The Context of EU-ASEAN Relations: Trials and Tribulations of Regionalism in Post-Cold War Europe and Asia
Chapter
Abstract
It is a common view that the divergences between European and Asian regionalism outweigh their similarities. Compared with its Asian counterpart(s), European regionalism is much more highly institutionalized (at least in a formal-legal sense) and much more demanding in terms of the criteria that a candidate state must meet to qualify for membership. Compared with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the European Union (EU) was historically also more inclusive in as far as, prior to the end of the Cold War, it organized all the big non-Communist European powers (at least once the UK joined in 1973), while ASEAN did not integrate the economically most highly developed non-Communist Asian states, first and foremost Japan.
Keywords
European Union Member State Regional Integration European Union Member State North Atlantic Treaty Organization
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
- Attali J. (1995) Verbatim III 1988–1991 (Paris: Fayard).Google Scholar
- Dieter H. (2007) ‘The future of monetary regionalism in Asia’, in H. Dieter (ed.), The Evolution of Regionalism in Asia: Economic and Security Issues (Abingdon and New York: Routledge), 123–142.Google Scholar
- Dyson K. and Featherstone K. (1999) The Road to Maastricht: Negotiating Economic and Monetary Union (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (2005) The European Constitution: Post-referendum Survey in Trance (Brussels: European Commission).Google Scholar
- Fligstein N. (2008) Euro-Clash: The EU, European Identity, and the Tuture of Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
- Genscher H.-D. (1995) Erinnerungen (Berlin: Siedler).Google Scholar
- Gordon P.H. and Shapiro J. (2004) Allies at War: America, Europe, and the Crisis over Iraq (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution).Google Scholar
- Haacke J. (2005) ‘The development of ASEAN’s diplomatic and security culture: Not beyond “flexible engagement”’ in B. Fort and D. Webber (eds.), Regional Integration in East Asia and Europe: Convergence or Divergence? (London and New York: Routledge), 150–171.Google Scholar
- Hamilton-Hart N. (2003) ‘Asia’s new regionalism: Government capacity and cooperation in the Western Pacific’, Review of International Political Economy, 10, 2, 222–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Issing O. (2006) ‘Monetary missionary: Interview’, Financial Times, 28–29 October.Google Scholar
- Ravenhill J. (2008) ‘Fighting irrelevance: An economic community “with ASEAN characteristics’”, The Pacific Review, 21, 3, 469–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schabert T. (2002) Wie Weltgeschichte gemacht wird: Frankreich und die deutsche Einheit (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta).Google Scholar
- Scharpf F.W. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Severino R. (2003) ‘The future of ASEAN economic integration’, unpublished paper presented to a conference, Regional Integration in Europe and Asia: Pasts, Presents and Futures, organized by INSEAD and the Asia Europe Foundation, Singapore, 7 July.Google Scholar
- Severino R. (2006) Southeast Asia in Search of an ASEAN Community (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies).Google Scholar
- Webber D. (2007) ‘Trade and Security in East Asia: Political (non-?) integration in an insecure region’ in Heribert D. (ed.), The Evolution of Regionalism in Asia: Economic and Security Issues (Abingdon and New York: Routledge), 145–159.Google Scholar
- Webber D. (2010) ‘The regional integration that didn’t happen: Cooperation without integration in early twenty-first century East Asia’, The Pacific Review, 23, 3, 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Douglas Webber 2012