Building Confidence in East Asia

Maritime Conflicts, Interdependence and Asian Identity Thinking

K. Togo, G. Naidu, K. Togo, G. Naidu, Kenneth A. Loparo, Walter Allan

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781137504647
• eBook ISBN: 9781137504654
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

Conscious that trust deficit is a principal concern in East Asia, the book attempts to suggest ways to enhance confidence in certain key areas such as disputes in East and South China Seas, maritime CBMs, impact of economic interdependence on security, and issues concerning identity and values in Asian thinking.

1

Introduction

G V C Naidu and Kazuhiko Togo

Togo, Kazuhiko and G V C Naidu, eds. Building Confidence in East Asia: Maritime Conflicts, Interdependence and Asian Identity Thinking. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137504654.0003.

I

A case to build confidence in East Asia is more urgent now than ever before because of the kinds of momentous changes the region is witnessing in its security and economic profiles, and the anxieties that have been generated as a consequence of these. It is obvious that the narrative on today’s East Asia presents a paradox, given the fact that while the region is swept by unprecedented economic dynamism, it is also teetering since a range of grave politico-security issues engulfing virtually the entire region are threatening to undermine its stability. It is these seemingly contradictory trends that need to be reconciled for the sake of regional peace and uninterrupted development. A close scrutiny of political issues dogging the region clearly reveals that a lack of trust among neighbors is a major root cause.

Much of the debate on East Asia since the end of the Cold War has centered primarily on two major issues. One, the continued uncertainty about robust US military presence in, and commitment to, regional security and two, the rise of new power centers, in particular China, which could adversely affect regional equilibrium and hence its security. However, the current dynamics of the region are evidently more complex than those that could be explained by one or two notable developments. Nor can they be captured by applying one of those theories of international relations that have dominated much of the discourse on the subject.

Whereas the advocates of major theoretical streams strongly argue in favor of their convictions, which more often than not are quite contradictory, there is however a broad agreement that East Asia is undergoing a profound transformation in more than one sense. In any event, the status quo is not an option as it is difficult to sustain, but the challenge is to make sure that the transition that is currently taking place in terms of moving from post–Cold War US-led unipolarity to a new regional order is smooth and uneventful. As history reveals, perhaps the most critical phase is when a region transits from one order to another. Invariably, status quo powers would resist the shift whereas revisionist powers would strive hard to change it. This invariably would result in a major clash of interests and quite often lead to major wars. The second and equally daunting task is to make sure that not just the transitory phase, but also the new architecture that might come about as a consequence, is peaceful and stable.

There seems to be a broad agreement that the East Asian region has witnessed unprecedented peace for more than three and a half decades. Barring minor incidents of armed skirmishes, the last major armed clash that the region witnessed was in early 1979 between China and Vietnam. That of course is no guarantee that no war will take place in the future. Although current trends suggest that war is an unlikely proposition for the foreseeable future, one cannot ignore rising tensions in the maritime domain. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the likely factors that have helped the region to remain peaceful. One is that the US, despite its military withdrawal from the Philippines after closure of its largest overseas bases in 1992, has maintained fairly formidable deployments across the Indo-Pacific region from South Korea to Diego Garcia. Despite US’s relative decline, there is no question that it has been a predominant power that continues to exercise enormous influence. In the face of remarkable changes, Washington has molded its approach by constantly adjusting its policies while retaining the alliance system and forward military deployments as the backbone. At the same time, in addition to allies, it is building several strategic partnerships to bolster its role. Aside from a new “rebalancing” strategy, which would result in stepped-up American military presence, the US is also taking an active interest in regional multilateralism. Notwithstanding occasional hiccups, both the US and China have not spared efforts to maintain stable relations, even as stakes steadily increase in each other’s economies.

The second factor that has contributed to the prolonged peaceful and stable environment is the unprecedented economic prosperity that the region has been experiencing. There is no question that it is economically the most vibrant region and no reason to doubt why buoyancy will slacken any time soon. Today three out of the four largest global economies are in Asia, with China emerging the largest in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) terms (and is within striking distance to overtake the US even in nominal terms). And, it is also the largest manufacturing and trading nation. Japan, despite a prolonged slowdown, has huge strengths that cannot be underestimated, such as possessing certain advanced, niche technologies and huge private savings. Similarly, India, another major emerging economy, possessing formidable military power equipped with nuclear weapons and a fast emerging blue-water capable navy, has become a significant factor in East Asia in recent years. Interestingly, there are a large number of tiger economies such as Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, etc., which carry considerable economic heft in the region. Even those that had long been considered laggards, such as the Philippines and Myanmar, are fast catching up with their neighbors by logging impressive growth rates.

East Asia’s rise is represented not merely by China and India but by the entire region, an unprecedented development in global history. A vast region, spread from India to Australia and from Korea to Indonesia, with a combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) that is already larger than the US and the EU in PPP terms, is by any measure the most dynamic in the world, besides being home to nearly half of the global population and the world’s largest and fastest growing markets. In contrast to the past, the region’s economies are now relatively much more robust and resilient, which became evident during the 2008 global and later the Eurozone crises. Thus, not only is the global economic and strategic focus invariably shifting to the East, but also there is no reason to doubt that Asia will dominate global affairs in the coming years. Rapidly increasing economic prosperity is in itself a significant contributor to peace. After enduring prolonged exploitation under colonial rule, most East Asian countries had to face grave problems of stability both at the domestic and regional levels. Lack of economic progress, as it has been proved, had been one of the principal contributing factors for the absence of peace. As the region has begun to get prosperous, in particular since the 1980s, one can see phenomenal improvement in political stability. Moreover, economic prosperity has also contributed to the growth of democracy across the region. There are very few countries that are not yet democratic, in comparison to the 1980s, which means democracies are most unlikely to go to war with each other. Thus, there is undoubtedly a strong co-relation between economic prosperity, democracy and peace.

Thirdly, as the East Asian region has begun to prosper, the economic interdependence has also started increasing in a big way. Indeed, in East Asia both globalization and regionalization processes are taking place simultaneously remarkably rapidly even as the region vigorously pursues regional economic cooperation and integration. At over 60 percent in 2012, the intra-Asian trade is already more than North America and very close to the EU level. In other words, East Asia is trading with itself more than with the rest of the world, which has meant that dependence on outside markets has declined dramatically. Similarly, much of East Asian investments are bound within the region as opportunities expand. Through what is called “networked FDI” the region is rapidly integrating itself economically. And, if the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) proposal that is being discussed materializes by 2015 as envisaged, the process of regional integration will further intensify. With talks at the World Trade Organization virtually deadlocked, bilateral and regional free trade agreements are emerging as principal drivers of trade. East Asia is in the forefront on regional agreements by signing the largest number of them. As a result, stakes in regional security will rise further than ever before for each and every country in the region, and even beyond the region.

Fourthly, regional multilateralism, economic and security, despite its below par performance, is taking root, albeit sluggishly. Comparisons with Europe are inevitable, but let us not forget that it is basically a post–Cold War phenomenon in East Asia and issues here are far more complex. Yet, the role of multilateralism in bringing together all stakeholders within and without the region for periodic face-to-face interactions is laudable. The progress of economic multilateralism is far more impressive and the goals are indeed ambitious. The aim is to go far beyond creating not merely a trading bloc by crafting a pan-East Asian market but also by economically integrating the vast region. Concomitantly, ambitious plans are also afoot to bring the region closer through a massive road, rail, air, and sea connectivity. In such an eventuality, peace dividends are expected to be immense. Contrarily, the security multilateralism has not been up to expectations. Whereas the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) has remained merely a talk shop, the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting (ADMM) and the ADMM-Plus (Plus being the Dialogue Partners of ASEAN) seem promising since their focus is on addressing non-traditional security challenges collectively. These suggest that there is a dearth of strong multilateral mechanisms, as the existing ones are weak and underdeveloped and hence an urgent need for more focused, goal-oriented regional security frameworks than general ones.

The above picture of East Asia is certainly encouraging, nonetheless there is no denying that numerous other developments are becoming a cause for concern. Of course, the most prominent are the territorial disputes that have surfaced in a big way. These are not only tricky and sensitive but can incite strong emotions and dangerous nationalist feelings. The East Asian complexity is further compounded by the fact that there are strong suspicions among neighbors and that historical animosities, which had been subdued for sometime, can resurface powerfully.

The ongoing intense modernization of armed forces across the entire East Asian region is a reflection of security anxieties. Yet, it would be incorrect to jump to the conclusion that wars are imminent or inevitable. Military modernization per se is not necessarily an indication of a country’s aggressive intents. The reasons for acquisition of advanced weaponry could be varied and certainly should not be construed as preparation to wage a war. Fortunately there is no arms race taking place in East Asia in the conventional sense. The race to acquire arms could be for the protection and advancement of economic and diplomatic interests, or to hedge against potential dangers, and could also be due to the fact that most countries are becoming richer and hence can afford to spend more on defense. But the problems arise if military modernization and acquisition of offensive capabilities take place in the absence of trust and lack of transparency; it can incite strong reactions from neighbors. The danger is that potentially it can spin out of control resulting in a kind of “action-reaction” quagmire.

Not least is the fact that East Asia is crowded with great powers, a scenario in which their interests are bound to overlap and intersect, leading to tensions. Besides the US, it is the three Asian powers, that is, China, India, and Japan, that are becoming assertive in trying to carve their own strategic spaces and seeking to play bigger roles in this increasingly complex region. It is not just the great powers, there is ASEAN that has emerged as a crucial player not just in geostrategically located Southeast Asia but as a force that could engage competing great powers productively. Many also bemoan the fact that the region lacks a classic balance of power, which could be a de-stabilizing factor. In any case, the common concern shared by most is the shape of the new order that will come about.

While the above enumerates some of the major issues confronting East Asia that are encouraging as well as alarming, what is apparent in the discourse on East Asia is that, notwithstanding increasing economic prosperity and interdependence, a lack of confidence among the countries in general is palpable. It is particularly so in those which are embroiled in land/maritime border/boundary disputes. East Asia is not exactly on the precipice but even minor incidents can go a long way in triggering crises unless there are mechanisms to deal with them.

II

In the above backdrop, which by no means claims to capture the entire gamut of the emerging East Asian economic and security landscape, the question is whether the academic and policymaking community can play a role by suggesting ways to enhance confidence and reduce mistrust. With this objective in mind, an international conference was organized in February 2014 by the Institute for World Affairs, Kyoto Sangyo University, to elicit views from leading scholars drawn from across the region so that ideas generated could be used in addressing certain key issues of concern to the region. Three specific areas were identified in this endeavor: the evolving global picture of East Asia seen from the perspective of current sources of tension; maritime security issues with a focus on East and South China Seas; and the impact of growing economic interdependence and cooperation on regional peace and security.

In addition to the nine contributors as introduced below, Professor Kirti Prasirtsuk of the Thammast University, Thailand, Dr. Jan Rood of the Clingendael Institute, Netherlands, and Professor Kimiko Haba of the Aoyama Gakuin University, Japan also participated and made valuable contributions to the discussion at the conference.

Thus, the volume is not about testing various theories but an earnest attempt to look at certain current developments in a perspective which seeks to find ways and underscore those elements that can contribute to building trust. It seeks to bring together some deep thinking that is coming from Euro-American world views, strongly underpinned by the tenets of Realism and Liberal Institutionalism and from major thinking of Asian scholarship which is well versed in Asian reality. Further, an attempt is also made to explore the role of shared values and identity concepts in Asian thinking from pre-19th century Asian thinking, when Asia seemed to share some common world view.

In Chapter 1, Pham Quang Minh examines Vietnam’s relations with great powers. It traces how, while in the midst of an intense nationalist war, Vietnam had to deal with two great powers, being China and the Soviet Union, who actively supported it against the US, but also had to face the tricky situation of China–Soviet Union rivalry and its impact. True, Vietnam had been much closer to China, both geographically and otherwise, but also had bouts of tensions. On the other hand, Hanoi’s relations with the US swung from one end to the other. Now, once again it appears a situation may be arising in which Vietnam may be forced to choose between China and the US, which is something it seeks to avoid, given its own limitation. Hence, it ideally seeks an environment where great powers do not seek hegemony but work closely for the promotion of peace and development.

Liu Ming contends in Chapter 2 that current tensions in the East and South China Seas are anachronistic in the wake of rising interdependence. While explaining current events in a theoretical framework, he acknowledges that the maritime disputes are complex and that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) would not be able to resolve them amicably since claims are based on historical rights. Conceding that China’s Nine-dash line is vague, he advocates a series of confidence building measures such as maintaining the status quo, crisis management measures, no military installations, joint development of natural resources, and finalizing a mutually acceptable Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. Even on Senkaku/Dyaoyu, Liu Ming makes an interesting proposal that China “minimizes the number of vessels and frequency of patrols”, with the expectation of talks with Japan.

In Chapter 3, Gilbert Rozman argues that there is no scope for idealism in the East Asian context and discounts the role of growing economic interdependence. The process of construction of national identities in East Asia is leaving significant gaps in perception and hence there is little room for a conventional way of conducting inter-state business. Confidence could be built through respective initiatives by China, ASEAN, and the US. In this there is merit in strengthening regional multilateralism, such as the East Asia Summit, which can play a key role. Building meaningful confidence would be difficult if China were to use its economic leverage in dividing the US allies. Further, a detailed examination of sub-regionalism in both Northeast and Southeast Asian regions is attempted.

In Chapter 4, Kazuhiko Togo firstly addresses the maritime security issues that divide the East Asian countries. He offers the Realist viewpoint in suggesting that “the status-quo power should be ready to talk” and “the power challenging the status-quo should express its claim peacefully” but concludes that the use of or threat to use force cannot be part of the settlement as these can fuel nationalist emotions, which are closely linked to the issue of identity. He therefore enlarges the analysis to cover the issue of identity formation under Xi Jinping in China and Abe Shinzo in Japan. Since he does not see a mutually acceptable solution either from Xi or from Abe’s new thinking, the latter part of the paper concentrates on the search for Asian wisdom dating back to ancient Confucian Chinese thinking and of mid-19th century Japanese ideas, such as those of Yokoi Shonan, to find out whether a common basis of problem solving between Japan and China in particular could be derived.

Tran Viet Thai and G V C Naidu forcefully argue in Chapter 5 that the maritime security environment both in Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia is becoming problematic. The problems are not limited to those involved in disputes but for several other countries too who have stakes in regional security. Since there are hardly any mechanisms in place to promote confidence in the maritime sector in East Asia, there is an urgent need to undertake a series of initiatives. Primarily analyzing the situation in the South China Sea, Tran Viet Thai and Naidu argue that tangible military Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) can help promote transparency, such as ship visits, personnel exchanges, exercises, navy talks, mine countermeasures, hotlines, and also joint operations in counter-piracy, counterterrorism, good order at sea, search and rescue, disaster relief, etc. Further, a number of military maritime CBMs can be built by crafting regimes, especially those that are multilateral, and promoting cooperation to provide good order at sea. There is also an acute shortage ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• 1  Introduction
• I  East Asia: Geopolitical and Historical Context
• II  Maritime Security: Crisis Management and Acceptable Solution
• III  Interdependence: Effect and Limitation
• Index