Abstract
1. It has been a fashionable view among observers of international affairs during the past two decades that the rich resource endowments, impressive economic growth and development ambitions of Asian-Pacific countries would bring about a radical transformation in the global balance of power with the establishment of the Pacific region as the focal point of the world economy. Visions of a ‘Pacific age’ or ‘Pacific century’ have been variously articulated by scholars and experts as well as by political and business leaders.1 Further-more, several attempts have been made to translate the somewhat vague aspiration to a ‘Pacific Community’ into a blueprint for collective and pragmatic action. In fact, the growing recognition of a substantial interest in developing regional Cooperation has originated a number of proposals intended to build a stronger relationship among Asian-Pacific countries and eventually to set up a framework for permanent inter-governmental Cooperation in economic, political and security matters.2
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
As a journal wittily put it, ‘pundits have been forecasting the dawn of the Pacific age for so long that most people have turned over and gone back to sleep’ (The Economist, 21 July 1984, p. 13). For a general introduction see Staffan Burenstam Linder, The Pacific Century. Economic and Political Consequences of Asian-Pacific Dynamism (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986).
For an overall view see M.W. Oborne and N. Fourt, Pacific Basin Economic Cooperation (Paris: OECD Development Centre Studies, 1983); E. Fontela and O. Hieronymi (eds), ‘The Expansion of the Pacific Basin’, Annals of International Studies, vol. 14, 1985 (Geneva: Association des Anciens Etudiants de l’Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales, 1985). An analysis of concepts and goals of economic Cooperation in the Pacific is to be found in: W. Kraus and W. Lütkenhorst, The Economic Development of the Pacific Basin (London: C. Hurst & Co., 1986) pp. 92–114. For a Chinese perspective see Zhu Chun, ‘Growing Role of the Asia-Pacific Region in the World Strategic Pattern’, International Strategic Studies, Beijing Institute for International Strategic Studies, no. 2, 1987, pp. 1–10; Zhan Yunling, ‘The Shift in the Center of Gravity of World’s Economy’, West European Studies, Institute of West European Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, no. 1, August 1986, pp. 51–65.
It should be stressed, however, that both China and Taiwan (the latter under the name of Taipei, China) participate as full members in the Asian Development Bank; they also attend meetings of the Pacific Economic Cooperation Conference (PECC) as Standing Committee members. Moreover, indirect trade and investment links between the two countries are steadily growing.
Partly to counter Soviet moves to build up a stronger presence by means of fishing and trade deals, Japan is steadily increasing its economic assistance to the small nations of the South Pacific.
The coup d’état in Fiji in May 1987 — the first military putsch against a democratically elected government in the South Pacific — and the subsequent events, including another coup in September 1987, are one more example of instability in a once tranquil region. Racial tensions are the root cause of the Fijian events which have no direct connection with wider geopolitical issues, including Soviet and Libyan involvement in the region.
The paramount importance of the EC experience for all other regional groupings is stressed by one of the leading Japanese scholars proposing Pacific Cooperation schemes who points out that ‘if there were no European Community, we would have no need to consider Pacific economic integration either’. See K. Kojima, Economic Cooperation in a Pacific Community (Tokyo: Japan Institute of International Affairs, 1980) p. 10.
C.E. Morrison, ‘American Interests in the Concept of a Pacific Basin Community’, in J. Crawford and G. Seow (eds), Pacific Economic Cooperation: Suggestions for Action (London, 1981) p. 114 ff.; L.B. Krause, ‘The Pacific Economy in an Interdependent World: A New Institution for the Pacific Basin’, in J. Crawford and G. Seow (eds), op. cit., p. 128 ff.; K.S. Sandhu, ‘The Pacific Basin Concept: A View from ASEAN’, in J. Crawford and G. Seow (eds), op. cit., p. 176 ff.; K.D. Jackson, Sukhumband Paribatra and J. Soedjati Djiwandono (eds), ASEAN in Regional and Global Context (University of California, Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, 1987). See also R.L. Downen and B.J. Dickson (eds), The Emerging Pacific Community: A Regional Perspective (Boulder and London: Westview Press, 1984).
For an account of the origin, structure and activities of the main inter-governmental organisations in the Asia-Pacific region see the relevant entries in: G. Schiavone, International Organisations. A Dictionary and Directory, 2nd edn. (London: Macmillan, 1986).
In particular, Indonesia has been a member of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) since 1962.
For a survey of ASEAN’s contributions to Third World efforts for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) see J. Saravanamuttu, ‘ASEAN Postures and Performance in North-South Negotiations’, in Pushpa Thambipillai and J. Saravanamuttu, ASEAN Negotiations. Two Insights (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1985) pp. 29–55.
The PECC, which had its origin in the Canberra Seminar in 1980, is a private body comprising academics, businessmen and government officials, all participating in a private capacity. For an updated survey see: Kumao Kaneko, ‘A New Pacific Initiative: Strengthening the PECC Process’, Japan Review of International Affairs, vol. 2, no. 1 (Spring/ Summer 1988) pp. 67-90.
J. Bercovitch (ed), ANZUS in Crisis. Alliance Management in International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1987).
For an updated list of the agreements see Far Eastern Economic Review, Asia 1988 Yearbook, pp. 14–16. Both super powers seem to be increasing the conventional and nuclear capabilities to face perceived threats from the other side. See also ‘East Asian Security’, The Economist, December 26, 1987, pp. 57–63.
According to Gorbachev, the proposed conference should be open to the participation of all countries with an interest in the Pacific and could take place in Hiroshima, Japan. The establishment of a comprehensive system of security in the Asia-Pacific region obviously implies substantial improvements in the Soviet Union’s bilateral relations with China and Japan and the resolution of conflicts in Afghanistan and Kampuchea. The Soviet leader also envisaged a conference of the communist parties of the Asia-Pacific. For an assessment of the importance of the Vladivostok address for Soviet policy in East Asia see R.C. Horn, ‘Soviet Policy in East Asia’, Current History, October 1987, p. 321 ff.; R. Nations, ‘Moscow’s New Tack’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 14 August 1986, pp. 30–34.
P. Dibb, ‘The Interests of the Soviet Union in South-east Asia and the South-west Pacific: Implications for Regional Security’, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University, Conference Paper, July 1982, p. 32. See also M. Leifer, Conflict and Regional Order in South-east Asia, Adelphi Papers, no. 162 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1980); F.A. Mediansky, ‘Soviet Strategic Interests in South-east Asia’, South-east Asian Affairs 1984 (Singapore: Institute of South-east Asian Studies, 1984) pp. 33–47; R.S. Cline, J.A. Miller, and R.E. Kanet (eds), Asia in Soviet Global Strategy (Boulder and London: Westview Press, 1987); H. Kimura, ‘Soviet Focus on the Pacific’, Problems of Communism, May-June 1987, pp. 1–16; M. Kaser, ‘Reform in the USSR and China’, The Pacific Review, vol. 1, no. 1, 1988, pp. 38–49.
Despite the huge economic potential of the Soviet Far East, especially with regard to oil, gas and natural resources, the region’s share in Soviet total production has recently shown a downward trend. As for the prospects of Soviet-Japanese cooperation for the accelerated development of the Soviet Far East, it should be noted that the failure of the two countries to sign a peace treaty after World War II may still prevent, to a certain extent, the strengthening of economic ties.
However, the restoration of ‘normal’ relations with the USSR was subject, according to the Chinese, to the elimination of three ‘obstacles’, that is the end of the Soviet-backed Vietnamese occupation of Kampuchea, the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, and the reduction of Soviet troops on the Sino-Soviet border and in Mongolia. According to some Chinese analysts, a meaningful Sino-Soviet relationship could develop within a transnational economic Cooperation scheme involvingNorth-East China, Outer Mongolia, the Soviet Far East, Japan and the Korean peninsula. See L. do Rosario, ‘Recovering Lost Time. The Growth of Sino-Soviet Trade has Resumed in Earnest’, Far Eastern Economic Review, January 1, 1987, pp. 46–7.
For a discussion of the prospects of ASEAN integration see H.C. Rieger, ASEAN Cooperation and lntra-ASEAN Trade, Research Notes and Discussions Paper, no. 57 (Singapore: Institute of South-East Asian Studies, 1985); H.C. Rieger, ‘ASEAN: A Free Trade Area or a Customs Union’, Far Eastern Economic Review, May 1, 1986, pp. 58–60; ASEAN: The Tasks Ahead, Report of a Colloquium on ASEAN Economic Cooperation (Singapore: Institute of South-East Asian Studies, 1987).
M. Vatikiotis, ‘Zone of Discord’, Far Eastern Economic Review, January 14, 1988, pp. 12–13.
The Treaty establishing a South Pacific nuclear-free zone (SPNFZ) was signed within the framework of the South Pacific Forum (SPF) and forbids production, testing, basing and use of nuclear weapons in the region. Freedom of passage of nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed ships within the area is guaranteed by the treaty, each contracting party retaining the right to allow or deny access of such ships to its ports.
R.H. Solomon and Masataka Kosaka (eds), The Soviet Far East Military Buildup. Nuclear Dilemmas and Asian Security (Dover, Mass.: Auburn House, 1986).
In this connection, it has been stressed that military friends can be economic enemies and vice versa.
The recent merger in Australia of the Department of Foreign Affairs with the Department of Trade reflects, inter alia, the need to expand more actively Australia’s presence in foreign markets.
Art. XXIV of GATT recognises the desirability of increasing trade through the setting up of customs unions and free trade areas, provided that these groupings are intended to facilitate trade between the constituent territories and not to raise barriers vis-à-vis third countries. Actually, the trade-creating and trade-diverting effects of the various regional arrangements submitted to GATT have never been clearly assessed. The provisions of art. XXIV are among those proposed for review and possible amendment during the current round of MTNs.
Japan has recently been raising its diplomatic profile mostly with regard to international economic and financial issues but also in the discussions leading up to the INF treaty which includes Soviet SS-20 missiles located in Asia, thereby reducing the threat to Japan itself and to China.
‘Pacific Boosterism’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 9 June 1988, p. 34.
In early 1988 the United States has decided to phase out Singapore and three other East Asian NICs out of the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) causing widespread dissatisfaction on the ASEAN side. For its part, the EC has planned the removal of duty-free trade concessions to South Korea.
In 1987, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea had a combined current-account surplus of about $110 billion; of these Japan alone accounted for $82 billion. At the end of 1987, Japan’s trade surplus with the United States amounted to $58 billion.
Two recent studies devoted by the EC to the manifold implications of ‘1992’ pay little attention to the external policy aspects. See the ‘Cecchini Report’ (The European Challenge 1992 by Paolo Cecchini, published in early 1988 by Wildwood House) and the work appeared in the issue of March 1988 of European Economy, the EC Commission’s journal.
Vietnam’s aspirations to join ASEAN are well known, while Burma, already in Ne Win’s times, had expressed some interest in attending ASEAN meetings as an observer. The case of Papua-New Guinea — apparently a prospective member — is entirely different owing to the South Pacific affiliations of that country. The prospective ASEAN membership of a truly independent and neutralised Cambodia should also be considered.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1997 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schiavone, G. (1997). Western Europe and South-East Asia: Partners in a Pacific Age?. In: Schiavone, G. (eds) Western Europe and South-East Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10262-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10262-4_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-10264-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-10262-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)