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.     

U.S. Policy Towards Southeast Asia

Greater East Asia is expected to be the next theatre for world politics. 1 East Asian cooperation is rapidly developing through the channels of ASEAN Plus Three （APT） and East Asia Summit （EAS）, both driven by ASEAN. Southeast Asia is a region of diverse states and cultures that brings together all the major powers of the Asian-Pacific in a myriad of strategic interests. It is thus an open arena with the potential for a variety of strategic game-playing, options, and uncertain outcomes.2 In recent years, China＇s developing relationship with Southeast Asia has undergone a significant shift as the U.S.＇ distraction elsewhere and neglect of the region have created opportunities for an increased Chinese diplomatic and economic role in Southeast Asia.3 U.S. analysts are concerned about what may lie behind this shift in China-ASEAN relations, how it may affect American interests in the region and how best to react to the changes. Some have expressed concerns that to avoid becoming distanced from the region the U.S. should pay more attention to Southeast Asia, rather than just watching from a distance. This paper attempts to analyze the possible changes of U.S. policy towards Southeast Asia in the current context of East Asian Cooperation and its implications for China.     

东亚峰会吸收美俄参加及其影响

东盟外长会议决定邀请美国和俄罗斯加入东亚峰会，这是东亚区域合作的重要变化，也使美国加快实现其“重返东南亚”的战略。近年来美国遏制中国的倾向比较突出，斯坦伯格的“战略再保证”与当年杜勒斯的“岛链战略”一脉相承；美国务卿希拉里在东盟地区论坛会议上大谈南海问题，表明美国高调介入南海主权争端，这将使南海问题更加复杂化。当前中国的周边环境较为严峻，须冷静观察，沉着应对。     

Towards an Asian security-community

The title of this paper indicates that the subject matter involves a process. It is a gradual process, step by step , since there are still many constraints: the complete normalization between China and Japan; the acceptance of the US, openly or tacit; and ASEAN's credibility, which will depend on the efforts to build the ASEAN Community. The process probably involves more than only East Asia in the geographical sense, because it would be sensible to include India, Australia and New Zealand as well. An Asian Security Community appears premature. But an extended East Asian community, which has a security component, could be a possibility. How this will unfold further will depend on how successful this regional process will be. East Asia cannot emulate the EU because it is a more diverse region than Europe, but East Asia can learn from the EU.     

The perception of the European Union in Southeast Asia

The article examines the external image of the EU among elites in five selected Southeast Asian countries: Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore and the Philippines. Southeast Asia offers an interesting area for examining perceptions. Firstly, this region is linked to Europe by a long-standing and prosperous trade relationship. Secondly, the Association of South East Asian Nations has embarked on a process of deepening integration, adopting certain elements of the EU in its design. How desirable is the EU experience as an example of how to deepen integration? And how are EU external policies such as trade, human rights and environment perceived by stakeholders in the region? The article analyses perceptions on the themes of integration and external polices, contrasting them with the scholarly understandings of the EU as a ‘benign’ actor, notably the notions of ‘normative’, ‘civilian’ and ‘soft’ power.     

India's look east policy: an Asianist strategy in perspective

Indian nationalist leaders developed a strong interest in Asia right from the early nineteenth century. Jawarharlal Nehru articulated an Asianist ideology based on the cultural affinities between India and China and the geopolitical interest in Greater India. This approach, which culminated in the Bandung summit, was put into parenthesis after the 1962 war. The Cold War, during which India and South East Asia were in different camps, prompted differing paths towards in emulating the economic progress of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, and different approaches towards the development of the ASEAN. India's Asianist policy met an uneven fate but, by and large, there has been a significant rapprochement between India and East Asia. This move materialized in the investments of several Asian countries – including South Korea – in India and the entry of India in the ARF. Yet the symbiosis between India and Southeast Asia remains hindered by the rather nationalistic view of the latter region that the Hindutva movement is still propagating: like in the colonial period, Asianism remains part of an instrumentalist strategy.     

2003年的东盟与中国-东盟自由贸易区

在东南亚经济复苏、东亚经济增长、世界形势多变的情况下 ,东盟在2003年比较活跃 ,成为亚洲舞台上的一个热点 ,不仅促进了东盟内部在政治、经济、地区安全、社会的一体化进程 ,而且还进一步扩大了与中国、日本、韩国、印度等亚太国家的合作 ,加强了与美国、欧盟在非传统安全领域的对话与合作。中国—东盟自由贸易区进展顺利 ,它的启动积极地推动了东盟与中国经贸关系的发展。一、东盟 :扩大合作 ,促进一体化2003年的世界并不宁静 ,美英联军发动对伊拉克战争 ,“SARS”上半年肆虐东北亚和东南亚 ,在这种多变的形势下 ,东盟在各方面加强了内…     

Japan’s reluctance in East Asian economic integration

Until 1997, the only preferential trading arrangement, which existed in East Asia, was the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). Former Prime Minister of Malaysia Tun Dr. Mahathir had realized earlier the deficiency of AFTA in terms of stimulating economic development. In 1990, he proposed to ASEAN members to form the East Asian Economic Group. Due to regional political factors, his proposal was turned down and replaced with the East Asian Economic Caucus in 1992. In 1997, again, he proposed that ASEAN needed to establish large economic cooperation with other countries in East Asia. His suggestion had been warmly responded by the members of East Asian countries. At the ASEAN summit in Manila 1999, ASEAN Plus 3 (APT) was created. ASEAN, China, Japan, and South Korea had agreed and reached a joint statement to form a free-trade area by the year 2020. The establishment of APT was timely since most countries in the world are moving toward establishing wider or larger economic blocs due to the failure of multilateralism of the WTO in creating a new trade agreement. However, there is a shortcoming in the process of building APT, in the minimal and uncertain role of Japan in integrating economies in East Asia. This behavior has disappointed members of the group. The intention of this paper is to discuss the behavior of Japan in the economic integration process in East Asia.

---

从马来西亚与日本的关系变化看冷战后东亚格局的演变

冷战后,东亚地区的国际格局发生了重大的变化,大国关系处于历史性调整时期。东盟在亚太地区的影响日益上升,并逐渐成为塑造东亚格局的重要一极。中国的崛起和日本实力的相对下降深刻地改变了东亚地区的国际关系。本文通过分析马来西亚和日本的关系演变,管窥冷战后东亚格局的演变。     

奥巴马政府东亚政策的调整及中国的应对

对东亚政策的调整是奥巴马政府外交政策调整的主要方面。调整的内容包括,巩固与东亚盟国的关系,重视发展与东盟及东南亚国家的关系,而调整与中国政策的关系,无疑是美国东亚政策的核心。奥巴马政府对东亚政策的调整给中国外交政策带来了挑战,但如果处理得当,机遇明显大于挑战:美国东亚政策的调整可以促进中国推动国际秩序朝着更加公正合理方向发展的实践和规则的制定;为中美合作创造拓展更多的领域、提供更多的机会,特别是在非传统安全领域;也有利于中美关系的未来协调发展。     

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.     

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).     

2010年东南亚政治经济发展概述

2010年东南亚地区政治经济形势的发展特点可以概括为“政治上喜忧参半,经济上整体上扬,区域合作缓慢推进”。总体上讲,除泰国外,东南亚地区各国基本上都保持了政治社会的稳定;尽管挑战明显增加,但东盟共同体建设以及由东盟主导的东亚合作仍然缓慢推进;东盟国家整体实现恢复性增长,东南亚成为最具经济活力的地区之一。     

简析越南的东亚合作和共同体建设新对策

作为2010年东盟轮值主席国和东亚世界经济论坛东道主,越南在2010年元月召开的瑞士第40届达沃斯世界经济论坛年会上,就东亚合作和共同体建设以及其它一些国际问题积极发表意见,为提升自己在东盟中的地位和作用做出努力,并借此进一步提升自己的国际地位,推进其长远外交战略的实现。     

新地区主义视角下的中国东亚区域合作外交

在全球化时代的世界政治中,东亚新地区主义的发展为20世纪90年代以来的中国外交提供了广阔的舞台。当前,东亚区域合作外交正在成为中国外交中一个日益凸显的亮点。在新地区主义理论的视野中,中国提出新安全观,塑造负责任的大国形象;提出并倡导“开放的地区主义”思想,为新地区主义在亚太地区的发展开辟了道路;积极推进“10+3”合作,着力发展“10+1”;积极参与东亚区域合作的制度化建设,支持东盟为推进东亚区域一体化所作的努力;以“10+3”机制为契机,深化中、日、韩三国合作。在未来的东亚区域合作中,中国应在加快自身经济发展的同时,让东盟国家从中切实受益;继续坚定不移地树立负责任的大国形象,发挥大国作用;切实按照《南海各方行为宣言》所规定的各项原则处理同有关国家的海上领土争端和历史遗留问题;大力发展中、日、韩三国经贸合作,切实推进三国次区域自由贸易区建设;以建设性的合作精神发展中美关系。     

日本与东盟科技合作研究

日本既是当今世界第二大经济大国,也是一个科技强国。由于人口众多、国土狭小、资源匮乏,长期以来日本走的是一条面向全球发展经济的道路。加上日本地理上邻近东南亚,相互往来历史悠久,双方在社会、政治、经济和文化等领域保持着密切的关系,因而战后日本一直十分重视对东南亚地区的市场开拓。早在1977年,日本首相福田纠夫在首届日本—东盟首脑会议结束后,就提出了要与东盟发展“对等的伙伴关系”和“心心相印的信任关系”。以此为契机,日本在经济、社会和文化等众多领域与东盟进行合作并提供了大量的政府开发援助(ODA)①,并且随着其产业技…     

The Biden Administration's Policy Toward Southeast Asia: Momentum,Motivation and Challenges

After Biden took office,the United States,on the basis of inheriting the main framework of the Trump administration's Southeast Asia policy,has gradually increased its strategic input in Southeast Asia to expand the depth and breadth of cooperation with Southeast Asian countries.First,consolidate its diplomatic influence.     

中国与东亚共同体建构

在探讨东亚地区主义时通常所运用的三种思维范式———现实主义、自由主义和建构主义的思维范式。按照这样的一些思维范式分析,90年代后期的区内外因素促成了东盟+3会议的召开和真正意义上的东亚地区主义的发生及东亚同盟体的建构所面临的挑战。中国和平崛起对于参与和推进东亚共同体的形成具有重要的作用。     

Constructing Southeast Asian security: the pitfalls of imagining a security community and the temptations of orthodoxy

At the ninth summit of the Association of South‐East Asian Nations (ASEAN) in October 2003, the organisation's leaders declared their intention of transforming ASEAN into a security community. In making the case that ASEAN has functioned as a realist security institution since its inception in 1967, this article argues that the theoretical literature underpinning the ASEAN security community idea is characterised by significant conceptual and empirical flaws. First, a number of problems surround the variables—either norms or identity—that are used to explain the emergence of a putative security community among the ASEAN states. Second, critical issues in the ASEAN security community literature include the tautological nature of the arguments and a failure to rule out alternative explanations. Third, from an empirical perspective, the nascent ASEAN security community has arguably never existed.     

东盟国家华文教育研究述评

自中国与东盟2001年签署《中国—东盟全面经济合作框架协议》以来,双方在经济、政治、安全以及文化方面的合作不断加深。已有众多国内外学者对东盟各国的华文教育展开理论和实证方面的研究。本文在综合近10年来国内核心期刊上发表的有关东盟华文教育的研究成果的基础上,分析东盟各国华文教育研究的内容、特点、启示和发展趋势。