No hurry on formal APEC: Expert
JAKARTA (JP): A foremost American political economist yesterday called on members of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) to refrain from a hasty formalization of the forum.
Lawrence B. Krause, professor at the Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego, said here yesterday that the forum should continue utilizing the current structure of APEC as an informal forum.
"My view is to accept the wisdom of Southeast Asia on this issue. Why should one want to make a decision on this issue at this time," Krause said in a lecture at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
He argued that rather than creating piercing arguments on the forum's institutionalization now, it would be better to wait and see the impact of the liberalization dictated by the Uruguay Round.
APEC comprises Canada, United States, Mexico, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and the members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) are Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, Brunei and Indonesia.
From the outset, ASEAN members have shown caution towards APEC. They feared that APEC might undermine ASEAN's cohesiveness and evolve into a trade block.
They also feared that the United States wanted to create APEC as a means of countering the European Union.
However, the past few months have seen a slight shift in attitude with ASEAN members increasingly warming to the concept of the forum. More specifically, Indonesia, currently presiding over the forum, has embraced it more and more.
With the APEC leaders about to arrive here in November, and with the release of the forum's Eminent Person's Group (EPG) report calling for free trade by the year 2020, the debate of APEC's formalization has once again erupted.
"Delay may have several virtues," Krause said, arguing that APEC could use the time to observe the European Union as it implements trade liberalization.
While waiting and studying the European Union, according to Krause, "it may be easier to reach a true consensus on whether a formal agreement is necessary."
Krause noted that despite this deferral, members could still adopt the timetable for free trade since it will enhance APEC's political commitment without formalizing the forum.
"It would be sufficient to sign a ringing declaration of intent to create free trade by a given date even if it does not contain a detailed plan for reaching it," he said.
In his assessment the incremental approach to trade liberalization taken up by the forum has insured APEC's progress.
ASEAN
Speaking on the role of ASEAN within APEC, Krause contends that ASEAN can become stronger as a result of the forum.
"APEC may challenge ASEAN but it will not dilute ASEAN," he said.
According to Krause, ASEAN plays a strong central role in APEC and hence the Association plays a decisive role in the forum.
Thus any cajoling by either the United States or Korea to formalize or accelerate the forum's pace would not succeed if ASEAN countries were against it.
"If the ASEAN countries want the progress of APEC to be slow and gradual, then that will be the outcome," he said.
Krause brushed aside arguments that a sluggish pace by the forum would turn the U.S. away from APEC leading them to look southwards to the Latin American countries.
"I myself do not think that South America has anywhere near the potential of Asia Pacific and cannot begin to satisfy the U.S. need for trading and investing partners," he said. (mds)