print
 

‘Asia-Pacific Regionalism and Asian literacy’

Theme: Comparing Proposals for Regionalism in the Asia–Pacific

Key research questions
Context/Background Statement
Research plans
Events
Contact us

Key research questions

This group explores the significance of regionalism, and seeks to answer the following questions:

  • What motivates states in the Asia–Pacific to pursue regionalism?
  • How do regional bodies differ in prospective memberships: are they inclusive or exclusive?
  • Have proposals for regionalism proven to be mutually compatible?
  • How have contested concepts of regionalism played constructive roles in guiding directions, providing visions and setting principles in organising and creating a regional community?
  • How effective have regional bodies been at preventing conflict among member states?
  • How effective have they been at preventing conflict between great powers?

Context/Background Statement

This research group brings together a range of scholars, both senior and junior, for the first time. Although predominantly based in the International Relations teaching area of the School of International and Political Studies, the group includes members from other areas of the Faculty. It also includes two HDR candidates, thus creating an opportunity to develop a research cluster that can evolve over time. The group spans a diverse spectrum of research skills, interests and experience, and this diversity forms a sound basis for innovative, multidisciplinary research.

A strength of the group is its regional and country specialists. The research interests of the group encapsulate some of the most influential countries in the region, such as the United States, China, Korea, Indonesia, India and Australia. Furthermore, the group has the unique capacity to conduct research about these countries using local languages. This is a rare and valuable advantage to the pursuit of high quality research. Individual members have impressive track records in publishing about their countries of interest, and this project offers an opportunity to combine these talents fruitfully.

A second feature of the group is the breadth of its methodological expertise. Scholars in the group belong to disciplines as diverse as history, political science, political philosophy, international relations, political economy, sociology, and anthropology. The group has a track record of contributing to these disciplines, to methodological and philosophical debates, and to area studies. They draw on both qualitative and quantitative research methods, vastly increasing the potential impact and accessibility of their outputs. This project, consequently, has great potential to deliver comparative, inter-disciplinary and multidisciplinary research.

Research plans

The initial objective of the group is to convene a group of Deakin scholars to discuss the various proposals for regionalism in the Asia–Pacific region. We held a one-day workshop in August 2009, at which group members presented short papers about proposals from key states for furthering regional integration. The workshop was open to other scholars and students, who offered comments and suggestions. On the basis of the workshop, group members produced more substantial research monographs by November, when a research symposium was held. Several scholars from outside Deakin University attended as both presenters and commentators, greatly enhancing the quality of our research output. Participants and topics at the symposium were as follows:

  • David Walker: “Locating the region: Australian dilemmas”
  • J.D. Kenneth Boutin: “The United States and Asia–Pacific regionalism”
  • Marshall Clark: “Models for Southeast Asian regional integration: Indonesian perspectives”
  • Malcolm Cook (Lowy Institute for International Policy): “Japan’s regionalism choice”
  • Baogang He: “The cultural dimensions of Rudd’s Asia–Pacific community”
  • David Hundt: “South Korea and Australia: Competing middle powers in the Asia–Pacific”
  • Emilian Kavalski (University of Western Sydney): “Shanghaied into cooperation? Beijing, Central Asia and the international relations of China’s regionalization”
  • Damien Kingsbury: “Identity, belonging and the state: Aceh and Timor-Leste”
  • Juliet Pietsch: “Regionalism as seen in public opinion”
  • Chengxin Pan: “Chinese perspectives on regionalism”
  • Craig A. Snyder: “ASEAN views on Asian regionalism”
  • Michael Wesley (Lowy Institute for International Policy): “Interrogating regionalism”

Given the timeliness of the issue and the expertise contained in the group and invited guests, the intends to produce a series of papers on Asia–Pacific regionalism which will attract interest from journals such as Pacific Review, International Relations of the Asia–Pacific, Pacific Affairs, and Australian Journal of International Affairs. These journals are listed in the Social Science Citation Index and are ranked A* by the ARC, so acceptance of the papers as a Special Edition will greatly enhance the reputations of the individual researchers and the university as a whole.

Having attained this degree of expertise, the group will be well placed to analyse regionalism in the Asia–Pacific in a variety of innovative ways. First, a 2010 CRG application will use the group’s expertise to analyse some of the key themes in regionalism, such as its varieties (economic, political, security), the perspectives of different classes of states (great powers, middle powers, smaller powers), and comparative regionalisms (Asia versus Europe). These themes offer great potential to increase links between Deakin scholars and their counterparts overseas, and in turn establish a firm basis for an ARC application in 2010–11. Promoting greater interest in the study of the Asia–Pacific also offers opportunities to attract and cultivate more HDR candidates who have a regional focus.

To subscribe to the Asia-Pacific regionalism and Asia literacy research group mailing list, please email.

APRAL Events

The workshop on the Rise of China and its Impact on Asia-Pacific
Monday 5 July 2010
Time: 9.00 am - 5.00 pm
Venue : Deakin Prime, Level 6, 601 Bourke Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000 Australia

Abstracts:

Charmed or Alarmed? Reading China’s Regional Relations
Mark Beeson and Fujian Li
The University of Western Australia, Australia

Abstract:
China has rapidly re-emerged as a major regional power in East Asia. Although this represents a return to a long-established historical pattern, the ability of China’s political elites to reassure nervous neighbours about the implications of its rise will be a major test of its evolving and increasingly sophisticated foreign policies. In this paper we focus primarily on China’s regional engagement strategies, detailing the way such initiatives are understood in China, and the way they are received elsewhere. We focus primarily on the political and economic impacts of China’s policies, and briefly consider their reception in Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and the Anglo-American economies. We highlight the different dynamics and issues that China’s policymakers must consider in each area, and suggest that despite some difficulties and tensions, on balance, China’s policies are proving surprisingly effective.

Rising China: The impact on the strategic situation in East Asia
Derek Mcdougall
The University of Melbourne, Australia

Abstract:
Beginning with an overview of what ‘rising China’ amounts to, the focus of this paper is an assessment of the impact of this phenomenon on the strategic situation in East Asia. East Asia is broadly defined to include Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia, including the involvement of powers such as the US, India and Australia in the affairs of this region. The analysis proceeds on two levels. The first level encompasses the relationships among the major and middle powers involved in the region; the second level focuses on specific ‘hot spots’, particularly Taiwan and the Korean peninsula. The argument is that ‘rising China’ needs to be put in the context of problems faced by China and also the responses of other powers. Perceptions are a very important influence on behaviour. China appears to have a growing but not a dominating influence in regional affairs; this is related as much to a widespread perception that China should have greater recognition as a major power as to the inevitable outcome of the ‘rising China’ phenomenon.

China’s Rise and the Making of East Asia’s Security Architecture
Nick Bisley
La Trobe University, Australia

Abstract:
While the past twenty-five years have been Asia’s most peaceful, events during that time, most notably China’s rise, have presaged a state of flux in East Asia’s international relations into a state of flux. A central part of this process are a range of key changes in the region’s strategic landscape, including dramatic increases in defence spending including the acquisition of strategic weapons, the reconfiguration and strengthening of America’s alliance system and the emergence of a host of new issues such as energy security, maritime rivalry, climate change and terrorism with which states and societies must cope. One of the most important responses to these epochal challenges has been the dramatic increase in interest in security multilateralism and more recently explicit efforts to devise some kind of ‘security architecture’ to manage the region’s international order. This paper provides a detailed analysis of this trend and focuses particularly on the way in which China’s rise has shaped efforts to construct a viable security architecture in the region and, in turn, the implications this has for the region’s broader international order. The paper first provides a brief overview of the growth in security cooperation and what is meant by the idea of a security architecture. The second section examines how China’s rise has influenced this process and particularly what China’s involvement in these efforts can tell us about China’s broader strategic policy. The final section considers the extent to which efforts to foster a security architecture are capable of damping down the international consequences of power transition. The paper concludes with a brief assessment of the emerging patterns of regional order. The paper argues that while laudable, efforts to devise an East Asian security architecture, as traditionally conceived, are unlikely to provide a robust foundation for a stable regional order and that the major factor determining the stability of the region will continue to be the quality of the bilateral relations of the region’s major powers, most particularly China and the United States.

China’s Official Development Assistance: A Window into the Future?
James Reilly
University of Sydney, Australia

Abstract:
What kind of world power will China be? As China rises to global preeminence, is it more likely to accommodate itself to the existing systems and norms; or is China going to insist that the international system be reshaped to reflect its own image and interests? China’s burgeoning official development assistance (ODA) offers insight into this critical question. Questioning the dominant rationalist assumption that Chinese aid is shaped exclusively by a coherent strategic logic, I argue instead that China is beginning to act both as a ‘norm-taker’—taking up aid approaches dominant among major donors; and also as a ‘norm-maker’—drawing upon China’s own developmental experience and experience as an aid recipient. While China’s ODA approach varies significantly from Western donors, the similarities with Japan and South Korea point to an emerging East Asian model of development aid, suggesting an interesting and important case of norm contestation.

Politics of Accommodation of the rise of China: The Cases of Australia
Baogang He
Deakin University, Australia

Abstract:
Over the course of just a few decades, China has progressed from being a relatively marginal member of the international community to a key participant in economic, political and security issues at both the regional and global levels. At the same time many Southeast Asian countries, Australia and even the United States seem to have begun shifting towards a different policy concerning China, namely, accommodation. Each nation comes to terms with China in its own manner combining the different elements of containment, engagement and hedging strategies in a variety of ways. However, open discussion or acknowledgment of accommodation policy is treated as an act of appeasement serving to undermine the moral authority of Western democratic governments. As a result, the significance of accommodation strategy is underrated and study of it is neglected.
This paper studies the characteristics, sources, promises, and limitations of this new kind of accommodation policy. It aims to develop a concept of accommodation under which two claims can be made. First, a selective accommodation policy and strategy toward the rise of China has been developed in Australian. Second, the adoption of accommodation policy is a sign of the changing power relations under which the mainstream paradigms of containment and engagement have proved inadequate to the task of dealing with China.

Key words: accommodation, the rise of China, containment, engagement, appeasement, power transitional theory

Commentators and participants:

  • Professor Suisheng (Sam) Zhao
    Editor, Journal of Contemporary China (listed in SSCI)
    Executive Director, Center for China-US Cooperation
    Josef Korbel School of International Studies
    University of Denver

  • Dr Richard Rigby
    Executive Director
    The ANU China Institute
    ANU College of Asia and the Pacific
    The Australian National University

  • Professor Andrew O'Neil
    Director, Griffith Asia Institute
    Griffith University

  • Rowan Callick
    rcallick@gmail.com
    Asia-Pacific Editor
    The Australian

  • Dr Chengxin Pan
    Lecturer in International Relations
    School of International & Political Studies
    Faculty of Arts & Education
    Deakin University, Australia

  • Dr J.D. Kenneth Boutin
    Lecturer in International Relations
    School of International and Political Studies, Faculty of Arts and Education
    Deakin University, Australia

  • Craig Snyder, Senior Lecturer in International Relations
    Director, International Relations Post-graduate Studies program
    Faculty of Arts and Education
    Deakin University, Australia

  • Dr David Hundt
    Lecturer in International Relations
    Coordinator, Higher Degrees by Research
    School of International and Political Studies
    Faculty of Arts and Education
    Deakin University, Australia

  • Michael Crisp
    Ph.D Candidate
    Deakin University

Contact us

Deakin University acknowledges the traditional land owners of present campus sites.

23rd January 2012