Asean plus three makes more sense than a larger grouping
Saturday, 29 December 2007
Bunn Nagara
REGIONALISM in East Asia took off in a big way four decades ago, when the Association of South-East Asian Nations (Asean) was formed in 1967. But China, Japan and the Koreas in North-East Asia were weighed down by their historical baggage.
Since then, regional highs and lows saw Asean both as the most successful regional organisation in Asia, and a grouping that has - like East Asia as a whole - not done enough. The Fifth East Asia Congress in Kuala Lumpur recently reviewed this chequered past and prospects for the future.
A Thai delegate observed that certain "imbalances and dislocations" were not unique to Asean. He said although China was the world's second-largest economy, by purchasing power parity, it was not among the G8, while Japan as the second-biggest UN sponsor was not a permanent member of the Security Council.
For East Asia, it can also be said that even as the fastest-growing and most promising economic region in the world, it still does not have an economic community to call its own. And as a region devastated by the 1997-98 financial contagion, it is still without a regional economic institution to help avoid or mitigate such crises.
Meanwhile there was a mistaken presumption voiced by some Korean and Indonesian participants that North-East Asian networking and East Asian community-building were mutually exclusive or incompatible. In practice the opposite is true since closer North-East Asian relations, like the Asean experience for South-East Asia, is an integral and necessary part of an East Asian community.
A Malaysian delegate said research had found that an East Asian community built by Asean with China, Japan and Korea (Asean Plus Three, or APT), made more sense than by a larger grouping with countries outside the region. This was because the economic linkages among the APT countries were already evident and becoming significant.
A delegate from Singapore agreed, adding that this was based on the latest trends. He also said an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) was the most likely of all existing proposals to emerge, although its emergence was not a foregone conclusion.
A US-based Asian scholar said an Asian Monetary Fund could fund key infrastructure projects in East Asia's poorer countries, citing a point made by Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in opening the congress.
He added the challenge was to build a strong regional financial market, which does not require a regional financial union.
Some participants were unsure if such policy proposals would be approved by the United States. A Korean delegate said this was an unnecessary worry, since the priority was to work within the region towards such an institution and regional integration.
A Thai delegate said for integration to work, it was necessary to reach out to the people of the region and build on their common values. He said "we cannot wait" for these values to emerge on their own, and Asean had a key role to foster this initiative.
A Japanese delegate said the role of local governments in Japan was becoming important in improving ties with China and Korea. His Chinese counterpart said scholars in China were intrigued by the mutually defining roles between Asean, Japan and China.
A Singapore delegate underscored how market forces were the main determinant of regionalism in South-East and East Asia. He also noted that interdependence within the region had become more real than the institutional initiatives so far to encourage it.
A general view was that regional integration was achieved more quickly by economics than by politics - unless urgency prevails on states to expedite it. Fraying relations among neighbours created Asean in 1967, while it took a numbing crisis in 1997 to establish the APT.
The question now is whether countries in the region would remain merely reactive, requiring another crippling crisis to motivate them towards greater integration, or choose to be more pro-active in conscientiously striving for that now.
As Singapore chairs Asean at the start of its fifth decade, and as East Asian community-building enters its second decade, much of that remains to be seen.
Staronline
REGIONALISM in East Asia took off in a big way four decades ago, when the Association of South-East Asian Nations (Asean) was formed in 1967. But China, Japan and the Koreas in North-East Asia were weighed down by their historical baggage.
Since then, regional highs and lows saw Asean both as the most successful regional organisation in Asia, and a grouping that has - like East Asia as a whole - not done enough. The Fifth East Asia Congress in Kuala Lumpur recently reviewed this chequered past and prospects for the future.
A Thai delegate observed that certain "imbalances and dislocations" were not unique to Asean. He said although China was the world's second-largest economy, by purchasing power parity, it was not among the G8, while Japan as the second-biggest UN sponsor was not a permanent member of the Security Council.
For East Asia, it can also be said that even as the fastest-growing and most promising economic region in the world, it still does not have an economic community to call its own. And as a region devastated by the 1997-98 financial contagion, it is still without a regional economic institution to help avoid or mitigate such crises.
Meanwhile there was a mistaken presumption voiced by some Korean and Indonesian participants that North-East Asian networking and East Asian community-building were mutually exclusive or incompatible. In practice the opposite is true since closer North-East Asian relations, like the Asean experience for South-East Asia, is an integral and necessary part of an East Asian community.
A Malaysian delegate said research had found that an East Asian community built by Asean with China, Japan and Korea (Asean Plus Three, or APT), made more sense than by a larger grouping with countries outside the region. This was because the economic linkages among the APT countries were already evident and becoming significant.
A delegate from Singapore agreed, adding that this was based on the latest trends. He also said an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) was the most likely of all existing proposals to emerge, although its emergence was not a foregone conclusion.
A US-based Asian scholar said an Asian Monetary Fund could fund key infrastructure projects in East Asia's poorer countries, citing a point made by Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in opening the congress.
He added the challenge was to build a strong regional financial market, which does not require a regional financial union.
Some participants were unsure if such policy proposals would be approved by the United States. A Korean delegate said this was an unnecessary worry, since the priority was to work within the region towards such an institution and regional integration.
A Thai delegate said for integration to work, it was necessary to reach out to the people of the region and build on their common values. He said "we cannot wait" for these values to emerge on their own, and Asean had a key role to foster this initiative.
A Japanese delegate said the role of local governments in Japan was becoming important in improving ties with China and Korea. His Chinese counterpart said scholars in China were intrigued by the mutually defining roles between Asean, Japan and China.
A Singapore delegate underscored how market forces were the main determinant of regionalism in South-East and East Asia. He also noted that interdependence within the region had become more real than the institutional initiatives so far to encourage it.
A general view was that regional integration was achieved more quickly by economics than by politics - unless urgency prevails on states to expedite it. Fraying relations among neighbours created Asean in 1967, while it took a numbing crisis in 1997 to establish the APT.
The question now is whether countries in the region would remain merely reactive, requiring another crippling crisis to motivate them towards greater integration, or choose to be more pro-active in conscientiously striving for that now.
As Singapore chairs Asean at the start of its fifth decade, and as East Asian community-building enters its second decade, much of that remains to be seen.
Staronline