ABSTRACT
One of the engines in the process of tying Europe and Asia closer together has been so-called “track-two” diplomacy. Academics, politicians, businessmen and other experts in different policy fields have developed and influenced the dialogue between the two regions and contributed to the growing Asian-European relationship. In the official documentation of the Asian-European processes, which are characterized by their discursive rather than mandatory power, there is hardly any mention of the second track. Thus, it would, perhaps, be premature to ascribe too important a political role to this form of dialogue between experts from both regions. However, the socio-political and socio-cultural significance of interregional track-two discourse cannot be underestimated. As the ASEM process, as an institutional framework for Asia-Europe relations, itself is characterized by a high degree of informality and non-committal negotiations and has so far proceeded very slowly, track-two processes could be a complementary framework for the Asian-European construction site. Based on academic and practical knowledge and technical expertise, track-two dialogues could help to establish new issues between the participants and to open spaces for debate. They could, furthermore, prove to be a substantive instrument for leading the necessary debates and setting new agendas in order to advance Asian-European relations. Yet, what are the actual implications and potential of the AsianEuropean track-two process with respect to interregional relations? Has the dialogue developed into a steady policy network – e.g. as an epistemic community – and what are its chances on the one hand and its limitations on the other?
