Cooperation Vs. Confrontation: Asia’s New Multilateralism

1. Cooperation Vs. Confrontation: Asia’s New Multilateralism Hannah Perry 4013R360-8

2. Definitions of Multilateralism • Robert Keohane: Cooperation or coordination of three or more nations in any form • John Ruggie: Cooperation that is institutionalised through common rules and norms within the multilateral form • James Caporaso: Multilateral cooperation that is regulated by general norms and indivisibility of values • John Duffield: Highest form of multilateral institutionalisation that involves clear rules, compliance, commitment and an institutionalised third-party mediator

3. Cold War: The Rise of Asian Regionalism • US bilateral partnerships: • 1951: Australia, New Zealand, Philippines • 1953: South Korea • 1954: Japan, Thailand, Taiwan • 1954: Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) • Australia, France, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, UK, USA • 1967: Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) • Founding members: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand

4. Post Cold War: “Asianisation” • 1989: Asia-Pacific Economic Forum (APEC) – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, USA • 1993: APEC formally institutionalised and headquartered in Singapore with 21 participating members • 1994: ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) – 27 countries • First Asia-Pacific multilateral forum for consultations on peace and security issues • 2001: Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) – China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Russia, Uzbekistan • Summits on political, economic and security issues

5. Post Cold War: “Asianisation” ASEAN Expansion • 1997: ASEAN Plus Three- Japan, China, South Korea (APT) • APT summit 2002 proposed East Asian Free Trade Agreement under the ‘East Asia Summit’ (EAS) • 2005: Inaugural EAS • Membership criteria announced • Members must have close relations with ASEAN • Members must be full dialogue partners with ASEAN • Members must be signatories of ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC)

6. Asian institutional architecture

7. Successful Asianisation? Asian regionalism characterised by: • Bilateral  Multilateral • New Asian institutional ‘architecture’ • New regional architecture allows for greater fluidity • Bloc-based system vs. open regionalism • Asia proper vs. Broader Asia Pacific • EAS vs. APT – uneasy coexistence • Power centres in the region – China? Japan?

8. Ad Hoc Multilateralism – ‘Minilaterals’ What is ad hoc multilateralism/minilateralism? • Impromptu organisations, bringing together like-minded countries in the face of imminent threats in order to address and resolve common issues Example: The threat from North Korean nuclear ambitions • 1995: Korean Energy Development Organisation – USA, Japan, South Korea, EU • 1997/1999: Four Party Talks convened between China, USA, North Korea and South Korea • 2003: Six Party Talks – China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Russia and USA

9. Ad Hoc Multilateralism – ‘Minilaterals’ Why is the ad hoc process appealing? • Capability to focus on specific, mutually shared problems • ‘Coalitions of the willing’ • Including China in minilateral coalitions  reinforces stability in the region

10. Obstacles to the process of regional integration • Who is in Asia? – Discrepancies in geographic scope • Each state attempts to pursue individual national interests • USA prefers trans-pacific agreements • China prefers narrow geographic definitions of Asia in order to increase its weight and influence • However; a combination of exclusivity and inclusivity remains

11. Obstacles to the process of regional integration • What Agenda? What Norms? • EU members had a set of common norms that allowed for effective integration and development of the EU • Japan vs. China – an ideational contest • China aims to preserve diversity of norms and value-neutral cooperation • Japan aims to narrow normative gaps between countries on issues such as democracy and human rights

12. Obstacles to the process of regional integration • What kind of economic integration? • Issues regarding • Speed • Inclusivity • Reduction of barriers to trade and investment • US investment • Asia has largely focused on bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTA) • Only proposals and potential for more inclusive economic integration – FTAAP, APT-FTA

13. Obstacles to the process of regional integration • Who provides public goods? • US remains the most important actor in humanitarian crises or state failure – A reliance on US military capabilities • Stability sits on the shoulders of the US network of alliances in the region • Problem of bilateral military cooperation between ASEAN states and the US rather than between ASEAN states

14. Can multilateralism work? • Socialisation effect – where states are eager to acquire an Asian identity through involvement with multilateral institutions  states acquire regional norms • Common lexicon – rising use of concepts including ‘East Asian Community’ and ‘open and inclusive regionalism’ • Collective action becoming the common norm • States beginning to cede aspects of national sovereignty in order to promote cooperation

15. Findings and Implications Gill and Green Define Asia’s new multilateralism; ‘extension and intersection of national power and purpose rather than as an objective force in itself’ (p.3) Positive Findings: • Clear desire within the region for Asian led institutions • Notable increase in the number of multilateral mechanisms • Economic integration largely prioritised over security cooperation Negative Findings: • Continued under-institutionalisation in Asia compared to Europe • Attempts to establish a balance of power dynamic remains • Continued over-reliance on the US

16. Asia vs. Europe • National sovereignty and power of the nation state remains overwhelmingly important in Asia • Asian model is more fluid and flexible whilst Europe is based on a formal legality approach • Asia = diversity of political systems, economic levels, social conditions etc. • Asian institutionalisation is often responding to crises and discontinuity • No equivalent to the European Coal and Steel Union

17. What does the Future hold? • ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) – 2015 • Goal of regional economic integration with free movement of goods & services, labour etc. • AEC blueprint adopted in 2007 • Concerns: • Problems of form over substance – creating numerous new forums may be redundant  more beneficial to strengthen or enlarge existing forums • Necessary to focus on stability and not just the language of community building • Competition due to ad hoc agreements may create new security dilemmas

18. Conclusion/Comments • Problematic to compare Asian multilateralism to European integration • Problematic to apply academic definitions of multilateralism directly • Necessary to draw a distinction between collective action and action based on mutual constraint • Gradualism – slow pace in development

19. Conclusion/Comments • Can ASEAN remain a dominant institution in the region as multilateral institutions continues to incorporate powerful, arguably more influential and not necessarily Asian states? • Is US focus on bilateral and sub-regional FTAs impeding economic integration in the region? Or is Asia proper simply prone to protectionism • Will the proliferation of FTAs contribute to or undermine Asian regional integration • Is Asian multilateralism affected by the fact that it can be considered the ‘world’s most dynamic region’? • Can Asia escape the tradition of a hierarchical regional order? – Is ‘community building’ therefore simply a front?