New Zealand and the Asia–Europe Meeting

This article considers New Zealand’s accession to the Asia–Europe Meeting, considering both its formal path to membership and the evolving calculus by which its views of the process were structured, focusing on elements such as the enabling context provided by a change of national government in 2008, the impact of the global financial crisis and the position of Australia. Drawing on a set of interviews undertaken within the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, it goes on to examine perceived benefits of the Asia–Europe Meeting for New Zealand, and the extent to which these have been achieved. Finally, it addresses the issue of a New Zealand ASEM strategy, outlining potential areas for future engagement.     

Stability in North East Asia is the Foundation for Regional Cooperation

１．ThedevelopmenttrendofregionalcooperationinNorthEastAsia．Since１９９０s，economicglobalizationhasgrownrapidlyintheglobalsphere．Inthemean－time，organizationsofvariousformsforregionalcooperationhavecomeintoexistence．Worldeconomicpatternandinterna－tionaldivisionoflaborandcom－petitionsystemhavewitnesseddrasticchanges．Theofficialin－augurationanddevelopmentoftheEuropeanUnionandNorthAmericanRegionalOrganizationhavemountedseverechallengetoAsia．IntheworldtotalGDP，thethreeNorthAmeric…     

Asia’s and Europe’s energy policy challenges: introduction

We bring together a collection of papers that were presented at the inaugural event of the Asia‐Europe Energy Policy Research Network (AEEPRN), held at Singapore in May 2012. The idea for creating AEEPRN was in response to the growing importance of energy in Asia and Europe’s relations and to our shared belief that energy will become a more significant aspect of these relations over the forthcoming years and decades. The papers presented here cover the following themes: wind energy, biofuels, natural gas and gas pipelines, exergy and manufacturing, green energy co‐operation, coal, unconventional gas and solar energy.     

Clashes and dialogues of civilizations revisited— the case of contemporary East Asia and Europe

This article sets out to inquire whether or not—political desiderata apart—genuine intercultural dialogue is feasible between Europe and East Asia, and if so, in which subject areas this could be done productively. It therefore examines the underlying value patterns which are grounded in religious traditions on both sides. It retraces the consequences which Communist rule had (and continues to have) on religious practice and ethnic identities of affected societies, and reviews the salient inter-ethnic and inter-religious conflicts which surfaced during the past quarter century on both continents. This is done in order to be able to qualify empirically Huntington’s theory on predominantly cultural clashes between civilizations. In conclusion we find a large measure of congruence between normative values of Christianity and Buddhism and between the secularized work ethics of Confucianism and of (Calvinist) Protestantism, so as to permit a meeting of minds. Conflicts were caused by the religious and ethnic suppression by Communist regimes (Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia), by other authoritarian regimes (post Communist Serbia and Russia, Myanmar), and by nationalist: chauvinism. Conflicts between cultures (Bosnia, Nagorno Karabach, Abkhazia, Chechnya, Eastern Indonesia, East Timor, Pattani, Mindanao, Tibet, Xinjiang) occured as well as within them (Transnistria, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Aceh). Huntington is thus frequently right, but not universally so. Moreover open conflicts on the two continents have rather been limited in extent and mostly took place in peripheral regions. Coexistence with Muslims is difficult both in Europe and in East Asia. But more often than not they appear as victims of aggression (Bosnia, Chechnya, Xinjiang, Pattani, the Cham) rather than as its perpetrators (Northern Cyprus, East Timor, Eastern Indonesia, and Al Quaida linked terrorism in the UK, Spain, Bali and Mindanao). In view of common values and similar problems, dialogue and cooperation should—and are—perfectly possible and potentially productive on a wide range of subjects, starting from conflict management and prevention, confidence building and reconciliation, to grand subjects of managing the consequences of globalization, of global security, of sharing experiences on regional integration, of lessons to be learned from development cooperation, on environmental protection and resource conservation, and on solving common demographic problems. Adapted lecture on “Dialogue of Cultures and Religions within and with East Asia” given at the Afro-Asian Institute, University of Graz (Austria) on 9.10.2007. Note that this article reflects only personal views.

---

Enhancing Dialogue,Exchange and Cooperation(Excerpts)

ＥｎｈａｎｃｉｎｇＤｉａｌｏｇｕｅ,ＥｘｃｈａｎｇｅａｎｄＣｏｏｐｅｒａｔｉｏ（Ｅｘｃｅｒｐｔｓ）ＢｙＷｕＸｉｎｇｔａｎｇ（Ｓｅｃｒｅｔａｒｙ－ｇｅｎｅｒａｌｏｆＣＡＦＩＵ，ＰｒｏｆｅｓｓｏｒａｔｔｈｅＰｅｏｐｌｅ＇ｓＵｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙｏｆＣｈｉｎ?..     

East Asia in a unipolar international order and Europe’s role in the region

This article attempts to explore the post-Cold War international system in which regional orders intermingle their influence. It pays special attention to regional conflicts in East Asia in the new era and what roles global powers could play to maintain regional stability. I will first examine the characteristics of the new global order after the end of the bipolarity. I will then focus on American foreign policy in the new international system in the context of its dealing with major global events that have strategic implications for its relations with other major global powers. As to discussions of regional orders, this article focuses on East Asia, where conflicts between states have not evaporated despite the relaxation of the global Cold War confrontation. What makes this area special is the involvements of many great powers and less-powerful nations that could somehow easily manipulate the seniors into the conflicts to their favour. While the regional order in East Asia is being shaped by the post- Cold War international order, the regions peace and conflicts will in turn significantly influence global order. Finally, I will argue that dealing with problems in East Asia should acquire involvements of powers that would give necessary momentum to the existing participants to solve conflicts by the means of multilateralism. The European Union (EU) is often forgotten for its role in contributing to world order, and the EU should be taken seriously by the powers in East Asia as a possible player in maintaining the regional peace. I conclude that both global and regional security depend on continuing US unipolarity, strengthened by the co-operation of the EU in the form of multilateralism. By the same token, US unilateralism without a EU counter-balancing it, only invites potential challengers, such as China, to threaten the USs preponderant position, thereby destabilising world peace.This article was supported by a research project (NSC-P3-2414-H-004-018) of the National Science Council, Taiwan, which is gratefully acknowledged.     

“Possession is Nine Tenths of the Law”: Britain and the Boundaries of Eastern Europe since 1945

This article argues that British policy on boundaries in Eastern Europe after 1945 was based on hardheaded Realpolitik whereby the justice of any given border was of entirely secondary importance to wider policy imperatives. British disregard for the legal and moral merits (or demerits) of respective cases was justified by British policy makers on two counts: firstly, international relations could not assess boundary disputes on a case-by-case basis as such thinking had undermined international stability to the point of global conflagration after 1918; secondly, British policy makers declared that it was their aim to stabilize the international system by means of détente. In reality, the proclaimed goal of universally beneficial goals by means of a “pragmatic” consolidation of the status quo hid a real desire to institutionalise a system that was seen as the best possible option for Britain given the harsh reality of its relative decline after 1945.

“There is no government on earth which divulges its affairs less than England, or is more punctually informed of those of others.”

—Sagredo, Venetian Ambassador to London in the Sixteenth Century.

     

After decolonization: Australia and the emergence of the non‐aligned movement in Asia, 1954–55

This article is a study of the response of the Australian government under Robert Menzies to the emergence of the Afro‐Asian movement in the mid‐1950s, especially the element of the non‐aligned nations, which culminated in the Bandung meeting of April 1955. Non‐alignment and anti‐colonialism posed direct threats to the Menzies government's plans for the defence of Southeast Asia and its foreign policy for the region. The study of the Australian response to the Bandung meeting reveals the different legacies which European imperialism left behind in Australia compared with its neighbours in south and east Asia.     

ASEM’s role for co-operation on security in Asia and Europe

This article argues that the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) process of multidimensional dialogue plays a prominent role in addressing issues of transnational security in both regions mainly in the field of soft and non-traditional security affairs. Furthermore, this significance and effectiveness of ASEM as a tool for mutually enhancing security could be further enhanced through such measures as greater co-operation between the UN and regional organizations, greater complementary efforts from Civil Society, pro-active engagement of ASEM in a changing security environment, greater convergence with other regional security groupings, opening of avenues for track 2 contributions, and heightened consistency in the commitment of the European Union to the process. Despite questions and challenges that ASEM may face, ASEM is now a clear reference in Europe and in Asia – and in Southeast Asia in particular-for security issues.This text reflects the personal views of the author.     

The EU's security and defense policy (ESDP) and the challenges of civil–military coordination (CMCO): the case of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

Abstract

The article assesses the role of the EU in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and the ability of the EU to coordinate its different means and instruments with regard to the relationship between the European Commission and the Council. The article focuses on what is referred to as civil–military coordination (CMCO) in internal EU documents. The aim is to compare the four ESDP missions in DRC since 2003 with special regard to CMCO since the aim of the EU as a comprehensive security actor is to avoid artificial distinctions between military and civilian missions. Hence, the distinctiveness of ESDP derives precisely from its civil–military synergies, and a comparative perspective on CMCO could tell us more about how the EU has developed so as to become a comprehensive security actor in a country which is of importance for EU interests. The final part of the article assesses the impact on CMCO of the newly implemented Lisbon Treaty. A suitable institutional framework as devised for in the Treaty is essential so as to shape a framework that creates a timely as well as a comprehensive response to crises.     

Australia's dilemma between geography and history: how consolidated is engagement with Asia?

Australia's relations with Asia have been variously envisionedas integration, enmeshment or engagement, and this relationshipdescribed as comprehensive, close, cooperative, positive andmultifaceted. Among its components, economic, political, socio-cultural,and military or strategic spheres have been distinguished. Theuse of several designations, and the emphasis of distinctivecharacteristics and components, has led to the appearance ofdifferent meanings and implications. In order to overcome thisproblem, this article aims to provide a conceptual frameworkin terms of which the process of Australia's engagement withAsia can be described, explained and predicted. Thus, a conceptualframework is developed, and tested empirically for the period1991–2001. This article argues that Australia is stillfar from achieving behavioral, attitudinal and institutionalconsolidation in its engagement with Asia.     

Europe,China and security governance: is there evidence of normative convergence?

Normative power can be defined as the ability to govern interdependencies by means of rules, regimes and compliance strategies. This paper presents two case studies in security governance—international responsibility to protect in Sudan and counter-proliferation policies towards Iran’s nuclear programme—to evaluate the degree of normative convergence between China and Europe. It concludes that there are still major differences between Europe and China on employing normative strategies in security governance but that both modes of governance and identities as security actors are mobile so that the trend is towards convergence, albeit with some distance still to travel.     

Asian perceptions about the EU in the Asia�CEurope Meeting (ASEM)

The inauguration of the Asia–Europe Meeting (ASEM) in Bangkok in March 1996 has created enthusiasm and hopes for closer inter-regional relations between Asia and Europe. This article observes how behaviors of European countries representatives in the ASEM process have significantly shaped the perceptions of Asian officials and people about the EU and European intentions to develop mutually beneficial relations with Asia. It employs a constructivist framework in which the ASEM process is treated as a dynamic social setting for not only Asia–Europe inter-regional interactions but also intra-Asia socialization. Methodologically, it is a qualitative research with an inductive process and interpretive method. The research uses qualitative data, gathered from various sources and 82 in-depth interviews with diplomats, scholars, journalists, business peoples and civil society representatives in five Asian countries. This study finds that some behaviors of EU participants at ASEM or ASEF interregional forums are counterproductive for EU efforts to develop robust relations with Asian countries. The polarization between Asian and European groups in the ASEM or ASEF meetings, caused by political issues and colonial memory, contributed to the difficulties in trust-building between Asian and European participants. In addition, by their frequent absence from ASEM Summits, EU leaders squandered rare opportunities for a ‘meeting of minds and hearts’ with their Asian counterparts. This process seems to be a precondition for Asians to develop tangible cooperation.