COMMENT Why an East Asian Community matters By Jian Junbo
SHANGHAI - The concept of an East Asian Community (EAC), which Yukio Hatoyama
strongly advocated even before he was elected as Japan's prime minister in
September, has aroused heated debate in the countries concerned, including
economic powerhouse China.
The summit of China, Japan and South Korea in Beijing last week did not
formally discuss or endorse the formation of the EAC, but this does not mean
China is not interested in the idea. The crux of the matter is how to make the
formation feasible.
According to some sources, the trilateral summit last week did not to discuss
EAC simply because no feasible proposal was
presented for discussion. The feasibility of the EAC is something worth
discussion, and in China its "workability" is widely debated.
The idea of the EAC was not initiated by Hatoyama. Former Malaysian prime
minister Mahathir Mohamad said as early as 1990 that East Asia (including
Southeast Asia) should unite as a community to reduce the influence of the
United States in the region and to enhance independence. The former prime
minister of Japan, Junichiro Koizumi, had also once advocated the formation of
the EAC.
Regional integration and cooperation on a similar concept started in the 1980s,
long before the EAC idea was conceived. Why has the idea now become more
attractive than before, especially as the process of actual economic
integration in the region has been in progress for years?
This can be explained from two perspectives. One is the fast development of
regional economies, symbolized by the rise of East Asian countries,
international trade and financial cooperation in the region. These trends
demand a higher degree of East Asian integration, especially amid and in the
aftermath of the global financial crisis. Fast economic growth and the need for
closer financial cooperation in East Asia demand closer ties among the
countries of the region.
Nevertheless, what motivated Japan's new leader to advocate the EAC is more
about Japan's national interests.
Japan was occupied by the United States after the end of World War II, in 1945.
The US-Japan alliance was formed when the Cold War began, and strengthened when
the Korea War broke out in the early 1950s. Even after the Cold War came to an
end in the 1990s, the US-Japan bond has not dissolved.
Since 1945, Japan has hardly been an independent state politically or
diplomatically, and its defense and foreign policies are highly dependent on US
policy toward the Japanese. For many years, Japan has largely benefited from
this alliance and its dependence on the US.
Yet, in the post-Cold War era, Japan's importance to the US has declined, and
its economy has been mired in periods of recession or slow growth. In recent
years, especially after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York
and Washington, the US has concentrated more on the Middle East and its war
against the Taliban and al-Qaeda
In turn, Japan has increasingly felt that its national security is not
safeguarded - especially from the perceived threats of North Korea and China.
Japan now seeks a more independent relationship with the US to enhance its
national interests and influence in East Asia. Being a leader or an influential
founding member of the EAC would promote Japanese interests and enhance its
lost power.
Suspicions have arisen about Japan's "selfish" motives in proposing the EAC.
Still, a country's foreign policy is primarily meant to serve its national
interests. The question is whether other countries - such as China - could also
benefit from formation of the EAC.
China could benefit. First of all, a more independent Japan and a new regional
organization like an EAC are both in accord with China’s diplomatic strategy of
striving for a multipolar world. The successful construction of a comprehensive
community in East Asia would promote long-term peace and stability in the
region - a crucial factor for China to develop its economy.
Closer regional integration would help China divert its exports, and reduce its
reliance on US and European markets. Given China's economic muscle today, it
could certainly play a leading role in the EAC.
Mutual trust is of utmost importance to make the EAC feasible. In this regard,
Japan needs to adopt a more sincere attitude about its alleged war crimes in
the past to win back the trust of Asian neighbors.
Because of historical feuds, territorial disputes, conflicts and mistrust among
countries in the region, a number of analysts in China, as well as in Japan and
other Asia countries, have thrown cold water on the EAC idea. Some have called
it "mission impossible".
Still, many scholars in China still feel an EAC is feasible if it is approached
with economic integration based on existing mechanisms - and other
controversies can be set aside for the time being.
Last week, Chinese, Japanese and South Korean leaders agreed on deeper
cooperation among the three countries as key trade partners. Japan, after all,
is the biggest importer of China-made goods. Closer cooperation between these
three countries could be a starting point for the formation of the EAC.
South Korea could also benefit from the EAC. Such a regional bloc would enhance
Seoul's international position as an equal partner of China and Japan in the
grouping.
These three economically vital countries in East Asia should theoretically all
support the EAC idea. There is also the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN), with which China is soon to sign a free trade agreement.
Hatoyama did not elaborate on his EAC idea. He and his colleagues have claimed
in recent weeks that this community should consist of 16 countries, including
Australia, New Zealand and India. Hatoyama has never stated clearly whether the
EAC should be an economic cooperation body or whether cooperation should extend
to other areas, such as military agreements and diplomatic ties.
Beijing may be in favor of a community with 13 countries - such as the ASEAN+3
which is currently in operation. To make things easier, the EAC should be
formed as a body of economic cooperation in non-disputed areas to start with.
Only after mutual trust is gained by its members through economic cooperation,
can cooperation in other fields be discussed.
There are other obstacles to the formation of the EAC. The US won't approve of
a regional community dominated by East Asian powers, and would have a hard time
tolerating Japan's total independence.
Kurt Campbell, the US assistant secretary of state in charge of Asian and
Pacific affairs, claimed in Beijing last Wednesday that the US should not be
excluded from the East Asian Community.
There also seems to be little urgency for the EAC to be formed; there are no
strong pressures or urgent national security threats from outside the region to
stir immediate action. In the past, such motivating factors have swiftly united
neighboring countries and accelerated regional integration and solidarity. For
example, when Western Europe began its integration in the 1950s, it was
threatened by the former Soviet Union and its communist bloc proxies.
The emergence of ASEAN was also stimulated by outside threats.
Yet, among East Asian economic or political powers, apart from Japanese fears
over would-be threats from North Korea and China, no country worries much about
military threats or political subversion. Additionally, the existing de facto
international arrangements for integration, such as the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC), ASEAN+3 and the East Asia Summit, are functioning at the
moment.
Historical and territorial issues in East Asia will likely also remain a
barrier for this region's integration. It remains difficult for China and Japan
to transfer the resources of economic development in debated sea areas to a
multinational institution, as European nations did in the early stages of
integration.
In regards to these difficulties and challenges, some argue that the EAC is
still impossible. Yet difficulties, challenges and differences should not be an
excuse to forsake the commitment to East Asia’s integration.
The construction of an international community is never completed overnight.
The European Union, for example, originated from the European Community, which
started the end of World War II, when the two biggest members of the community
- France and Germany - were enemies. This suggests that two enemies can be
friends under the framework of one international community.
Furthermore, the community is never a finished framework but a changing process
of integration. If France and Germany can be friends and push together for
regional integration, so can China, Japan and Korea.
The EAC should be gradually pushed forward. Because even the movement's chief
advocate, Hatoyama, cannot depict clearly its structure, and there is no
consensus on the EAC's aims and functions, the community should be built
gradually from the low to high levels. It should be first organized as a free
trade region under a technological and societal cooperative structure.
The success and significance of the East Asian Community will be based on its
different mission with regard to other Asian regional organizations, such as
APEC, ASEAN+3 and the East Asian Summit.
Its main function would be to provide East Asia with stability and economic
prosperity. Other aspects and ambitions can only be realized once this first
step is taken.
Dr Jian Junbo is assistant professor of the Institute of International
Studies at Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
