![]()
p.1
1 Introduction
Steven B. Rothman and Utpal Vyas1 with Yoichiro Sato
Introduction
The Asia-Pacific region continues to be a source of economic dynamism and strategic tension in the 21st century. During and after the end of the Cold War era, the Asia-Pacific’s regional institutions and alliances developed in the context of heavy US involvement in the region. However, some countries maintain an underlying current of dissatisfaction with US dominance, while China concurrently rises and Japan weakens in strength and influence in the region. Changing priorities among regional actors, and in particular increased Chinese involvement in the development and form of regional institutions, generate a number of questions about the interaction of states in the Asia-Pacific. How do states inside and outside the region (re)define their relationships with and interests in each other? How do rival actors use their varying forms of power and linkages to influence the rules and formation of new institutions as well as their place within existing institutions? What role will institutions take as independent actors in influencing and constraining the behavior of states in the region?
As the international system globalizes, the number of actors with interest in the Asia-Pacific region broadens. The book reflects this increasing interest in the Asia-Pacific, with each chapter taking on different perspectives, including Japan, China, the United States, Australia, India, Russia, and Taiwan. These chapters pay particular attention to the different interests and motivations for developing, changing, or utilizing existing institutions in further development of regional integration as well as the problems these actors face. In addition to state actors, the papers address several important regional institutions in development such as the ASEAN (+3, +6, and the East Asian Summit), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), existing security alliances, and other bilateral institutions.
The chapters in this volume discuss the relationship between economic interests, motivations of state action, and the interaction of states in the potential for regional institutional development in the Asia region. As a whole, these papers present a stark reality of institutional development in Asia. Institutional development in Asia is characterized by idiosyncratic and diverse motivations (both material and non-material), a variety of policy strategies (strategic and norm-based), and the looming questions of China’s future depth of involvement as its economic position becomes more stable and its confidence in foreign affairs grows. Ultimately the volume describes the unique slow and diverse growth of a multitude of regional institutions, the complexities of generating cooperation, membership concerns, and competition between states and with existing institutions in the context of China’s increasing confidence and strength.
p.2
The research makes both theoretical and empirical contributions to the literature on Asian institutional development and international relations. The book uses theory pragmatically, applying the relevant theories and variables depending on the actors and questions discussed. For instance, for understanding motivations and interests of states, authors rely heavily on identity, values, and institutional influences. When discussing interaction between states in bargaining and institutional development, authors rely on theories of institution building, regimes, and strategic interaction grounded in relative power concerns. Empirically, the book contributes to current scholarship by examining institution building from an interaction of actors, and the dynamics occurring, rather than each actor individually. Since actors in Asia do not operate in isolation, scholars should examine them dynamically where decisions of each both depend on and influence the future decisions of other actors.
This book offers a middle-of-the road approach between limiting the analysis narrowly to formalized institutions and addressing international relations in the region with a more open definition of “institutions.” Various other studies of regional institutions have focused more on multilateral institutions (such as ASEAN and its expanded meetings, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)). While many book-length studies examined these institutions, both individually and collectively,2 some ongoing conceptualization and proposals for new institutions warrant the need for timely paper-length discussions. This book includes some chapters that address such issues. The former group also includes books focusing on bilateral security alliances. Several book-length analyses of each bilateral alliance exist,3 and some discuss trilateralization of US alliances.4 These discussions usually involve broader regional international relations, but do not specifically link with further “institution building” within the region.5
The latter group of books6 provide a good academic debate between liberal and neorealist varieties of institutionalism; however, ongoing developments in regional institutions and relations since the publication of these studies need to be considered in order to build upon this debate. Hence, a book-length treatment of both formal and less formal institutions with updated empirical research is called for.
Theoretical framework
In order to provide context for the book, this introduction discusses the theoretical framework based on three perspectives: defining institutions, current theories of international institutions, and strategic use of institutions where the book makes its primary contribution.
p.3
Institutions
The chapters in this book refer to a wide variety of international institutions at various stages of development in the Asia-Pacific region. At the broadest level, institutions are “systems of established and prevalent social rules that structure social interactions.”7 Beyond this most basic level of defining institutions, various scholars have conceptualized institutions for particularities of research programs by adding additional criteria. For instance, institutions may be defined by formality, functionality, or degree of internationalization. As more criteria are added, the definition of an institution narrows, adding particular values as defining elements as they take on central components of a scholarly research program.8
Some scholars have defined institutions in terms of formality because theory might suggest that more formalized and defined institutions have different effects on actors. Thus, scholars defined institutions based on the degree of formalization or “weakness” in terms of the degree of internalization or formal bureaucracy.9 There have been various formulations of this distinction, and further subdivisions of each type:10 however, for the purposes of this book, informal institutions, usually emphasized more by English School and constructivist scholars, generally consist of norms, practices, or habitual behaviors. Formal institutions tend more toward specific rules, legal frameworks, and organizations. In some instances, informal institutions evolve or formalize as treaties and organizations; it is also possible for newly created formal institutions to introduce new international norms and practices.11 The degree of institutionalization can also be seen as a sliding scale12 – some international norms are more entrenched (internalized), and equally some international treaties and organizations are more effective and purposeful.
Other scholars defined international treaties based on a number of criteria, including the formalization or weakness of the substantive measures in the text, as well as degree of internationalization (bilateral or multilateral), and other factors because they were of interest to the scholarly research program.13
Some scholars consider informal institutions as close relations to successfully internalized norms and practices.14 The almost universally internalized norm of sovereignty, for instance, has led to an institutionalized system of international relations whereby a host of practices and behaviors morphed into an accepted institutional structure underpinning the relations between states. This is more self-evident in a region such as the Asia-Pacific, where formal institutions are weak. As can be seen from several of the chapters in this book, an institutional structure of relations exists in the Asia-Pacific, which depends on ideas and practices built up in the post Pacific War era and post Cold War era. Norms such as non-interference, a strong notion of state sovereignty, and related ideas based on an often post-colonial form of nationalism have led to a generally accepted way of conducting diplomacy and visualizing international relations in the region.
This informal institutionalization of relations has defined a base on which it has been difficult to build more formal international institutions, and yet which has enabled the reasonably smooth economic integration of the Asia-Pacific region in the post Cold War era. It is also clear from the chapters in this book that the rise of China challenges this informal institutional structure,15 along with China’s more formal institutional challenges.16
p.4
Theories of international institutions
The current state of research on formal international institutions suggests their importance in a variety of contexts as an independent influence on international affairs. Institutions act as agents in dispute settlement, as forums for international communication and as a re...
