ABSTRACT
The Asia-Pacific is not only home to some of the world’s largest economies, it also contains some of its most important strategic actors and potential “flashpoints.” Indeed, the East Asian side of the Pacific is routinely cited as one place in which war is not just possible, but quite likely. In the words of one prominent American strategic analyst, East Asia is a region that is “ripe for rivalry.”1 And yet as we saw in Chapter 2, the East Asian region generally and Southeast Asia in particular have been relatively peaceful for decades, and inter-state war arguably seems less rather than more likely as time goes on. How do we account for this apparent paradox? The ASEAN countries might reasonably argue that they have got something to do with it: since ASEAN was established, none of its members have gone to war with each other, and they might claim to have had a pacifying effect on the wider East Asian region. While it is not possible to demonstrate unambiguously that ASEAN was responsible for this happy outcome, it is, nevertheless, a striking coincidence, and one that directs our attention to the possible role played by institutions in bringing it about. The fact that there is anything to actually examine in East Asia or
the Asia-Pacific in this context is interesting and important in itself. After all, ASEAN wasn’t established until the late 1960s, and even then it was not conceived of as a specifically security organization-even if security concerns were actually a key part of its underlying rationale. It was not until 1994 and the inauguration of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) that the Asia-Pacific saw the establishment of a genuinely region-wide grouping unambiguously dedicated to facilitating a “security dialogue” and enhancing regional stability. Again, it is worth pointing out that this is a quite different developmental trajectory to that of Europe where, from the outset, overarching geopolitical concerns were a major driving force behind the very idea of regional integration, and the establishment of the European Union was largely a
consequence of strategic, rather than economic concerns.2 To account for the very different history of institutional development in the AsiaPacific, therefore, it is necessary to first consider those unique historical circumstances that have shaped institutional development in the region, particularly during the Cold War. As we shall see, this period played a crucial role in the evolution of East Asia in particular, making the possibility of peace, let alone cooperative security, a fairly remote prospect at times. The first part of the chapter briefly sketches the general historical
contours of regional security relations in the Asia-Pacific. One of the most important developments in this regard has been the increasing importance of the United States as a key strategic actor. Importantly, however, American influence has been overlaid on, and helped to define, extant relations between East Asian nations-the most important of which has been the Sino-Japanese bilateral relationship. The separate but interconnected interactions between the U.S.A., Japan and China are not simply historical curiosities, however: they continue to influence profoundly security relations in the Asia-Pacific to this day. Any institution that seeks to manage relations between the big threeor influence their impact on other countries and potential trouble spots in the region, for that matter-must take account of the historical baggage they bring with them. Perhaps what is most surprising about the region, given its history and the major asymmetries of power that exist within it, is that the ARF exists at all. Even more remarkably, the ARF reflects the influence of some of its smallest and, one might have thought, least influential players: the fact that the ARF subscribes to the “ASEAN way” is evidence of this possibility, but as with ASEAN itself, this way of managing inter-state relations has noteworthy weaknesses as well as strengths. The bulk of the chapter is taken up with exploring how these factors have played themselves out and how the region’s security relations have been affected as a consequence.
