Journal Name: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific:
August 2005, Vol. 5, No. 2
Print ISSN: 1470-482X, Online ISSN: 1470-4838
Hegemonic order, September 11, and the consequences of the Bush revolution (pp177-196)
Michael Mastanduno (Department of Government, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA)
The striking feature of contemporary world politics continues to be the disproportionate power position of the United States. U.S. officials consider stability in East Asia to be of vital importance, and they have adopted a hegemonic strategy to promote regional order and serve U.S. interests. U.S. officials are likely to find the management and completion of hegemony more problematic in the years ahead. U.S. power, particularly military, will remain unchallenged. But changes in U.S. foreign policy after September 11, developments in the world economy, and developments in East Asia suggest that the exercise of U.S. power and U.S. relations with states in this all-important region will become increasingly complex and will demand more creative diplomatic efforts.
ANZUS: Regional versus Global Security in Asia? (pp197-216)
William Tow (Department of International Relations, Research School for Pacific and Asia Studies (RSPAS) The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia)
Debate over the continued relevance of postwar U.S. alliance systems in Asia is intensifying at a time when American 'global' and 'regional' strategies seem to be converging. The ANZUS alliance is no exception to this trend. Australian and regional security analysts have recently focused on whether Australia faces a 'choice' between sustaining U.S. alliance affinities and commitments in a `global' context or prioritizing its regional security postures in tandem with its growing economic involvement in Asia. It is argued in this article that the two approaches are complementary rather than divergent and that the current Australian government recognises this geopolitical reality. It concludes that alliances and other 'classic' state-centric mechanisms for pursuing both regional and international security will continue to be applicable to Australia's need for 'getting the balance right' between its future regional and global strategies.
Trade liberalization and the new regionalism in the Asia-Pacific: taking stock of recent events (pp217-233)
Ramkishen S. Rajan (LKY School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore)
In the aftermath of the regional financial crisis of 1997–98, many Asian economies have underscored the need consciously and aggressively to explore alternative liberalization paths or 'fallback positions'. This is where the 'new regionalism' or new regional trade agreements (RTAs) become relevant. This paper explores some of the primary rationale behind, and main concerns regarding, the proliferation of bilateral and plurilateral trade pacts in the Asia-Pacific region. It also considers the 'dynamic time path' of Asian RTAs. Do they facilitate or hinder multilateral trade liberalization?
Crime and economic instability: the real security threat from North Korea and what to do about it (pp235-249)
Hazel Smith (Politics and International Studies Department University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK)
This essay examines the domestic and international causation of the socioeconomic transformation that has taken place in the DPRK since the 1990s. In the process the essay demonstrates how the DPRK socio-economy has become an enabling environment for crossborder illicit economic activity. The argument is that there is little evidence that the DPRK government fully comprehends the potential problems for its own society from the lack of regulation of market transactions and therefore not much likelihood that it is currently able or willing to prevent spillover of the numerous grey areas of North Korean marketization into the socio-economies of its neighbours. What is therefore needed is positive interaction by foreign economic interlocutors, including governments and international institutions. A policy of 'intelligent intervention' that combines closely monitored but relatively substantial economic interaction integrally linked to a programme of market institution-building in the DPRK, along with a policy of military deterrence, could best contribute to preventing the growth of economic and political instability in Northeast Asia.
On norms, rule breaking, and security communities: a constructivist response (pp255-266)
Alice D. Ba (Department of Political Science and International Relations, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA)
Debates and disagreements about the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its status as a security community are longstanding. In offering one of the first systematic, constructivist treatments of the subject, Acharya (2001) has helped catalyze new theoretical interest in Southeast Asia, as well as new debate - as illustrated by Nicholas Khoo's (2004) recent book review, in which he challenged Acharya's conclusion about ASEAN's 'nascent' or 'ascendant' security community status. This article continues the debate by offering a constructivist reply to Khoo's review. Although Khoo raises some pointed questions about Acharya's thesis, his discussion may be overly broad in its treatment of norms and their effects. Khoo may also miss important constructivist insights into process and constitution - aspects of which could have been more explicity elaborated by Acharya.
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific (2005)
Copyright ©2005 Oxford University Press and the Japan Association of International Relations
(This journal is available online at: http://irap.oupjournals.org/)
Posted with permission from the publisher.