• Hungdah Su
• Married, two boys
• Professor and Jean Monnet
Chair at National Taiwan
University
• Director General of EU Centre in
Taiwan
• Member of Council of Jean
Monnet Foundation for Europe
• Chief editor of Books Series on
EU Studies in Taiwan
•
•
•
•
Doctorat of IH of University ParisSorbonne
Master of EC Law of University PantheonSorboone
Master of Diplomacy and International
Law of Cheng-Chi University in Taiwan
BA of National Taiwan University
September 18, 2014
EU Centre of Excellence at Carleton University, Canada
EU experience and the
Competing Asian Regionalism in
the aftermath of Financial Crisis
Dr. Hungdah Su
Professor and Jean Monnet Chair at National Taiwan University
Director General of EU Centre in Taiwan (EUTW)
Outline
1. Introduction
2. Development of Asian regionalism
3. Competing approaches to Asian
regionalism
4. China and Asian regionalism
5. Evaluation of these competing
approaches in light of EU experiences
6. Prospect of Asian regionalism
Asia as a geographical region
Political map of Asia
The largest Asia
• Area
44.6 million km2
(4 Canada)
• Population
3.9 billion (55% of
global population)
• Polities
47 (including Cypruses,
Turkey, Taiwan etc.)
Asia defined by UN (without Siberia)
Asia defined by the US (ADB)
Asia in the context of Asia Pacific
Asia defined by EU (ASEM)
Some structural but evolving facts 2013
State
PRC
Population
Area
(million) (th. Km2)
(est. 2014) (2014)
1,356
9,597
127
N.Korea
GDP
( trillion $)
(2013)
6,594
1/3
378
5.01 39,393
5/5
25
121
0.03
1,127
121/130
S.Korea
49
100
1.20 24,429
7/8
Taiwan
23
36
0.49 20,749
21/20
ASEAN
630
4,481
1.63
2,563
X
1,236
3,287
1.76
1,422
19/9
EU
509
4,325
17.03 33,434
2/1
USA
319
9,827
16.72 52,432
3/2
Japan
India
8.94
Income
Exports/
(U)
Imports
(calc.) (rank) (2013)
ASEAN
State
People (million) Area (th. km2)
(est. 2014)
(2014)
Brunei
Burma
0.42
56
5.8
677
Cambodia
Indonesia
Laos
15
254
6.8
181
1,905
237
Malaysia
Philippines
Singapore
30
108
5.6
330
300
0.7
Vietnam
93
331
Thailand
68
513
Foreign Exchange Reserve
(billion $) (est. 2013)
State
FER
PRC
3820
Brazil 378
Japan
1268
S. Korea 342
Eurozone
812
HK 309
Saudi
740
India 277
Russia
517 Singapore 271
Taiwan
415
Regimes and alliances in 2013
International structure in Asia
Potentially military conflicts
Territorial disputes
Conflicts in South China Sea
Young nation-buildings based
upon old civilizations
Young nation-buildings
•
•
•
•
•
1867
1911
1939
1945
1947
Meiji Reform in Japan
Creation of ROC
Creation of Modern Thailand
Independence of Koreas, Indonesia
Independence of India and
Pakistan
• 1948 Independence of Burma
• 1949 Creation of PRC
• 1953 Independence of Vietnam,
Cambodia and Laos
• 1957 Creation of Malaysia
• 1967 Indepenedence of Singapore
• 1984 Independence of Brunei
• 2002 East Timor
Debate
• Do Asian values exist?
- Community is more important
than individuals.
- Order is more important than
liberty.
- Consensus replaces
confrontation.
- Virtue to work hard rather
than enjoy life.
- ………
Integration in light of EU
experience
• Integration means a pooling of sovereignty
of member states into common institutions.
This pooling process could be started with
establishment of intergovernmental
cooperation, which later developed into
supranational integration.
Schimmelfennig, Frank and Sedelmeier, Ulrich (2002).
Theorizing EU enlargement: research focus, hypotheses,
and the state of research. Journal of European Public
Policy, 9(4), 500-528.
• Integratioin is defined here as ‘vertical
institutionalisation’, which includes all
the institutionalising developments of
intergovernmental cooperation, common
policies and Community building.
Definition for Asian integration
• All developments based upon the
integovernmental agreements in the
region that aim to constitute any step
enumerated by Balassa are defined as
parts of Asian integration.
Integration in Asia:
• Integratoin without strong
institutionalization.
• Integration without supranational
inspiration.
• Integration without strong regional
identity.
Asian integration in comparison
• Compared to Europe
– No integration/reconciliation among US allies
in Asia though US-led alliances guaranteed
the regional security.
– Regional economy is now driven partly and
increasingly by PRC, a non ally of US
– All regional projects must include PRC, a non
ally of US, a dominant power in Asia.
2. Development of Asian
regionalism
Until 1945, Asia was dominated by
imperialism.
Before 1945
• 1924 Su Yat sen proposed
Greater Asianism or Pan
Asianism in Kobei, Japan, which
aimed to persuade Japanese
leaders to help liberate Asians
from Western imperioalism and
build up an Asians’ Asia. Then
Sino-Japanese cooperation
should constitute the driving force
of Asian regionalism.
1940-45 Japan intended to establish the Greater
East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere as part of
Japanese militarism in Asia.
During the Cold War period
• 1966 Asian Development Bank (ADB)
• 1967 Pacific Basin Economic
Cooperation (PBEC); ASEAN
• 1980 Pacific Economic Cooperation
Council (PECC)
Since 1989
• 1989 Asia Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC)
• 2002 ASEAN plus Process
• 2008 Charter of ASEAN; TPP with US
• 2010 ASEAN plus PRC; ECFA
• 2012 RCEP (Regional Comprehensive
Economic Partnership)
Asian regionalism
• 1960-1980 Japan-initiated integration
• Late 1980- mid 1990 US/Australia-led
integration
• Mid 1990 – early 2000 ASEAN-centred
integration
• Early 2000 – 2010
China-centred
integration
• Since 2010 Rising competition between
US and China
Competing approaches to
regionalism in Asia
ASEAN
APEC
SAARC
ASEAN Plus (East
Asian Summit)
xxxxxxxxxxxx
SCO
Asian IGOs: ASEAN
Asian IGOs: APEC
SAARC
E. Asian Summit (ASEAN plus)
Asian IGOs: ASEAN plus
• ASEAN 10
• ASEAN 10 plus 1: ASEAN + PRC
• ASEAN 10 plus 3:
+ Japan, S. Korea
(East Asian Community)
• ASEAN 10 plus 3 plus 3: + India, Australia,
New Zealand (East Asian Summit)
• ASEAN 10 plus 3 plu 3 plu 1:
+ USA
(APEC +)
SCO
3. Competing approaches to
Asian regionalism
Different and even conflicting
approaches
US
INDIA
ASEAN
JP
PRC
American strategy
Asian
Integrat
-ion
APEC
(TPP)
Regionalism of Japan
Asian
Community
JP
APEC
ASEAN strategy: A tripartite balance
N. Asia
ASEAN
S. Asia
Western
powers
Indian strategy: a balance plus a
linkage
PRC
Arabia
INDAN
US
Asia
Regionalism of PRC
SCO
PRC ASEAN+
4. China’s strategy towards
Asian regionalism
Debate
• Is regionalism or Asian regionalism in
China’s interest?
PRC-preferred integration
SCO
RCEP
Qua of China’s diplomacy
Bilateral summits
With Big
Powers
G 20
With Int’l
Institutions
With
Neighboring
Countries
Regionalism
With Developing
World
BRICS
Chronology
• 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis
• 2001 PRC accession to WTO
• 2001 Declaration on Conduct of Parties
in the South China Sea
• 2002 ASEAN plus 1
• 2008 Japan initiated Asian Community
ASEAN signed ASEAN Charter
• 2010 ASEAN plus 1 and ECFA entered
into effect
• 2010
ASEAN plus Korea effective
ASEAN plus India effective
ASEAN-Japan Economic
Partnership effective
• 2012 RCEP was started
K-C-J FTA negotiations were
stated.
• 2014 C-K FTA will be signed.(?)
5. Evaluation of Asian
regionalism in light of EU
Experiences
Theoretical debate
• Liberal Intergovrnmentalism
• Neofuctionalism
• Institutionalism
Liberal intergovernmentalism
• Two-level games
– National
– International
• Three-step formulation
– Struggle between interest groups
– Power struggle between countries
– Options for new institutions
Neofunctionalism
• Transnational cooperation between elite
as leadership
• Sector integration as the source of
spillover
Institutionalism
• Rational choice approach: supranational
institutional leaders
• Sociological approach: normative and
cognitive forces (values, norms, identities
etc.)
• Historical approach: path dependency
(historical legacies)
Evaluation
Power
structure
Historical
legacies
Elite
cooperation
Asia
Regionalism
Normative
power
Sector
integration
Regulatory
power
A very tentative balance sheet
Power
structure
Elite
cooperation
Sector
integration
Regulatory
power
Normative
power
Cognitive
power
USA
strong
strong
Weak
Weak
strong strong
Strong
Japan
Middle
Weak
None
None
Weak
Weak
Weak
PRC
Middle
Middle
Strong
Weak
Weak
Middle
Middle
ASEAN
Weak
Weak
Weak
Weak
Strong Weak
Strong
India
middle
Weak
None
Weak
Weak
Weak
Weak
Historical
legacies
A very tentative conclusion
• The PRC will never be granted leadership
as long as it is governed by a communist
regime.
• The further the PRC-led integration
advances, the more the US will strengthen
the trans-Pacificism or, to a lesser degree,
support the Japanese approach to Asian
integration.
• The real challenge to the US is the fact
that, as the only global superpower, US
can never participate in a region-building
project. Its policy towards regionalism is
always passive and defensive.
6. Prospects
1. Lacking fast track mandate from the
Congress and suffering low reputation,
Obama government will fail to make TPP
adopted by the Congress.
2. On the contrary, negotiations on RCEP
could be closed before the end of 2015.
• Facing increasing pressure to reform its
economy, China will be obliged to
participate in the TPP negotiations and
open negotiations on FTA with the EU.
• These developments may bring US and
China to negotiate FTA during the coming
years, transforming the dualism of TPP
and RCEP into G2 negotiations in the
Pacific.
• Hungdah Su
• Thank you!
• Merci!