Europe and Asia Evolving U.S Views on Asia's Future Institutional Architecture Tian Fengjun 4013R353-4
Outline Introduction A historical overview of US approaches to Asian Multilateralism Evolving U.S approaches to East Asian Multilateralism Conclusions Comments&Questions References
Introduction Three debates determine U.S views on Asia's future institutional architecture a) the debate between Asia-Pacific regionalism and Asian regionalism and how the two can coexist. b) the debate involves the role of Washington's traditional alliance-oriented strategy in Asia and how it coincides or conflicts with Aian multilateralism. c) the debate concerns institutionalized versus ad hoc multilateralism, and it plays ou both throughout the world and within Asia.
A historical overview of US approaches to Asian Multilateralism During the Cold War and immediate post- Cold War era→ apprehension ＆ suspicion As late as 1991→ hesitant As the Cold War faded→ a decided shift the Clinton administrations the Gorge W. Bush administrations ｛
Evolving U.S approaches to East Asian Multilateralism Factors affect U.S perspective and involvement in Asian community building: Who leads the Asian community How an emergent and much trumpted East Asian community relates to the region's other multilated organizations and initiatives Emerging Asian mechanisms' willingness to adopt global norms
Two important caveats of U.S support for multilateral institutions: No multilateral machanism is allowed to substitute for or threaten U.S bilateral alliances and other U.S- led security arrangements. It made clear its support for ASEAN in general and for more "inclusive" multilateral approaches in particular.
Pan-Asianism Pan-Pacificism exclusive inclusive APT SCO EAS APEC ARF cautious watchful welcome support
Multilateral institutions the ARF and the APEC U.S perspectives of the ARF: constrained contribution to regional security "talk shop"→ preventive diplomacy Issues of the APEC: politics and security issues promotion for free trade and economic cooperation ｛ ｛
AD Hoc multilateralism: the PSI and Six-Party Talks other examples: the U.S Pacific Command/ the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate
APT and the EAS to achieve an East Asia community: ASEAN→ the driving role APT→ the main vehicle U.S involvement in the EAS full membership observer ↓ two factors determine U.S attitude toward the EAS EAS→ other multilateral organizations/initiatives its adoption of global norms ｛ ｛ ｛
U.S views of multilateral pluses and minuses Pluses: useful vehicles valuable efforts Minuses: remain dialogue mechanism Taiwan's exclusion
Conclusions The United States eventually participated in the EAS formally in Noverber 2011, during the Obama's administration. This showed Washington's more positive attitude toward Asian community building. However, the two principles will not change: It still prefers that pride of place go to pan-Pacific institutional building. It insists the establishment of norms and objectives consistent with international standards.
Comments ＆ Questions U.S attitudes toward Asian multilateral cooperation are largely influnced by its concerns of China's influence in this region. What's the clear difference between APT and the EAS U.S empahsizes Taiwan's importance in this region's security cooperation. Is it necessary to incorporate Taiwan's views of this region's multilateralism?
References Alan Burns(2011),"U.S. Joins East Asia Summit: Implications for Regional Cooperation," The National Bureau of Asian Reserach, Nov Victor D.Cha(2011),"Complex Patchworks: U.S. Alliances as Part of Asia's Regional Architecture," Asia Policy, No.11, January, pp.27-50