European experience for East Asian integration: ideas, national interests, and the international circumstance

This paper traces the possibility of East Asian integration through comparison with the early stage of European integration on three different levels: ideas, national interests, and international circumstance. Judging from the European experience, ideas always come first, then national interest contests, and eventually the international circumstance conditions the context. I compare the multilateral approach in Europe with the imperial hegemony competition in East Asia, Adenauer’s regionalization policy in Europe with the Yoshida line of Westernization detouring from Asia, and the US and Russia’s different roles in the two regions as external forces constraining the international order. My conclusion for the future of East Asia is located somewhere between views of procedural divergence and fundamental skepticism. I worry about integration for the sake of integration in which regional integration is presupposed as inherently good. Such discourse will easily be deteriorated and such a blind community simply collapses when circumstances change. For these reasons, there needs to be an adequate discussion regarding for what, by whom, and through which method integration is achieved.     

历史视角下日本学界对东亚共同体的审视

日本学界通过不同的历史视角审视日本与东亚共同体的关系,并设定日本在东亚区域合作中的角色。积极看待古代东亚历史的日本学者,主张吸取近代日本殖民主义和帝国主义教训,日本应积极投身东亚共同体建设。强调东亚历史多样性和差异性的日本学者,主张日本应该借用西方的价值观念和东亚区域外的政治力量,进行东亚区域合作。而延续近代日本"脱亚入欧"历史视角的日本学者,坚决反对日本投身东亚共同体建设。     

The EU’s Asia: renegotiating boundaries, renegotiating norms

The global financial crisis and the shift of economic strength to a rising Asia have ushered in European introspection and allusions to the decline of the European Union (EU). The EU’s ambitions to have a normative impact in the world have been called into question. The seven articles in this guest-edited issue explore processes of change relating to geopolitical definitions, regional actorness, interregionalism, and normative power within the framework of EU–Asia relations. This introduction contextualises the themes taken up in the different articles. It considers important divides in the recent history of Europe–Asia relations and outlines key transformations in the global environment, before critically reflecting on the significance of normative power for Europe.     

A partnership postponed? Japan–EU cooperation in conflict resolution in East Asia

Asia Europe Journal - This paper explores reasons for the (un)willingness of the European Union (EU) to cooperate with its external partners such as Japan in promoting regional integration and...     

美国与东亚经济失衡及东亚区域合作构想

美国与东亚经济失衡与摩擦对东亚区域经济一体化的影响巨大而复杂。一方面,为应对与美国的经济摩擦,东亚先进经济体往往通过对外直接投资将国内失去比较优势的产业转移到区内后进经济体,将其作为自己的出口平台,从而促进东亚地区产业分工与国际生产网络等经济一体化的形成;另一方面,作为东亚区域经济一体化进程中最重要的外部因素,美国对东亚经济一体化的立场、东亚对美国市场和美国货币的非对称依赖都在一定程度上限制了东亚地区一体化的发展。     

东亚地区秩序的未来：东亚还是亚太？

东亚历史上曾先后建立以中国为中心的朝贡——华夷秩序以及以日本、美国为核心的霸权秩序,在以国家主权为国际关系核心机制的当代,这些反映不平等国家间关系的秩序无法复制到当今东亚,东亚的现实也决定了不存在孕育这些秩序的土壤。同时,20世纪80年代以来的全球化和区域经济一体化两种趋势极大程度地影响了当今东亚秩序的建构,然而一个统一的东亚秩序的建构又受到该地区复杂的大国关系的制约,东亚秩序将摇摆于“东亚”与“亚太”之间。     

Transcending borders: the sea as realm of memory

Asia Europe Journal - In this joint paper, ‘Transcending Borders: The Sea as Realm of Memory’, we shall discuss issues of regional integration by applying the concept of realm of memory...     

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。     

东北亚区域经济一体化发展趋势与实现途径

区域经济一体化已成为世界经济发展的潮流,而东北亚地区(中国、日本和韩国)作为世界第三大区域集团,其一体化进程却非常缓慢。目前,在东北亚地区有两个潜在优先发展的FTA,即一个双边的日本—韩国FTA和一个三边的日本—韩国—中国FTA。根据国际形势和东北亚主要国家的政策变化,可以预测东北亚区域经济一体化将要进入提速阶段。东北亚区域经济一体化从纵向深化和横向拓展的二维发展过程上,都应该选择与欧盟和北美自由贸易协定不同的实现途径。     

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.     

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.     

阿富汗变局后的中亚安全:大国博弈与地区合作

阿富汗与中亚有着非常密切的历史文化联系,同时阿富汗问题对中亚安全构成了直接威胁.随着2021年美国仓促撤军、塔利班重新夺取政权,中亚战略地位的特殊性引发大国为争夺地区安全和经济主导权展开新一轮地缘政治竞争,中亚地区的和平与稳定又遭遇新的挑战.本文通过对新形势下中亚地区安全的新特征、新变化的梳理和分析,发现阿富汗变局后中...     

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).     

Invisible Linkages: A Regional Perspective of East Asian Political Economy

This article studies East Asian political economy from a regional perspective. The Asian financial crisis showed that East Asian economies are highly regionalized. However, the linkages among Asian economies, mostly informal in nature, often appear "invisible" to many in the West, who focus more on the states and formal institutions. Drawing on a broad set of literature mostly in Asian languages, this paper provides a systematic study of informal integration in East Asia, which consists of not only regional production networks, but also ethnic Chinese business networks and subregional economic zones. It finds that the three informal mechanisms have formed an interrelated pattern of regional integration in East Asia. The nature of the economic networks is very useful in explaining the Asian crisis and the different performances of East Asian economies in the crisis. The crisis has also resulted in profound changes in informal integration. While the Japanese–led production networks have been greatly weakened, the Chinese Economic Area is rising, driven by the ethnic Chinese business networks and subregional economic zones. As a result, the Japan–dominated "flying geese pattern" has been broken. The connections between Greater China and the United States have also been enhanced and are out–competing the Japanese production networks. Many of the new developments have been ignored in the West but they are key factors that will shape the future of Asian and World political economy.     

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.     

东盟区域经济一体化的新格局

在经济全球化和区域化推动下，东盟区域经济一体化发展迅速，并成为东亚地区经济一体化进程的核心力量。已经并正在形成的东盟与中、印、日、韩、澳、新自由贸易区，对东亚区域经济的整合将产生重要影响，中国应进一步调整参与战略，以应对区域经济一体化带来的机遇与挑战。     

A systemic perspective on regional integration after the end of the Cold War

This paper explains the systemic pressures on states in Europe and Southeast Asia to broaden their alliances after the end of the Cold War, and how expansion impacts on regional integration. Inter-state cooperation is still very much the basis of regional integration. In Europe, states will scuttle attempts at deepening integration if this threatens their security, as the recent political impasse in the European Union reveals. In Southeast Asia, by contrast, the threat to the security of states arises from their failure to deepen economic integration in order to survive an anarchic world financial system. This failure is due to entrenched internal constraints that prevents closer inter-state cooperation and the pooling of sovereignty. Thus, while attempts to move into the area of political union will be resisted by states eager to maintain their sovereignty, the inability to advance into the area of monetary union can only lead to demise of states.

---

东北亚区域经济合作新构想

进入 2 1世纪 ,东北亚地区国际合作开发的外部与内部环境、政治与经济环境均发生了明显的变化 ,随着美俄、俄欧和中俄间加强合作 ,东北亚地区也已由各国自主开发进入了双边及多边合作为主的开发阶段。根据东北亚地区目前所具备的条件 ,现提出在东北亚地区建立跨国经济合作区 ,并利用当前良好的国际、国内环境和已有的合作基础 ,促进区域整体合作目标的实现 ,推动东北亚地区经济合作进入一个新的阶段。     

东亚经济一体化的特殊性——地区一体化的理论视角

地区一体化的相关理论认为,地区意志和地区行为能力是实现地区一体化的两个必要条件,在特定的历史条件下域外因素会通过作用于特定地区的地区意志和地区行为能力影响某一地区的走向。本文通过对东亚经济一体化进行分析,指出在东亚地区自身和美国因素的共同作用下,东亚各国进行经济一体化建设的地区意志和地区行为能力都相对较弱,东亚地区在一体化建设上任重道远。     

挑战与机遇:东亚一体化视野中的非传统安全合作

当前,传统安全威胁较冷战时期大为减弱,而形形色色的非传统安全威胁成为危害国家和地区安全甚至全球稳定的主要因素。东亚非传统安全合作较为成功,在实践中取得了明显成效,但客观上还存在一些不足之处。非传统安全合作增强了东亚国家的相互了解与互信,培育了地区认同意识和归属意识,促进了东亚合作机制向深度和广度拓展,为一体化深入发展提供了坚实的结构支撑。另一方面,东亚特殊的安全格局和错综复杂的历史与现实矛盾使地区非传统安全合作面临诸多挑战,同时也蕴涵了重要机遇。