Regional Order in East Asia

Issues and Insights, 2010

CENTRE FOR POLITICAL STUDIES OF INDONESIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCES WORKSHOP ASEAN 2004 ON ASEAN’S VIABILITY AMIDST THE NEW ASIA PACIFIC POWERS, 2004

APT relations are increasingly becoming important to ASEAN and its three East Asian dialogue partners, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK) not only in the economic realm but also in the political and security, social and cultural and development cooperation arenas.

2005

The traditional underpinnings of international relations in Asia are undergoing profound change, and the rise of China is a principal cause. Other causes include the relative decline of U.S. inºuence and authority in Asia, the expanding normative inºuence of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the growth of regional multilateral institutions, increased technological and economic interdependence throughout the region, and the amelioration of several formerly antagonistic bilateral relationships. As a result of these processes, the structure of power and the nature of the regional system are being fundamentally altered. China’s growing economic and military power, expanding political inºuence, distinctive diplomatic voice, and increasing involvement in regional multilateral institutions are key developments in Asian affairs. China’s new proactive regional posture is reºected in virtually all policy spheres— economic, diplomatic, and military—and this parallels China...

This paper mainly argues that East Asian regional co-operation efforts face many challenges to make it more institutionalised and concrete. Regionalism endeavours have waxed and waned depending on both international and external factors, such as the increasing divide between mainland and maritime Southeast Asia, the rise of China, the great powers’ rivalry, the neglect of America in Southeast Asia, and the political leadership in East Asian countries. However, the spirit of regionalism still survives until today. East Asian Community, though still in its embryonic stage, ensures the future commitment for East Asian countries to cooperate. The roles of external powers and regional power are certainly crucial to this development. However, East Asia cannot only wait and rely on their determination to support this project. Regional non-great powers can play a significant role in this development as it always did in the past such as the role of ASEAN. Therefore, this paper concludes that the role of non-great powers is also equally important to carry out a successful regional co-operation by asserting their leadership both as a group and on an individual capacity.

The confluence of the administrations of President Obama of the United States and President Xi Jinping of China has been marked by more aggressive projections of power in the region. For the United States, this power projection is best seen in the pivot/rebalance strategy to Asia. China's new level of aggressive confidence is dramatized by its massive island-building and fortifications in the contested South China Sea areas as well as its ambitious projects around the " China Dream " , including the AIIB and the Silk Road initiatives. These developments have weakened the ASEAN's projection of its own " centrality " in helping create a rules-based order and socializing other players in the region to a multilateral framework in addressing common problems. China's preference for bilateral negotiations in addressing territorial and maritime problems in the region has also gained headway among the major ASEAN claimant states, including the Philippines and Malaysia. All these developments challenge not only the claim of " ASEAN Centrality " but also the association's own goal of heightened integration and community building.

Since the start of the Association of South East Asian Nation (ASEAN) Plus Three (APT) initiative in 1997, East Asian regionalism seems to have progressed and an East Asian Community is just around the corner. In spite of all the pessimism brought about by the 1997 Asian financial crisis, East Asian political frameworks are in place, East Asian regional production networks are the most integrated in the world, and regional financial initiatives have taken off. From a financial integration, financial regulation, and education perspective, however, East Asian regionalism has either stagnated or even regressed. Furthermore, US re-engagement in the region and the increased tension over the South China seas tend to challenge further developments in East Asian regionalization outside of the economic space. This paper is a mini-scoping study to present the realities that East Asian regionalism is still lap-sided: economic regionalism is highly developed, while other key components (regional financial and financial regulation integration, education collaboration, and a regional political framework) are developing at a slower rate, stagnating, and/or regressing. It aims to present the reality of East Asian regionalism, provoke awareness of false perspectives, and present a recommendation towards a balanced and more sustainable East Asian regionalism and the formation of a real East Asian community.

ANU Press eBooks, 2023

This paper analyses ASEAN's prominence in regional order negotiation and management in Southeast Asia and the Asia-pacific through the lens of social role negotiation. It argues that ASEAN has negotiated legitimate social roles as the 'primary manager' in Southeast Asia and the 'regional conductor' of the Asia-Pacific order. It develops an English School-inspired role negotiation framework and applies it

TRaNS: Regional and National Studies of Southeast Asia, 2013

From its inception, ASEAN has been shaped by the evolving structure of the international system and the activities of more powerful external actors. This is still the case. What is different now is that the nature of the region of which ASEAN is a part has changed in significant ways. Indeed, the entire structure of the international system has undergone a number of profoundly important changes which have forced ASEAN to adjust and recalibrate its own policies. This paper explores this adjustment process and maps the most important forces and actors that are compelling change. By placing the ASEAN experience in a comparative conceptual framework, it becomes possible to identify the key drivers of change and to speculate about their future impact on an organisation that has proved remarkably resilient thus far. The nature of contemporary regional developments and the continuing evolution of the wider international system mean that ASEAN is currently facing major new challenges and questions about its relevance in an era when other regional organisations are emerging to challenge its authority and role.

Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 2009

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 2024

The concept of “ASEAN centrality” emerged in the aftermath of the Cold War but renewed power rivalries in the Indo-Pacific have put its relevance under scrutiny. This study contributes to the debate on the continuity of ASEAN centrality by examining major powers’ willingness to adhere to and engage with ASEAN-led mechanisms, which we argue will have a decisive impact on the dominant form of the organisation of regional order. Our analysis shows that the major powers – China, the European Union, India, Japan, and the United States – subscribe to an enhanced role for ASEAN in the economic realm but do not see the mechanism as the first resort in political and security cooperation. ASEAN centrality is hard to continue, although a possible way out for ASEAN is to leverage its in-between position to help diffuse tensions so major powers have a stake in maintaining its centrality.

The 21st Century is witnessing the return to preeminence of two of the oldest and most influential civilizations in human history, namely that of China and India. The courses plotted to this return are somewhat different for each, according to unique differences in culture, timing and demographic trends, however both are heavily dependent on increasing economic power. What is common is that prior to the 19th Century, the civilizations which are now represented by these two countries were dominant economic powers regionally and internationally, a position both will reclaim by the mid part of this century. In the 21st Century however, sitting between these competing powers, is an emerging economic bloc which did not exist when China and India dominated the regions of South and East Asia. The member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, with yet positive demographic trends, substantial natural resource reserves and three decades of development, must plot a political and economic course which attains the greatest benefit from being resident at the nexus of the two great local powers of India and China and the distant but critical superpower of the US.