Asia's competing multilateral initiatives: Quality versus quantity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)245-255
Number of pages11
JournalPacific Review
Volume32
Issue number2
Early online date15 May 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

multilateralism
ASEAN
regional development
leadership
China
Asia
time
co-operation

Cite this

@article{fc7f03416c8d41ff93c26d8edde5d3e4,
title = "Asia's competing multilateral initiatives: Quality versus quantity",
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.",
keywords = "ASEAN, East Asia, institutions, Multilateralism, regionalism",
author = "Mark Beeson",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1080/09512748.2018.1470556",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "245--255",
journal = "Pacific Review",
issn = "0951-2748",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

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 journalArticle

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 -