From ASEAN+3 to Asia-Europe<\/p>\n
Bunn Nagara
\nThe Star
\nAsia News Network
\nSelangor, Malaysia<\/p>\n
From regionalization, a process in which countries within a
\nregion cooperate and integrate over a range of issues, comes
\ninter-regionalism.<\/p>\n
This involves regional entities like the European Union (EU)
\nand the impending East Asian economic community working more
\nclosely together.<\/p>\n
This particular pairing, involving the most dynamic economies
\nof Asia and Europe, has in recent years been expressed in the
\nAsia-Europe Meetings (ASEMs), Asia-Europe Forums and Asia-Europe
\nSummits. Singapore is also the site of the Asia-Europe
\nFoundation, while Kuala Lumpur is where the Asia-Europe Institute
\nis based.<\/p>\n
All of these grew from Malaysia's proposal for an East Asia
\nEconomic Grouping 14 years ago.<\/p>\n
Inter-regionalism does not conflict with or detract from
\nregionalization, but complements and enhances it.<\/p>\n
As European and East Asian cooperation develops, Europe (as in
\nthe EU) and East Asia also grow as distinct regional entities
\nthrough extra-regional achievements.<\/p>\n
After Hanoi hosted an Asia-Europe Forum and then an Asia-
\nEurope Summit (ASEM V Summit) earlier this year, the Asian
\nStrategy and Leadership Institute (Asli) hosted another Asia-
\nEurope Forum in Kuala Lumpur this month.<\/p>\n
The fourth session is business territory best left to industry
\ncaptains to explore, which they did. The \"ambassador's
\nroundtable\" was a diplomatic play in which some of the more
\nverbal diplomats predictably tried to promote the image, if not
\nalso the interests of their countries.<\/p>\n
The first session as a report on the ASEM V Summit in Hanoi
\nwas partly reflective stocktaking, and partly a projection
\ntowards some imagined futures.<\/p>\n
The second session, dwelling on what Asian regionalization
\nmight learn from Europe, was based on certain interesting
\nstarting points.<\/p>\n
Regionalization in East Asia, which comprises giants China and
\nJapan, is implicitly led by ASEAN, among the world's most
\nsuccessful regional organizations.<\/p>\n
Principal member states of the EU are world leaders on several
\nfronts, just as East Asian cultures have been the bedrock of
\ncivilizations for millennia.<\/p>\n
The prospects for creative synergy and productive reciprocity
\nbetween the regions are therefore promising.<\/p>\n
The New Europe of the forum session, and as represented by the
\nEU today, is one that is modern, progressive, wary of being drawn
\ninto another war, respectful of others, and open in its relations
\nwith other regions like East Asia.<\/p>\n
Many East Asian countries are already aware of what might be
\nlearned from Europe's regionalization experience, even when a
\nformal East Asian regional entity has yet to be formed.<\/p>\n
This learning experience encompasses greater speed, volume and
\nease of doing business through a single entity; larger economies
\nof scale, as in the speed and size of turnover through bulk
\ntransactions; better integration into a collectivised market,
\nwhether regional or global; and added clout for member states in
\ndealing with others outside the grouping.<\/p>\n
These benefits, however, do not come without some costs. The
\ncosts include restrictive groupthink and loss of individuality;
\nlack of national creativity under a collective bureaucracy; and
\noccasional compromises in national interest and policy.<\/p>\n
Other object lessons include stumbling upon stragglers,
\ndoubters and naysayers in the regionalization drift.<\/p>\n
In Europe these include, to varying degrees, Britain,
\nScandinavia and parts of central Europe.<\/p>\n
East Asia has seen fewer problems in harmonizing intent, even
\nwith the socialist countries of Indo-China and China itself.<\/p>\n
But some countries on the cusp of East Asia, which have shown
\nantipathy for the region's international identity, are actually
\nsaying they do not want to be included in a regional grouping of
\nAsians.<\/p>\n
Their stand should be respected and they should be left to
\nthemselves.<\/p>\n
Among the documents, declarations and positions that help make
\nfor East Asian identity is ASEAN's Treaty of Amity and
\nCooperation. The countries of north-east Asia have joined ASEAN
\nin upholding it, so that East Asian regionalism can proceed and
\nprosper.<\/p>\n
After nationalism came regionalism, and beyond that lies
\nglobalism. Volumes have been written and published on them, but
\nwhat do they all mean?<\/p>\n
Nationalism is the struggle of individual nations to be
\nsovereign and free from the yoke of colonialism, imperialism and
\nhegemony of external powers. It is a universal path to self-
\ndetermination, arriving at and then proceeding from independence.<\/p>\n
But as the rich-poor, strong-weak and powerful-marginalised
\ngaps in the world grow wider, prospects for many developing
\ncountries grow fainter as they fall further behind.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, powerful multilateral organizations in trade
\nmatters, based on the economic clout of the rich and powerful,
\nwiden the gaps even more.<\/p>\n
Regionalization among the rich further multiplies the clout
\nthey enjoy, particularly over the poor, weak and marginalised.<\/p>\n
But regionalization can work for all: Countries in the world's
\ndeveloping regions, like Asia, can also develop it for
\nthemselves.<\/p>\n
Globalization means that the stakes that were once only
\nnational are now much greater, or global.<\/p>\n
This growth has meant new pressures which, if unheeded, might
\nthreaten the needs and interests of individual nations,
\nparticularly the poorest ones.<\/p>\n
Regionalism, already on the agenda before, now comes into its
\nown to lend greater clout to member states by shielding them from
\nthe excesses of globalization.<\/p>\n
In the process, common national interests are identified as,
\nand subsumed by, regional interests.<\/p>\n
Globalism also means something more: That the strength and
\nequilibrium of the whole system is imperative, such that if any
\nsignificant component of it staggers, the disequilibrium could
\njeopardize the global system as a whole.<\/p>\n
In trade relations, the Pacific leg connecting Asia and the
\nAmericas is strong -- as is the Atlantic leg connecting Europe
\nand the Americas.<\/p>\n
But the Asia-Europe leg is less strong, and requires urgent
\nremedy.<\/p>\n
Any leg that is too weak would be out of joint, moving out of
\nsync, threatening the health and future of the other limbs.<\/p>\n
If left unchecked, the Eurasian leg could be the weakest link
\nin the global system and its Achilles heel.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/from-asean3-to-asia-europe-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}