SPEAKING
FREELY APEC's role in 'new
regionalism' By Ramzi Bendebka
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
The contemporary
interest in regionalism, often referred to as "new
regionalism", is undoubtedly one of the important
trends in contemporary international relations.
The study of new regionalism has much to do with
the resurgence or emergence of regional
organizations during the 1980s and 1990s. The
revival of academic interest in regionalism has
been associated with a number of developments at a
global level. These include, the end of the Cold
War, the increase in economic
interdependence, and
globalization. Scholarly attention has been drawn
to the creation of a number of regional
organizations, such as the North Atlantic Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Common Market of
the South (MERCOSUR), which was created in 1991 in
South America. Meanwhile, 1989 saw the birth of
the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).
While regions have been typically defined
as geographically proximate, the existence of
interdependent states and regional attempts at
formal cooperation has made it evident that, these
definitions are too narrow for modern day usage.
Simply put, the connectivity between state borders
need not be a necessary element to reflect
cooperation and integration. Instead, the
geographical criterion is too limiting an
explanation of regions, in an increasingly
interdependent and globalized world. This leads to
"new regionalism", the second wave of regionalism
that needs to be related to the transformation of
the world, is associated with interrelated
structural changes of the global system.
Of these new regional organizations, the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) has
become the most interesting case study for
applying the characteristics of "new regionalism".
APEC was formed in 1989 in Canberra, Australia,
with support from the United States of America.
Australia first proposed the formation of APEC
with the intention of promoting open regionalism,
with emphasis on liberalization, privatization and
open markets. The APEC forum is now one of the
main regional organizations seeking to enhance the
level of regional collaboration in the economic
area (Haider, 2002). Therefore, it is important to
study the APEC from the perspective of the new
regionalism theory.
Regionalism in the
Asia-Pacific In this section, regionalism
in the Asia Pacific will be discussed. Therefore,
it is also necessary to define the use of the term
"Asia Pacific". In Asia Pacific in World Politics,
Derek McDougall (2007) points out that the usual
definition of Asia-Pacific Region includes East
Asia and the Western powers of the Pacific (the
United States, Australia, Canada, and New
Zealand). East Asia can be divided into Northeast
Asia and Southeast Asia.
Northeast Asia
covers China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, Japan,
South Korea, North Korea, Russia, and Mongolia.
Southeast Asia comprises of Brunei, Myanmar,
Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia,
the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.
Apart from East Timor, all Southeast Asian
countries are members of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). While Australia
and New Zealand are major powers in the South
Pacific, the entire Pacific islands region comes
within the definition of Asia-Pacific. Gaspinski
(1999) also points out that some definitions of
Asia-Pacific include not just the United States
and Canada, but the Pacific seaboard countries of
Latin America, Mexico, Peru, and Chile. In one
way, the Asia pacific region can be defined by the
group members of the APEC.
Concerning
cooperation, the Asia-Pacific economies have no
substantial history of regional consciousness in
the level of institutional building. At the same
time, the ability to undertake collective action
has always been quite poor in Asia-Pacific,
relative to that prevailing in Europe and North
America (Rapkin, 2001; Drysdale and Patrick,
2007). Prior to the Second World War, the colonial
form of economic regionalism prevailed in the
Asia-Pacific Region, within monetary fiscal
policies designed by home governments of the
respective currency regimes (Dutta, 1999). At the
same time, the ASEAN countries for example, had
diverse roots: Indonesia had colonial ties with
Holland; Malaysia and Singapore had ties with
Great Britain; and the Philippines with the United
States; while Thailand always remained
independent. This chapter provides a background
about the APEC organisation by discussing the
origins, goals, scope and the structure.
According to Richard Feinberg (2007), the
end of the Cold War created fresh opportunities
for regionalism in the Asia-Pacific region.
Indeed, growing market driven economic
interdependence in the Asia-Pacific created more
demand for cooperative problem solving.
Interdependence is a feature in which natural or
policy barriers are lower for commerce with some
partners than with others, and therefore economic
relationships are deeper with some partners than
with others (Petri, 2005).
Myrna Austria
(2003) said that there are two main reasons of
weak regionalism development in West and East
Asia. First, Asia in general has no enduring
history of unity and accepted commonality. Second,
the trading interests of Asian economies have been
traditionally outside of the region, in North
America and Europe. Mireya Solis and Saori Katada
(2007) are interested in identifying the various
factors that affect all countries in the region,
and create incentives for pursuing Cross-Regional
Trade Agreements, which offer unique opportunities
for these countries to consolidate their free
trade Agreement strategies. In La cooperation
economique en Asie-Pacifique or (Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation), Nathalie Lachance (2003)
points that "new regionalism" is simply
"regionalism ouvert" which means, an open
regionalism.
Even though open regionalism
is still not well defined among analysts, it is
still an important characteristic of the
contemporary studies of regionalism. Also, there
are two other characteristics that go together
with open regionalism. These are, namely,
non-discrimination and voluntarism. According to
Lachance, there is no difference between the words
open regionalism, cross regionalism and new
regionalism. Either one of them may be utilized in
the discussion of the contemporary wave of
regionalism. She also discusses the objectives of
APEC in her article. So, the achievement of
liberalization of the market, investments, and
technical cooperation represent the main three
objectives of APEC.
A new way of
regional cooperation It is necessary to
recognize that we are dealing with a new wave of
regional studies, different from previous ones in
terms of theory and practice.
To begin
with, the study of "new regionalism" is being
carried out within the context of a structural
change in the global system. The end of bipolarity
has removed the significance of the Cold War as a
structural description of the world. New
regionalism needs to be related to the changes in
the global system, especially in terms of economy
and politics. Previously, the world economic
system was a product of the Cold War. However, the
economic system is now shaped more by the
structures and dynamics of an increasingly,
globalized world economy. Moreover, at the
political system level, the boundaries between
domestic and international ideas as well as values
have become more intermingled.
Secondly,
extensive scholarly interest in new regionalism
has yet to generate a widely accepted definition
of this term. As a result, the concept of
regionalism is developed and used differently by
different authors but with new vision. For
example, new regionalism may be defined as a
multi-dimensional process of regional integration
that includes economic, political, social and
cultural aspects (Hettne, 1995). According to
Hettne, regional integration is a package rather
than a single policy, whether concerned with
economics or other aspects. New regionalism may
also mean a complex process of change
simultaneously involving state as well as
non-state actors, occurring as a result of global,
regional, and national levels. It is not possible
to state which level is dominant, because actors
and processes interact at the various levels and
their relative importance differs in time and
space.
Thirdly, the work of Schulz,
Soderbaun, and Ojendal (2001) introduced new
regionalism as a body of ideas, values and
concrete objectives that are aimed at creating,
maintaining or modifying the provision of
security, wealth, peace and development within a
region.The objective of new regionalism is to
activate the process of cooperation and
integration as an instrument to enhance the role
of the state in an interdependent world. On the
other hand, new regionalism is usually associated
with a policy programme, with goals to be achieved
and strategy, which consists of means and
mechanisms by which goals should be reached. It
normally leads to the creation of regional
cooperative enterprises, organizations or
institutions. (Chunyao Yi, 2007).
Lastly
and in terms of practice, APEC is a premier forum
for facilitating economic growth, cooperation,
trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region.
APEC has 21 members, referred to as "Member
Economies" which account for approximately 40.5%
of the world's population, approximately 55% of
world's GDP and about 43.7% of world's trade.
Also, the Asia-Pacific region is the geopolitical
centre of the struggle for world power. It is the
driving force of the global economy.
APEC
member-states the US, Japan, China, and Russia are
the most powerful economies in the world
(Ravenhill, 2000). Moreover, the old regionalism
usually grouped together similar countries, with
the most successful being developed countries,
while the less successful were developing ones. In
contemporary times, however, regional
organizations, specifically APEC, can consist of
both developed and developing countries. Moreover,
studying APEC is a necessity if a complete
understanding of world politics and the
international economy in the post-Cold War
environment is to be reached.
Conclusions Composed of the
fastest growing economies of the world, coupled
with the practice of new regionalism features, as
well as the sizeable populations involved, APEC is
capable of becoming a global leader in trade and
economy. It is also a vehicle for trade
facilitation and cooperation. More importantly,
for developing countries, it provides a venue for
discussion and collaboration on issues and
technical matters that will enhance growth and
cooperation with the leading developed economies
in the Pacific region. Without APEC, there would
be no regular framework for smaller economies,
such as the Southeast Asian countries, to engage
the United States in dialogue and debate on
regional issues.
However, it must be
mentioned that, notwithstanding the important role
it plays in trans-Pacific economic cooperation,
APEC has been the target of criticism concerning
its apparent confusion as to its purpose and that
it seems to have lost sight of its goals, as it is
been suspended on the brink of terminal
irrelevance. For example, is it possible to
realize the ambitious goal of the liberalization
of trade by 2020 for the developing countries? It
also has to compete with a number of regional
sub-groupings in Asia with interests that could
potentially challenge APEC's role in the region.
APEC has created numerous opportunities
for its developing country members. For the past
20 years, many countries in the region have gained
from their participation in APEC activities. APEC
has effectively brought together countries in the
region and established ties and networks that were
previously non-existent or were not thought
feasible. Its strength lies in the vastness and
diversity of this network. It should therefore
strive to strengthen this network by coming up
with programmes that reinforce cooperation among
member economies. APEC should pool in more
resources for its goals in the coming years as it
has the capability to build programmes that will
be able to help members overcome the obstructions
to significant participation in global cooperation
on economic and security issues.
References: APEC.
(1989-2009). Annual ministerial meetings.
Retrieved September 14, 2010.
http://www.apec.org/apec/ministerial_statements/annual_ministerial.html Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation.(2010). Scope of
work.Retrieved September 20, 2010. Austria,
Myrna. (2003, March). East Asian regional
cooperation: Approaches and processes. Manila:
Philippine Institute for development
studies. Beeson, Mark. (1999) 'Reshaping
regional institutions: APEC and the IMF in East
Asia'. The Pacific Review, 12: 1. Calleya,
Stephen. (2000). Regionalism in the post cold war
world. Hants: Ashgate Publishing
Company. Camilleri, Joseph, A. (2003).
Regionalism in the new Asia-Pacific order.
Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing
Limited. Donegan, Brendan. (2006). Governmental
regionalism: power/ knowledge and neoliberal
regional, millennium - Journal of International
Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, 23-52 Drysdale, Peter,
& Terada, Takashi. (2007). Asia Pacific
economic cooperation: past, present, future. New
York: Routledge. Echinard, Yann., Guilhot,
Laetitia. (1994). Le Nouveau régionalisme: De quoi
parlons nous? [The new regionalism : what are we
talking about ?]. Annuaire Francais de relation
international (AFRI). Paris: Ministère des
affaires étrangères et européennes. Feinberg,
Richard. (2007, November) Voluntary
multilateralism and institutional modification:
the first two decades of APEC. Springer Science +
Business Media, LLC 2007. Garnaut, Ross. (2004)
A new open regionalism in the Asia Pacific. Paper
Presented At The International Conference On World
Economy, Colima, Mexico. Hettne, Bjorn. (1995).
International political economy: understanding
global disorder. Nova Scotia: Fernwood
publishing. Louise, Fawcett., Andrew, Hurrell.
(1995). Regionalism in world politics. New York:
oxford University Press.
Ramzi
Bendebka is the author of Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation: A Study in New Regionalism,
1989-2009 (Copyright 2012 Ramzi
Bendebka)
Speaking Freely is an Asia
Times Online feature that allows guest writers to
have their say.Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing. Articles submitted for this section
allow our readers to express their opinions and do
not necessarily meet the same editorial standards
of Asia Times Online's regular
contributors.
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
