Abstract
East Asia has many distinctive features that set it apart from other comparable regions, not least attitudes to regional development and cooperation. Despite a growing number of regional initiatives in East Asia, however, they are generally distinguished by their ineffectiveness. It is entirely possible that ‘institutional balancing’, like its more well-known power balancing counterpart, is designed not to facilitate but to prevent something from happening. The sort of ‘multilateralism 1.0’ developed by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has a lot to answer for in this regard: having established its own pattern of institutional effectiveness ASEAN's ‘leadership’ has caused it to be replicated under the new wave of ‘multilateralism 2.0’. Consequently, I suggest that not only is China very comfortable with the idea of a rather feeble and ineffective institutional architecture, but the USA is also unlikely to do anything to change this picture, especially under a Trump administration that is highly skeptical about the efficacy of multilateral institutions at the best of times.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 245-255 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Pacific Review |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 15 May 2018 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2019 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Asia's competing multilateral initiatives : Quality versus quantity. / Beeson, Mark.
In: Pacific Review, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2019, p. 245-255.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Asia's competing multilateral initiatives
T2 - Quality versus quantity
AU - Beeson, Mark
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - East Asia has many distinctive features that set it apart from other comparable regions, not least attitudes to regional development and cooperation. Despite a growing number of regional initiatives in East Asia, however, they are generally distinguished by their ineffectiveness. It is entirely possible that ‘institutional balancing’, like its more well-known power balancing counterpart, is designed not to facilitate but to prevent something from happening. The sort of ‘multilateralism 1.0’ developed by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has a lot to answer for in this regard: having established its own pattern of institutional effectiveness ASEAN's ‘leadership’ has caused it to be replicated under the new wave of ‘multilateralism 2.0’. Consequently, I suggest that not only is China very comfortable with the idea of a rather feeble and ineffective institutional architecture, but the USA is also unlikely to do anything to change this picture, especially under a Trump administration that is highly skeptical about the efficacy of multilateral institutions at the best of times.
AB - East Asia has many distinctive features that set it apart from other comparable regions, not least attitudes to regional development and cooperation. Despite a growing number of regional initiatives in East Asia, however, they are generally distinguished by their ineffectiveness. It is entirely possible that ‘institutional balancing’, like its more well-known power balancing counterpart, is designed not to facilitate but to prevent something from happening. The sort of ‘multilateralism 1.0’ developed by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has a lot to answer for in this regard: having established its own pattern of institutional effectiveness ASEAN's ‘leadership’ has caused it to be replicated under the new wave of ‘multilateralism 2.0’. Consequently, I suggest that not only is China very comfortable with the idea of a rather feeble and ineffective institutional architecture, but the USA is also unlikely to do anything to change this picture, especially under a Trump administration that is highly skeptical about the efficacy of multilateral institutions at the best of times.
KW - ASEAN
KW - East Asia
KW - institutions
KW - Multilateralism
KW - regionalism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047001510&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/09512748.2018.1470556
DO - 10.1080/09512748.2018.1470556
M3 - Article
VL - 32
SP - 245
EP - 255
JO - Pacific Review
JF - Pacific Review
SN - 0951-2748
IS - 2
ER -