooperation. In the era of threats to inter-state peace the Union engendered security through ‘passive’ integration in the form of the abolition of European borders. Today the EU is increasingly given the responsibility for creating security and safety, both externally and internally, by the means of ‘active’ security instruments such as the European Security and Defence Policy and the Solidarity Declaration of 2004. The challenge is that these policies and principles require a vision beyond that of a free market, common threat perceptions and effective coordination of the crisis management capacity of EU member states. This article argues that the practical needs following this qualitative step, such as the strategic engagement of new security actors and levels of EU governance on a long term basis, are very similar to the ones that the Open Method of Coordination has attempted to resolve in EU cooperation in the field of welfare policies. It suggests that this method should be used also to strengthen the Union security policy and crisis management capacity.     

经济全球化下东南亚国家的经济制度变迁初探

20世纪80年代中期之后，东南亚国家的经济制度发生了重大变革。促进制度变迁的动力除了“自上而下”和“自下而上”的两股推进经济全球化的力量之外，东南亚区域经济一体化及1997年爆发的金融危机也极大地推动了东南亚国家的经济体制改革与变迁。本文探析经济全球化下东南亚国家经济制度改革与变迁的诱因，并以新加坡和菲律宾的贸易体制改革与变迁为研究案例，勾勒东南亚国家经济体制改革与变迁的多样性。     

中国视角中的印度与东盟关系

20世纪80年代末90年代初,随着冷战的结束和全球区域经济一体化浪潮的兴起,印度重新意识到东盟对其在政治、经济和外交上的重要性,及时提出“东向政策”。印度调整东盟政策,提升与东南亚的战略关系,是印度实施全方位外交、推行大国战略的重要组成部分,无疑将给东亚区域合作及中国东盟关系的未来发展带来重大影响。中国应适时调整与东盟、印度的关系,增强中印两国在东南亚的共同利益与合作愿景,推动中、印、东盟三边关系向更高层次发展。     

The rocky road of interregionalism: EU sanctions against human rights-violating Myanmar and repercussions on ASEAN–EU relations*

From 1991 until 2012, the European Union (EU) applied sanctions on Myanmar with the purpose of promoting democracy and human rights. In addition, the EU called on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to exert pressure on Myanmar. This paper analyses, in the context of Myanmar’s 1997 accession to ASEAN, how the EU’s sanctions approach towards Myanmar was perceived within ASEAN and related repercussions of this approach on ASEAN–EU interregional relations. With the accession of Myanmar as the base story, it is argued that a regional organizations membership concept implies specific dealings with normative ideas such as democracy and human rights as well as strategies of punishment such as sanctions. The differing membership concepts of ASEAN and the EU explain ASEAN’s critical perception of the EU’s sanctions on Myanmar. Further, the conceptual difference in membership also explains that the EU’s pressure on ASEAN has severely impaired the interregional relations.