scholarly journals South East Asia – In the Priorities of Russian Policy “Pivot to Asia”

Author(s):  
A. A. Rogozhin ◽  
N. G. Rogozhina

The foreign policy course “Turn to Asia”, taken by Russia in the early 2000s, was not accompanied, however, by the expansion of interaction with the countries of South East Asia. Despite creating a certain foundation for the development of bilateral and multilateral cooperation, its potential is far from being fully explored. The presence of objective factors hampered its expansion and limited the active involvement of Russia in regional integration processes. The article assesses the prospects for the development of relations with Southeast Asian countries in the context of Russia’s strategic and economic interests in the region and the emerging conditions for their implementation. The authors note that the region has begun to acquire strategic importance for Russia, firstly, for economic reasons, given the dynamics of its growth and the possibility of its involvement in Russian integration projects,secondly, for geopolitical reasons, based on an assessment of its contribution to the formation of a security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region, the principles of which are generally consistent with Russia’s strategic interests, which are realized within the framework of diplomatic and militarypoliticalrapprochement with the countries of South East Asia. The article notes that in building their relations with them, Russia proceeds from the fact that its more active participation in regional affairs may become a factor hindering the establishment of hegemony by one of the great powers in the region, which generally meets the interests of the Southeast Asian countries themselves. At the same time, the authors come to the conclusion that in search of a force  capable of ensuring stability in the region, the choice of Southeast Asian countries is unlikely to stop only on Russia, whose real level of political influence in the region is still low. As for economic cooperation Russia with the countries of South East Asia, in recent years, the interaction between them in the framework of bilateral relations has strengthened, primarily in trade. Russia has a positive balance in trade with the countries of the region. However, investment cooperation between them is small in scope and does not play a significant role in the economies of the counterparty countries. The article provides a detailed analysis of the problems that complicate Russia’s economic cooperation with the countries of South East Asia and offers recommendations for solving them, taking into account the specifics of Russian business and the particularities of the local market development. The authors come to the conclusion that the success of Russia’s economic relations with the countries of South East Asia will largely depend on whether we recognize them as equally important partners as China or India. No political steps taken by Russia in South East Asia will lead to a strengthening of its position in the region, if they are not accompanied by its economic expansion. 

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 338-353
Author(s):  
Nataliya Grigorievna Rogozhina

The article is devoted to the analysis of the position of the countries of South-East Asia on the construction of security architecture in the region within the framework of the Indo-Pacific region project in the format promoted by the USA. The article examines in detail the factors that determine the attitude of Southeast Asian countries to the American doctrine of free and open Indo-Pacific, which they assess as strategically risky and leading to deformation of the existing security system in the region with the loss of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) its central role in ensuring its stability. The response of the Southeast Asian countries to external challenges was the formation of their own concept Aseans - "Outlook On The Indo-Pacific, which reflects their views on the nature of the relationship within the emerging community. The author analyzes in detail the content of the ASEAN doctrine, which emphasizes the promotion of economic cooperation between the countries of the Pacific and Indian Oceans, in contrast to the geostrategic orientation of the American concept. Three main areas of cooperation are distinguished - maritime cooperation, the development of connectivity and interaction in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Offering such a format for engaging, ASAEN countries proceed from the need to strengthen trust between countries as the most important condition for maintaining peace and order in the region based on the traditional principles of ASEAN. These include: openness, transparency, inclusiveness, rules-based world order anchored on international law, respect for sovereignty, non-interference, equality, mutual trust and respect. ASEANs position remains unchanged in maintaining its central role in the evolution of the regional security architecture. Speaking from the position of multirealism, ASEAN sees a way to overcome the conflict of interests in the region in the context of escalating rivalry between the US and China, in creating a synergistic security system based on mechanisms associated with ASEAN. In the ASEAN concept, India-Pacific Region appears as a region of dialogue and cooperation, rather than competition, open to participation of China in the project. The author comes to the conclusion that such format is justified both from the point of view of strategic interests of the countries of Southeast Asia and the whole region, if the relations within it are based on the principles advocated by ASEAN. However, as the author emphasizes, the project proposed by the Southeast Asian countries raises many questions, the main of which is its feasibility in the context of the emerging split of the region along the axis of US-China rivalry for leadership in Asia. Nevertheless, as the author notes, the tendency to strengthen economic cooperation between the countries located in the basin of two oceans creates the basis for the growth of their interest in developing a stable security architecture.


2021 ◽  
pp. 951-965
Author(s):  
Yana Vadimovna Mishchenko

The article discusses the main results of two major international summits held in October-November 2021, the key topics of which were the issues of the global fight against climate change and environmental protection. The decisions taken at these conferences, with the broad participation of world leaders, reflect the fundamental trends of the global environmental agenda. Within the framework of this agenda, Japan and the countries of Southeast Asia are building their modern energy and environmental cooperation. In this context, the article examines the main urgent tasks of energy-environmental interaction and sustainable development of Japan and the states of Southeast Asia. These countries are located in the Asia-Pacific region, which remains until now the main emitter of greenhouse gases in the world. However, the indicators of environmental pollution by Japan and the Southeast Asian countries are relatively not so high, compared to some other states in the region and the world. The article discusses the most relevant and significant examples of bilateral and multilateral cooperation between these countries in areas related to curbing global warming and climate protection. It has been revealed that with all the efforts made, since the 1990s, the indicators of reducing harmful emissions into the atmosphere in Japan remain modest and even lag behind some of the Western countries. The Southeast Asian countries show a serious attitude to the development of renewable energy, but their intention to abandon coal still raises some doubts about the methods of implementing this ambitious plan. In particular, it is currently not entirely clear whether these countries are preparing to make a full-fledged "energy transition" in the coming decades, or whether they just intend to replace their coal-fired thermal power plants with gas ones.


2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (10) ◽  
pp. 91-102
Author(s):  
N. Rogozhina

The choice of the countries of Southeast Asia as an example for analyzing the nature of interaction between developing countries and China within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative is not accidental. The very logic of China’s stated goals of gaining dominant positions in the world economy and politics makes it inevitable that the countries of Southeast Asia located in geographic proximity to it are included in its long-term economic and political plans. The question, however, is to what extent do they meet the interests of the Southeast Asian countries themselves? The solution to this question is the main subject of research in the article. There are objective prerequisites for mutually beneficial cooperation. The Belt and Road projects are viewed by China as a tool for economic expansion into the region with the prospect of taking a leading position there, using the interest of Southeast Asian countries in the inflow of foreign investment to create modern infrastructure, the lack of which narrows their opportunities for further economic growth, maintaining competitiveness and developing integration ties within ASEAN Community. Expert assessments made by international organizations confirm the positive impact of OBOR projects on the economic development of Southeast Asian countries and although today it is too early to draw any conclusions, since the initiative is only at the initial stage of its implementation in the region, nevertheless the case studies presented in the article indicate a mismatch in the positions of the parties on a number of issues related to the financing of projects, their lack of transparency. non-compliance with environmental and social requirements. The support of the initiative on the part of the Southeast Asian countries does not automatically mean their acceptance of the terms of the agreements proposed by China, which are far from always consistent with their national interests and give rise to fears in society about its expansionist intentions. Therefore, in many Southeast Asian countries, participation in OBOR projects is turning into a subject of political discourse, which reflects the presence of disagreements in society and confrontation of interests regarding the advisability of rapprochement with China, given the associated economic and political risks. The countries of Southeast Asia can be conditionally divided into two groups according to their relation to the Belt and Road initiative. The first group includes Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam and Myanmar, whose position can be described as national pragmatism. While supporting the Chinese initiative in general, they nevertheless assess the possible risks of their participation in projects and seek to reduce them. The second group is represented by Laos and Cambodia, whose leadership unconditionally supports the Chinese initiative, guided by the interests of their own survival, which largely depends on Chinese assistance. Therefore, the prospect of falling into a debt trap and increasing economic dependence on the PRC and even the threat of losing sovereignty does not deter them from participating in highly controversial projects from a commercial point of view. Based on the analysis made, the author comes to the conclusion that, given the existing alignment of political forces in Southeast Asia, China can count on promoting its initiative in the region, which, however, does not automatically lead to an increase in its political influence and to the creation of a China-centric model of regional order. Acknowledgements. The article was prepared within the project “Post-crisis world order: challenges and technologies, competition and cooperation” supported by the grant from Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation program for research projects in priority areas of scientific and technological development (agreement № 075-15-2020-783).


Author(s):  
See Seng Tan

This introductory chapter presents the aims and architecture of the book. It introduces an emerging ethic of responsible sovereignty in Southeast Asia, which it calls the ‘responsibility to provide’ (or R2Provide), and seeks an ethical explanation for it. The chapter provides synopses of the eight chapters that follow, which collectively accomplish the book’s three objectives. Firstly, it identifies and assesses a number of regional developments in defence, security, diplomatic and economic cooperation in which Southeast Asian countries, individually as well as institutionally through ASEAN and its various functional manifestations and modalities, have sought to assist one another in collective response to challenging situations. Secondly, it discusses how the R2Provide has taken root in Southeast Asia, albeit more deeply so in some countries than others, as well as within ASEAN and its various functional subsidiaries and spinoffs, such as the ADMM, the ADMM-Plus, the AHA Centre and the like. Thirdly, contra communitarian and liberal perspectives on ethics, it introduces and critically applies the ethics of Emmanuel Levinas, specifically his notion of responsibility for the other, to the R2Provide and more broadly to the quest for responsible interstate conduct in Southeast Asia.


1962 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 543-558
Author(s):  
Lim Tay Boh

The group of Asian countries which are discussed in this paper covers a region which is generally known as South, Southeast and East Asia, and may be conveniently referred to as the ECAFE region, since it falls within the area covered by the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East. The developments in Southeast Asian countries are discussed in more detail than those in the rest of the region. Recent trends towards trade cooperation among the Southeast Asian group of countries are a striking contrast to the autarkic policies pursued, during the greater part of the 'fifties' by most of the newly independent countries of the region. A consequence of such policies is the fragmentation of trading areas, and this has tended to reduce the scope and volume of intra-regional trade and to restrict the size of markets for each country's exports.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (8) ◽  
pp. 159-162
Author(s):  
Guzal Usmanbekovna Sharipova

This article will expand the horizons of studying political and foreign economic cooperation between the Republic of Uzbekistan and South East Asian countries, in particular with Malaysia, as well as allow studying integration processes of the republic. 


2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 148
Author(s):  
Paramitaningrum Paramitaningrum

Besides businessmen and workers, Indonesian students have become one of the recent important actors in Indonesia - Taiwan bilateral relations. Currently, Taiwan became one of the popular destinations among Indonesians to pursue their highest degree.  In 2013, the numbers of Indonesian students has reached 3000 persons, made them the third largest group of Southeast Asian students in Taiwan after Vietnamese and Malaysians. The Indonesian students are quite organized and active. Giving the lack of diplomatic relations between both countries, these students are potential to be one of the significant actors to bridge Indonesia - Taiwan relations. However, they have some limitations on conducting their activities. On the Taiwan side, this trend has not gained sufficient responds.  Indonesia is still considered an unattractive object to study, comparing to other Southeast Asian countries. Therefore interaction tends to be one side only. This paper would discuss on (1) what the Indonesian students in Taiwan can do to maximize their capabilities to attract Taiwanese to learn more about Indonesia; (2) How the Taiwanese should respond to these trends, in order to create two ways of interaction. In that case, the counterparts are significant to bridge the limitations of mutual interaction between both states, especially to eliminate the unclear perceptions among Taiwanese to Indonesia, which might affect Indonesia – Taiwan bilateral relations, and to promote Indonesia in the better outlook.       


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Ninie Susanti

After 1,000 years of C.E, it was the most crucial period in the journey of Southeast Asian ancient history. Many fundamental transitions happened, which were caused by disturbances from the outside of the Southeast Asian countries, as well as, from the countries within Southeast Asia. Casparis was a scholar who wrote about King Airlangga’s rule in Java (1019 – 1043 C.E) and who called him “A True Personality” because he succeeded in helping his people going through difficult times when the state faced devastation. Coedès placed Airlangga in a position equal to that of other kings of mainland Southeast Asia, such as King Suryawarman (who ruled Khmer from 1002 to 1050), and King Aniruddha of Pagan (1044 – 1077). The content of King Airlangga’s inscriptions reflected his broad networks in politics, economy, and religion to many kings in Southeast Asia. Furthermore, his reforming ideas was – believed – inspired by his networks. During his ruling period, his ideas of reformation had granted him as a great king. He managed to raise his kingdom from the devastation caused by Pralaya in 1016 by using as an analogy, a policy which was formed through the political, economic and religious conditions implemented by other neighboring kings, to his domestic problem. The result of which is that it was an intense relationship between the kings in Southeast Asia and South Asia and King Airlangga during the spice route network and other products. This relationship continued until Majapahit era in Java, according to the inscriptions.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 120-136
Author(s):  
NGUYEN THANH LIEM ◽  
TRAN HUNG SON ◽  
HOANG TRUNG NGHIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (02) ◽  
pp. 1923-1929
Author(s):  
Nurhidayatuloh ◽  
Febrian ◽  
Mada Apriandi ◽  
Annalisa Y ◽  
Helena Primadianti Sulistyaningrum ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document