scholarly journals Security in South East Asia: How Are South East Asian Countries Ensuring Their Security in an Uncertain Asian Security Environment Due to the Rise of China as  a Regional and Global Power?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kevin Arlidge
Keyword(s):  
East Asian ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Viet Nam ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Aggressive Approach ◽  
Asian Security ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Asean Countries ◽  
Peaceful Development

<p>The countries of Malaysia, Viet Nam and Indonesia are using a hedging strategy to ensure their security. The Philippines is pursuing a dual policy of hedging and balancing with the US. Singapore is following a policy of hedging but is verging on bandwagoning with the US. All countries are leveraging off ASEAN and its associated fora as their first line of defence. While ASEAN and its fora are adequate for dialogue they are not effective in solving disputes among ASEAN countries or between ASEAN countries and China. The uncertain military rise of China and territorial and maritime disputes with China are causing South East Asian countries to feel insecure. While China professes a policy of “Peaceful Development” its actions in 2009 and 2010 indicated a more aggressive approach to its claims over the entire South China Sea that it now states is an area of “core Interest” to China along with Taiwan. South East Asian countries are expanding or have plans to expand their defence force capability. The US is considered an important actor in guaranteeing South East Asian security and keeping China’s territorial ambitions in check in the immediate future. The countries of Malaysia, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Philippines and Singapore are developing strong economic links with China but are keeping their military links at arms length while forging closer defence links with the US.</p>

scholarly journals Security in South East Asia: How Are South East Asian Countries Ensuring Their Security in an Uncertain Asian Security Environment Due to the Rise of China as  a Regional and Global Power?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kevin Arlidge
Keyword(s):  
East Asian ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Viet Nam ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Aggressive Approach ◽  
Asian Security ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Asean Countries ◽  
Peaceful Development

<p>The countries of Malaysia, Viet Nam and Indonesia are using a hedging strategy to ensure their security. The Philippines is pursuing a dual policy of hedging and balancing with the US. Singapore is following a policy of hedging but is verging on bandwagoning with the US. All countries are leveraging off ASEAN and its associated fora as their first line of defence. While ASEAN and its fora are adequate for dialogue they are not effective in solving disputes among ASEAN countries or between ASEAN countries and China. The uncertain military rise of China and territorial and maritime disputes with China are causing South East Asian countries to feel insecure. While China professes a policy of “Peaceful Development” its actions in 2009 and 2010 indicated a more aggressive approach to its claims over the entire South China Sea that it now states is an area of “core Interest” to China along with Taiwan. South East Asian countries are expanding or have plans to expand their defence force capability. The US is considered an important actor in guaranteeing South East Asian security and keeping China’s territorial ambitions in check in the immediate future. The countries of Malaysia, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Philippines and Singapore are developing strong economic links with China but are keeping their military links at arms length while forging closer defence links with the US.</p>

scholarly journals RUSSIA AND EAST ASIA: NEW OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

2014 ◽  
pp. 9-19
Author(s):  
A. A. Kireeva
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Russian Far East ◽  
Far East ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Asean Countries

The article focuses on major dimensions, achievements, challenges and prospects of relations between Russia and East Asia. Strategic importance of the region is shaped by East Asia's increasing role in world politics and economy as well as by its appeal for Russia's modernization agenda. Russia's great power status rests upon the effectiveness of its East Asian policy and development model of Siberia and the Russian Far East. Russia's positions in East Asia have improved substantially over the 2000s. However, its involvement in regional economic interaction is still insignificant and Russia cannot be regarded as a full-fledged regional player in this domain. Russian-Chinese strategic partnership has been the axis of Russia's East Asian foreign policy, though overdependence on China threatens Russia's independent policy in the region and encourages Russia to search for ways to diversify its ties. Russia's national interests reside in multivector policy, aimed at developing substantive relations not only with China but also with Japan, South Korea, ASEAN (Vietnam in the first place) and India along with Russia's involvement in the resolution of Korean nuclear crisis. The rise of China and the US counter-offensive have resulted in a changing strategic environment in East Asia. A need for balancing between the US and China has brought about ASEAN countries' desire to welcome Russia as a "balancer" or an "honest player" in the region. It corresponds with Russia's course on playing a greater role in regional cooperation and integration. Russia's improving ties in political, economic, energy and security dimensions have the potential to contribute to the stability of the emerging polycentric regional order in East Asia and development of Russia's regions of Siberia and the Far East.

Domestic Politics and Nationalism in East Asian Security

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall L. Schweller
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Primary Factor ◽  
Security Policies ◽  
Asian Security ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
East Asian Security ◽  
The Rise Of China

This chapter works within the neoclassical realist tradition to examine the role of nationalism in foreign policymaking and the implication for the international politics of East Asia. Whereas the rise of China is an important structural factor necessarily affecting states' security policies throughout East Asia, China's rise does not determine these states' security policies. Rather, domestic politics ultimately determines how a state responds to changing security circumstances. In particular, nationalism can drive states to adopt more belligerent policies than warranted by their strategic environment, thus contributing to heightened bilateral conflicts and regional tension. The chapter argues that, in contemporary East Asia, rising China sets the context of policymaking, but domestic politics has been the primary factor shaping policy.

The Evolution of APEC and ASEM: Implications of the New East Asian Bilateralism

2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Gyo Koo ◽  
Vinod Aggarwal
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
Economic Uncertainty ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Trading Bloc ◽  
The Us ◽  
Market Driven ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe traditional institutional equilibrium in East Asia—the embrace of the WTO at the multilateral level and a focus on market-driven, informal integration at the sub-multilateral level—is under heavy strain. Increasingly, East Asian countries are pursuing greater institutionalisation at the sub-multilateral level, weaving a web of preferential arrangements in response to similar strategies pursued by the US and the EU. This article examines the likely path of trading arrangements in Northeast Asia, its implications for East Asia and the future of APEC and ASEM. We propose an institutional bargaining game approach, focusing on goods, countries' individual bargaining situations and the fit with existing arrangements, and allowing an exploration of the evolution of trading arrangements in East Asia. An East Asian trading bloc has both benign and pernicious elements, depending on the ideas and beliefs held by regional actors. The contribution of a prospective East Asian bloc to APEC and ASEM primarily depends on the balance of interests between the US and the EU concerning East Asia. In view of the tremendous political and economic uncertainty in the global economy, the path to freer trade in Northeast Asia, East Asia and the world system is likely to be a bumpy one.

The economic impact of a rise in US trade protectionism on East Asia

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inkyo Cheong ◽  
Jose Tongzon
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
East Asian Country ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Asean Countries

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the economic impact of a rising US trade protectionism on the economies of China, Japan, South Korea and the ASEAN countries and draw out some policy and strategic implications for the USA and East Asia. Design/methodology/approach The authors employ a computable general equilibrium approach supplemented with qualitative analyses based on empirical evidence. Findings An increase in US import tariffs would result in economic losses for the USA and the corresponding country or region to which the import tariff increase is applied. An increase in US import tariffs for Chinese goods alone would not have any spillover effects on other East Asian countries. But, an imposition of a border adjustment tax (BAT) for all countries and for all products would actually boost US economic growth. Advanced economies would enjoy GDP increases, but China, Korea and the ASEAN countries would face an economic loss in a longer term period, although they would enjoy some growth in the short term. However, when the BAT only applies to a specific East Asian country, USA would suffer an economic loss, with the exception of a BAT specifically targeted at the ASEAN countries. ASEAN countries would not experience any economic loss under all scenarios except in the case of import tariffs specifically targeted at ASEAN. Research limitations/implications From the US perspective, it is beneficial to adopt a BAT for all countries and across the board. Under this arrangement, there would be an economic loss for China, Korea and the ASEAN countries in the longer term. An increase in US trade protectionism would only push the East Asian countries towards deeper economic integration, with serious implications for global pattern of trade and investment. Originality/value The existing literature on the likely economic impact of US trade protectionism on East Asia is very scarce and based on surveys and subjective speculations. This study uses a quantitative method based on empirical evidence.

scholarly journals Indonesia in ASEAN

1997 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 89-91
Author(s):  
Osman Suliman
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Asian Countries ◽  
Asean Countries ◽  
Southeast Asian Countries ◽  
Do So

This book analyzes Indonesia's political and economic commitment toASEAN. ASEAN compri es six Southeast Asian countries: Brunei, Indonesia,Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. To clarify that commitment,Anwar makes a deliberate attempt to investigate ASEAN's underlying assumptions.Specifically, the organization is intended to promote harmony and peacein the region, given that ASEAN countries are relatively more politically stableand economically developed compared to the nearby [ndochinese states. Inadrution, ASEAN has been perceived as attempting to manage regional orderagrunst nonregional powers such as Chma while strengthening Western ties. Theauthor examines these assumptions on the premise that ASEAN is mainly a distinctivevehicle of Indonesian foreign policy. To do so, he follows Wein tein'sapproach, which I based on the uses of foreign policy, that is, his analysis does not adopt a common theory. Thus, he unintentionally goes back and forth to verify what seems to be the main theme of the book: how Indonesia sought regionalleadership through ASEAN to achieve its main goals of foreign policy ...

scholarly journals Competition among China and ASEAN-5 in the US Market: A New Extension to Shift-Share Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 129-137
Author(s):  
He Shuquan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Export Growth ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Us ◽  
Static Approach ◽  
Asean Countries ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Export Destination

The United States has a robust trade and investment relationship with China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN is collectively the fourth-largest trading partner, and China is one of the largest trade partners of the United States, the largest export destination for China. Thus, China and ASEAN countries are competing in the US market intensively. The purpose of this paper is to calculate the net gains or losses for the ASEAN-5 Members and China during 1993 and 2007 in the US market. There are two main contributions of this paper: one is to dynamically estimate the net shifts of the economies as compared to the traditional comparative static approach; the other is to extend the shift‐share analysis to attribute the net gains or losses to competing exporters. This study adopts the widely used shift-share analysis technique to exam the net gains or losses for the ASEAN-5 and China during 1993-2007 in the Unites Sates market. The paper provides a new extension to the shift‐share analysis to attribute the net shift to competing economies with a dynamic approach. The paper applies the methodology to the competition among China and ASEAN-5 in the US import market with the data drawn from World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS), a data consultation and extraction software developed by the World Bank. The discussion focuses on three periods: 1993-1997, 1998-2002 and 2003-2007. In general, China performs the best among the competing economies. Among the ASEAN-5 Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand perform better than the other two members. During the first period, all economies have positive export growth as the actual export growth shows. However, in terms of net shift, only China and the Philippines are the winners with positive value of net shifts. During the second period, China stands out while the ASEAN economies show negative net shifts values. Similar is the case for the third period. In terms of the industries, China focuses on different industries during the thee periods, and the ASEAN economies depend heavily on a few industries. China’s gains in these industries are much bigger than the ASEAN economies’ gains in value. The ASEAN economies gain in small numbers of industries with small values. When attributed the gains or losses to competing economies, China only loses to the Philippines during 1993-1997, and gains from all competing economies during all periods. Though net losers, the ASEAN-5 also gain from other competing economies. For example, Indonesia gains from Singapore and Thailand during 1993-1997, from the Philippines and Singapore during 1998-2002, from Malaysia, the Philippines and Singapore during 2003-2007. The trade war between the United States and China provides opportunity for the ASEAN countries in the Unites Sates market, however, there are negative impacts on the ASEAN countries as well. The ASEAN countries are more vulnerable. Keywords: shift-share analysis, export competitiveness, Asia, ASEAN, China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document