Search results

Yoshimatsu explores the causes and implications of the diverse degree of institution-building in East Asia by examining two processes of initiating and developing multilateral institutions in five policy areas: trade, finance, food security, energy security, and the environment

This book explores the causes and implications of the diverse programme of institution-building in East Asia by highlighting political interactions among China, Japan, South Korea, and ASEAN in pursuit of self-interests, the influence of critical juncture in historical trajectory, the representation of policymakers' preferences for political legitimacy in domestic politics, and the involvement of researchers for regional governance formation. Examining two processes of initiating and developing multilateral institutions in five policy areas: trade, finance, food security, energy security, and the environment, Yoshimatsu argues that while Japan initiated the formation of regional institutions and made efforts to upgrade them, China exerted decisive power in determining the degree and direction of the upgrading of regional institutions. Contingent crises or events had significant influences upon institution-building in most cases, but the influence of researchers was generally limited due to close linkages with governmental actors and the lack of internal cohesion.

In the new millennium, Japan found a renewed interest in infrastructure investment and engaged in this policy issue with diplomatic initiatives and external partnerships with due attention to China's geo-economic presence. In formulating strategies for infrastructure investment, Japan has presented and disseminated a specific idea of 'quality infrastructure' as a principal component of its external infrastructure push. This article seeks to trace the evolution of Japan's ideational principles for quality infrastructure and elucidate policy motivation, policy objective, and external influence. It argues that Japan's advocacy of quality infrastructure derived from domestic impetus to expand infrastructure exports and external impetus to compete against China's infrastructural push through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Japan advocated quality infrastructure as a strategic tool to pursue multiple policy objectives that shifted from justifying Japanese infrastructural push to using as means to check and accommodate the BRI, and to legitimising common governance principles for infrastructure investment. In relations to external influence, Japan's persistence in norm-setting encouraged China to incorporate normative principles first at business dialogues and then embed common governance principles in its policy approach to infrastructure investment. (Pac Rev / GIGA)

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which serves as the linchpin of regionalism in East Asia, is facing a new challenge of great power politics. This article explores ASEAN's position in and strategy for taking cooperative regional initiatives by referring to the management of confrontational politics between rival states. It explains ASEAN's handling of great power politics theoretically by impartial enmeshment for managing great powers' material interests and moral legitimacy in developing specific ideational frameworks. This article argues that ASEAN managed great powers' rivalry by enmeshing them into its regional initiatives impartially and maintaining organisational legitimacy by developing systems of socio-cultural norms. It also contends that ASEAN needs, in envisioning the future of Indo-Pacific regionalism, to extend its strategic reach through alignments with other parties and enhance moral legitimacy by deepening and broadening normative frameworks for advancing collective interests for the Indo-Pacific region. (JCSA/GIGA)

China's geoeconomic assertiveness through the Belt and Road Initiative and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has a significant impact on countries in various parts of the world, and India is one of the major countries that have received complicated influences from such assertiveness. This article aims to examine India's strategic response to China's increasing geoeconomic presence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region. It argues that India has adopted policy options of confrontation and practical cooperation through risk management amid China's growing geoeconomic presence, and has pursued a multi‐pronged engagement, aimed at not taking sides between the United States and China and securing 'strategic autonomy'. These policy options contributed, as a hedging strategy, to defending and enhancing its dominant regional status in uncertain geostrategic politics. Additionally, India has pursued a hedging‐oriented ideational strategy of diluting the confrontational nature of the US‐led Indo‐Pacific strategy and advancing its ideational vision for the Indo‐Pacific.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which serves as the linchpin of regionalism in East Asia, is facing a new challenge of great power politics. This article explores ASEAN's position in and strategy for taking cooperative regional initiatives by referring to the management of confrontational politics between rival states. It explains ASEAN's handling of great power politics theoretically by impartial enmeshment for managing great powers' material interests and moral legitimacy in developing specific ideational frameworks. This article argues that ASEAN managed great powers' rivalry by enmeshing them into its regional initiatives impartially and maintaining organisational legitimacy by developing systems of socio-cultural norms. It also contends that ASEAN needs, in envisioning the future of Indo-Pacific regionalism, to extend its strategic reach through alignments with other parties and enhance moral legitimacy by deepening and broadening normative frameworks for advancing collective interests for the Indo-Pacific region.