Essay Title: 

international relations

March 30, 2016 | Author: | Posted in asian studies, history

How did the organization gap in Northeast Asia come into being ? Why has the gap narrowed in the late 1990s

Regionalism and Critical Junctures

Japan , China , and Korea trade massively with the outside world and remarkably smoothly , considering the scale of the transpacific imbalances

These nations periodically suffer turbulent and remarkably bitter trade spats with one another , such as the Garlic War of 2000 between South Korea and China , or the Tatami War of 2001 between China and Japan

Japan . On the environmental front , intraregional relations in Northeast Asia have [banner_entry_middle]

likewise been delicate and singularly devoid of coordination as the history of acid rain and the ocean-dumping of nuclear wastes so clearly and unfortunately demonstrates

Northeast Asia has never had a formal region wide multilateral security structure , despite the manifest dangers of its situation

Until the late 1990s it was virtually devoid of regional economic and environmental organization

From a functionalist perspective , the organization gap is a rising handicap to Northeast Asia , as regional economic interdependence grows amid continuing political and financial uncertainties

Multilateral institutions have prospective utility in addressing intraregional market failures in both the economic and cooperative-security spheres

Dual market failures within the region in security and finance – illustrated by the Korean War and the Asian financial crisis , in particular – have clearly inhibited regional stability and growth in the past

The Asian financial crisis of the mid-1990s , like its Korean War counterpart nearly half a century earlier , similarly shows that major political-economic turbulence can be a catalyst for formal regionalist institution-building in Northeast Asia . Before the financial crisis-driven critical juncture was visible , the AMF , supported with both material resources and political will , effectively failed

Lacking a civil society and a rule-oriented tradition , the nations of Northeast Asia tend to rely on individualistic and informal institutional arrangements . That provokes a tendency toward free-riding and a persistent , related reliance on asymmetric economic and security ties with the United States

The communication problem . Individuals and nations in the region persistently fail to see common interest . Miscommunication , due to lack of networks , was a serious problem during the Asian financial crisis between China and Japan , for example the Japanese Ministry of Finance could not coordinate closely with counterparts in China in developing the AMF concept , even if it had so desired , due to lack of personal contacts

The coordination problem . Again , Cold War estrangement , combined with traditional wariness toward Japan elsewhere in the region , greatly inhibited the creation of coordinating structures in the past – a heritage of history that continues to plague the region today . There remain few natural advocates of Northeast Asian regional integration , in contrast to the situation in Western Europe , and consequently few individuals with clear stakes in positive , integration-oriented outcomes

The agenda-setting issue . An embedded lack of think tanks and epistemic communities with broad knowledge of the region and its potential inhibits the development of realistic blueprints for change . This lack of blueprints in turn greatly increases the uncertainty and risk in building formal regional institutions

Difficulty in… [banner_entry_footer]


This author has published 9453 articles so far. More info about the author is coming soon.
Did you like this essay sample?

You must be logged in to post a comment.