GIARI

116

ASEAN

12

117

12

2

Pre-symposium Meeting
Date: December 2, 2010
Venue: Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University
Participants (in alphabetical order): Prof. Satoshi Amako, Prof. Rumi Aoyama, Prof. Kang Choi, Dr. Miki
Honda, Dr. Kenji Horiuchi, Prof. Alastair Iain Johnston, Dr. Hiro Katsumata, Dr. Shu Min, Prof Andrew Oros,Prof. Hatsue Shinohara, Dr. Rizal Sukma, Prof. Chikako (Kawakatsu) Ueki, and GIARI RAs.
The issues discussed at the meeting can be divided into the following eight categories:
1. Key terms
2. Regional security architecture
3. Regional communities and identities (1): foundations
4. Regional communities and identities (2): Critical views
5. ASEAN
6. US presence
7. The Korean Peninsula
8. The rise of China
The issues discussed at the meeting, concerning each of these eight categories, can be summarized asfollows:
1. Key terms
If one is to explore the key determinants of Asian regional integration, the first thing he/she has to do is tosoformer may be more relevant to the process in Asia, and the latter may be more appropriate to capture the
There are many ways by which countries can cooperate. For example, European countries have developed
operation may differ,depending on how countries choose to cooperate.
2. Regional security architecture
East Asian countries today do not have an overall/general architecture for regional cooperation that goesbeyond existing issue-specific frameworks.
In the area of non-traditional security issues, various cooperative mechanisms in East Asia do matter.
This is the case, although the US presence continues to have an important role in the area of traditional
security.
Multilateral dialogues at the top/senior-official level may be effective for the stability of the East Asian
region, involving China, Japan and South Korea.
The capacity of East Asian countries is an important issue. Each needs a regional cooperative architecture
because it lacks the ability to address various security issues by itself unilaterally.
For the exploration of a future regional security architecture in East Asia, it is essential to identify thepreferences of key players, including China, the US, Japan, ASEAN, South Korea and North Korea. One
concerning the following five key issues. The first is the membership of any given security framework.
The question of whether the US should be included as a member can constitute a point at issue. The samething can be said of the status of Taiwan and of North Korea. The second is the rules and/or decision
making procedures. Some countries may want all decisions to be made on a consensual basis, while others
may prefer decisions to be made by a majority vote. The third concerns the responsibility involved inmembership. The extent to which countries should contribute their military forces to regional institutions,for example, can be a point at issue. The forth is the issue areas to be covered within multilateral118

frameworks. Some countries may want to avoid liberal issues such as human rights and democracy.
Countries such as China may want to avoid addressing territorial issues within multilateral frameworks.
It can be argued that, in any case, all countries in the region probably want to be involved in regional
what each wants: all want to be a relevant player, having a legitimate stake in regional integration.
3. Regional communities and identities (1): foundations
Socialization and people-to-people exchanges are prerequisites for the formation of regional security
communities. Such communities represent a form of regional order, which should be distinguished fromother kinds of order, such as the concert of great powers and military alliances. Security communities arecharacterized by the prevailing expectation for peaceful change.
Social contract theory may be useful in analyzing the formation of security communities. The key toforming security communities is in- and out-group differentiations, and thus it is important to analyze thedeterminants of such differentiations.
In East Asia, there is robust evidence to show that foreign policy choices are made on the basis of theperceptions of identity differences on the part of policymakers.
It is worth exploring whether economic development/modernization leads to identity changes and themitigation of differences between societies in East Asia. Relevant to this point is the literature arguing that
economic integration leads to the convergence of identities among business elites, and that such
convergence may affect political activities.
It should be noted that the percep
reference groups. In this regard, it can be said that collective identities can be formed more easily whenrelevant parties share a common perception of an out-group.
The existence of a common security threat may be an important factor in shaping a regional identity.
Although people-to-people exchanges may seem like a negligible phenomenon today, their importanceshould not be underestimated because future generations, including students and youngsters, are involved.
They may form a collective identity and lead the process of regional integration in the future. Yet, at thesame time, young people may be passive, and simply bandwagon with dominant phenomena.
4. Regional communities and identities (2): Critical views
The formation of a collective identity at the societal level may not always lead to its formation at thepolitical/elite level. Notable in this respect is the fact that, in Europe, it was an identity at the elite level
which promoted regional integration. Yet it may also be argued that exchanges at the societal level
facilitated inter-governmental integration in Europe.
Activities such as traveling and economic exchanges can work in both directions: integration or
disintegration. It is notable that the Japanese are not welcoming Chinese tourists, who actually account foras high as 70% of the total number of tourists to Japan, according to a survey by the Yomiuri Shimbun.
It is worth adding that tourism is all about experiencing something different/exotic. If this is the case, mass
tourism may not be an effective force for the construction of collective identities.
Politics may matter. Political leaders may play a role in shaping public perceptions. To illustrate, only after
a power-balance change between great powers did Japanese people develop an interest in the Soviet leader,
Gorbachev. Another point to note in this regard is that political cooperation may be a prerequisite for
economic cooperation and perhaps also for collective identity formation.
Regional cooperation may easily be undermined by conflict. Domestic political problems may undermine
efforts for regional cooperation. Thus, functional cooperation may be the most promising. The role ofnational leaders should be emphasized in advancing regional cooperation.
5. ASEAN
It is worth exploring whether identity similarities have contributed to the formation of a regional
community in Southeast Asia. In this regard, it is worth noting that, in Southeast Asia in the past, there had
been continuous conflicts and wars. Hence, the nations there came to recognize that cooperation wasessential. Their understanding that there was no other way but to cooperate led them to address various
issues. One of the first tasks was the joint production of fertilizer.
Recently ASEAN members have agreed to bring their disputes to the International Court of Justice (ICJ),

119

and to accept decisions made by the court.
After the end of the Cold War, Southeast Asian countries expanded the areas of cooperation to include
non-traditional security issues. There was a need to change the goals and means of ASEAN.
Today democratization and human rights protection are indispensable for the formation of a common
identity in Southeast Asia. Thi
restricted. It is worth adding that the development of security communities cannot be planned in a
top-down manner.
It can be said that the development of ASEAN preceded the development of theories of regional
integration. Yet it can also be said that theoretical concepts have served as policy frameworks in Southeast
Asia.
The role of ASEAN in East Asia may be limited to the provision of forums in which the countries ofNortheast Asia and Southeast Asia can meet. In any case, these forums may have a constraining effect on
Chinese behavior
The significance of ASEAN can be understood in terms of the associa

space for addressing these p
6. US presence
The US presence in East Asia may be a prerequisite for regional order. Yet it should be noted, in thisrespect, that the US should think more seriously about multilateral cooperation.
The ways in which East Asian countries respond to various security issues may be determined by thepresence of the US. However, the real effect of the US presence is difficult to determine. In any case,counterfactual analyses may be needed. One may ask, for example, in what way China would have
behaved in the 1995/96 Taiwan Strait Crisis, if US forces were not present in Asia.
An important question for researchers to examine is whether the US has the will and capacity to make acontribution to the stability of East Asia, in particular, by promoting the formulation of regional
cooperation architectures.
It seems that US policy toward China has become more assertive. This may be one of the reasons why
China behaved so assertively in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Yellow Sea in 2010. In
any case, the intention of the US may have been to reassure its allies, and also to signal to others that it is
not in decline, and that it is by no means retreating from the East Asian region.
US domestic politics should be examined. The White House was seen as weak vis- à-vis Beijing during the2009 Obama-Hu summit. Hence, the US government may be intending to show to its domestic audience,as well as to the East Asian nations, that US policy toward China should remain strong, and that it isdetermined to remain engaged in East Asian affairs.
7. The Korean Peninsula
The presence of the US may be serving as a deterrent. Yet another question is whether a decrease in the
degree of US presence would lead to greater cooperation among the East Asian countries to deal with theircommon enemy, North Korea.
relations that Northeast Asian countries have with North Korea are all different. In any case, a stronger
emphasis should be placed on the benefit of cooperation.
One remarkable development in recent years is that the Chinese have mentioned that they could agree tothe unification of the Korean Peninsula, as long as certain conditions were met. They have however not
specified what exactly these conditions are.

It can be argued that the bilateral alliances of the US are the only way to deal with the issue of North
Korea, from a certain perspective. It is difficult to imagine effective multilateral cooperation over the issueof North Korea, given the difficulties of the existing multilateral institutions in Asia.
8. The rise of China

120

China is trying to create new norms of international politics, on the basis of its own preferences.
The recent use of rare earth exports by the Chinese as a strategic tool raises the question of whether theliberal view of regional peace is really relevant. Economics and politics can always be separated, and thespillover effect may work in a negative direction.
At the same time, it may be counter-factually said that, if the condition of economic interdependence had
been absent in the first place, the situation could have been worse. It may be that the economic measures
were taken, instead of more aggressive measures, because of the significance of economic
interdependence.
Increasingly assertive Chinese behavior in the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Yellow Sea in2010 can be seen as the result of exogenous shocks, which were magnified by the media and certain
interest groups. A counter-factual question is how China would have behaved if the exogenous shocks had
occurred last year, and so on.
The Chinese foreign ministry has become aware of the possible impact its regional policy will have on theimage of its country. Some kind of learning process is developing between China and Southeast Asian
nations.
The ways in which countries perceive the status of Taiwan is diverse. In particular, the views of the US andof Southeast Asian countries are different.
between Washington and
Beijing. East Asian countries apparently have not been able to reassure China in the security sphere. Thisissue should be explored in depth in the future.

121

(Satoshi AMAKO)

2002
2000
2003

4
1999

1999

)

(
NHK

2003
VS
1

11
2006

2004
2007

2009
2010
Professor, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies (GSAPS), Waseda University. He earned his PhD in
International Relations from Graduate School of Social Sciences, Hitotsubashi University. His specialties areContemporary China and Asian International Relations. He became Professor at Waseda University in April
2002 after serving as Assistant Professor at Ryukyu University, as Professor in the Faculty of International
Economics, Aoyama Gakuin University. He was invited to American University as Visiting Professor in 1999.
Major Publications include(Iwanami, 1999);
Change in Contemporary Chinese Structure, vol.4, The Political Structure of Central and Regional
Government (writing and editing, The University of Tokyo Press, 2000); Life-Size China (Keiso Shobo,2003); How to Associate with China (NHK Book, 2003); The History of China, vol.11: Mao Zedong vs.
Deng Xiaoping (Kodansha, 2004); Road to Asian Union: Theories and Ideas on Capacity Building (Chikuma
Shobo, 2010) and others.
(Rumi AOYAMA )

2007

2007
2009

Professor, The Research Institute of Current Chinese Affairs, School of Education, Waseda University. She
was a visiting researcher at the Stanford University from 2005-2006. She earned a Ph. D. in Law from
Graduate School of Law, Keio University. Her specialty is Contemporary Chinese Diplomacy. Her
ko Mori & Kenichiro Hirano eds., A New East Asia: Toward a Regional(Kang CHOI)
Ph.D
1992 1998 2002 2005

KIDA
KIDA
Korean Journal of Defense Analysis (KJDA)

60

1998

2002

4
-Korean Arms

122

-

-US Security-North Korean Relations:

CHOI, Kang (Ph.D., the Ohio State University) is a professor and Director-General for American Studies at
the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. From 1992 to1998, and from 2002 to 2005, Professor CHOI worked in the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA).
When at KIDA, Professor CHOI assumed various positions such as Chief Executive Officer, Task Force for
Current Defense Issues, Director of International Arms Control Studies, and one of the editors of Korean
Journal of Defense Analysis (KJDA). He has done more than 60 research projects on arms control,
crisis/consequence management including pol-mil games, and the ROK-US security alliance. From 1998 to
2002, he served in National Security Council Secretariat as Senior Director for Policy Planning and
Coordination. He was one of South Korean delegates to the Four-Party Talks. Professor CHOI has publishedArms Control and Inter-Korean
Prospect for USboard membership including Committee on Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Unification of National Assembly,
Ministry of National Defense, Ministry of Unification, and the National Unification Advisory Council.
(Alastair Iain JOHNSTON)
1993

PhD

Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture andGrand Strategy in Chinese History (Princeton 1995)
Social States: China in International Institutions,
1980-2000 (Princeton 2008)
Engaging China: The Management of an Emerging
Power (Routledge 1999)(Stanford 2006) Crafting
Cooperation: Regional Institutions in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge 2007)
Measuring Identity: A
Guide for Social Scientists (Cambridge 2009)
Alastair Iain Johnston is the Governor James Noe and Linda Noe Laine Professor of China in World Affairs
in the Government Department at Harvard University. He received his PhD in Political Science from the
University of Michigan in 1993. He has written on socialization theory, identity and political behavior, andstrategic culture, generally with application to the study of East Asian international relations and Chinese
foreign policy. Johnston is the author of Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese
History (Princeton 1995) and Social States: China in International Institutions, 1980-2000 (Princeton 2008),
and is co-editor of Engaging China: The Management of an Emerging Power (Routledge 1999), New(Stanford 2006), Crafting Cooperation: Regional
Institutions in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge 2007), and Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social
Scientists (Cambridge 2009).
(Kaoru KAMATA)
16

1970

1976

78

83
2010

(

1978-80
11

5

)
JICA

123

2001-0316th President of Waseda University. He received a B.A. in Law (1970) and an LL.M. (1972) at Waseda
University. He has served Waseda University as Lecturer (1976-78), Assistant Professor (1978-83) andProfessor (1983- ). He has also conducted overseas research at Paris University I and II on two occasions(1978-80 and 2001-03). He specializes in Civil Law, Real Estate Law and French Law. He also served asCurriculum Coordinator (Student Affairs) at the Faculty of Law, Dean of the Law School and took office as
16th President of Waseda University on November 5th, 2010. Outside Waseda University, he serves in otherpositions including: Vice-chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Japan Association of Law Schools;
Chairperson of the Civil Law Subcommittee (Credit Obligation Sub-Team), Legislative Council of the
Ministry of Justice; Chairperson of the Land Appraisal Committee of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism; Member of the Judicial Apprentice Committee, the Supreme Court; Member of theIntellectual Property Policy Subcommittee of the Industrial Structure Council, Ministry of Economy, Tradeand Industry; Member of the Medical Ethics Subcommittee of the Medical Ethics Council, Ministry of
Health, Labour and Welfare; Member of the Special Committee for Law Schools, University Subcommittee,
Central Education Council, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology; Member of theExpropriation Committee, Tokyo Metropolitan Government; Member of the Civil Law Working Group, theMember of the Japanese Society of Land Law; Board Member of the Japanese Society of Financial Law;
Board Member of La Société Franco-Japonaise de Sciences Juridiques (French-Japanese Society of Legal
Science).
Chikako KAWAKATSU UEKI

Professor, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies (GSAPS), Waseda University. She earned her Ph.D. in
Lucian Pye Award for Best Dissertation in Political Science. Her specialties are International Relations andSecurity Studies. Her areas of expertise include causes and prevention of war and East Asian international
relations, with a special focus on U.S.-Japan-China relations. Prior to joining GSAPS, Dr. Ueki was Staff
Writer and Political Correspondent for The Asahi Shimbun, Visiting Scholar at Institute of International
Relations at Peking University, and Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute for Defense Studies. She
has written extensively on issues concerning threat perception in a unipolar world, transformation ofinternational relations after Cold War, and issues relation to security problems in East Asia. Her major
publications include: Nationalism as a Cause of War: The Case of the Crimean War
East Asia Strategic Review
Security
Access Anzenhoshoron (2005), Repairing the Strategic
SafetyJapan-U.S.-China Relations: The Importance of a Policy of LiberalInternational Affairs(Kokusai Mondai), Vol. 586 (November 2009) (in Japanese).
(Benjamin SCHREER)

Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel
2008
5

PhD
2009

2009

3

2010

2008
6

2

cept andUS Commitments in the AsiaRUSI Journal, vol. 154, no. 5 (October2009), pp. 98-103 The Howard Legacy: Australian Military Strategy, 1996 2007 (Frankfurt: Peter Lang,
2008), (with Stephan Frühling)
IP Global Edition, vol. 10 (November/December 2009), pp. 46-50

124

Benjamin Schreer is Senior Lecturer of Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University
and Director of Undergraduate Studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre. He earned PhD in
Political Science from the Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Germany (2008). He was a Deputy Director,
The Aspen Institute Germany, Berlin, March 2009-June 2010 and a CoMay2008-February 09. His
current Publications include(with Stephan Frühling) RUSI Journal, vol. 154, no. 5 (October 2009), pp. 98-103. The Howard Legacy:
Australian Military Strategy, 1996 2007
IP Global
Edition, vol. 10 (November/December 2009), pp. 46-50.
(Hatsue SHINOHARA)

2004
2003
2006
2008
No. 1020(2009No. 2055

2010

Professor, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies (GSAPS), Waseda University. She earned her PhD from
Department of History, Chicago University. Her specialties are History of International Relations andInternational Relations. She became Professor at Waseda University in 2004 after serving as Assistant Professor
in the Faculty of Humanities at Keisen University, Assistant Professor in the Faculty of International Relations at
Meiji Gakuin University, Assistant Professor at GSAPS. Major publications include Forgotten Crusade: The
American Scholars of International Law in the Interwar Period (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 2003) (inJapanese), "American Just War Theory," in Globalization and Empire (Kyoto: Minerva Shobo, 2006) (inShiso No.1020 (April 2009) (in Japanese), and League of Nations (Tokyo: Chuokoronshinsha, 2010)(in Japanese).
(Rizal SUKMA)
CSIS
LSE

)

1997

PhD

ASEAN
BDF
IPD
2000 2001

2002 2003
2005
7
100 Global Thinkers 2009
Studies in Asian Security

2009
100
Global Change, Peace and Security
Stanford University Press
East West Center
Security Operations in Aceh: Goals, Consequences, and Lessons (Washington, DC: East-West Centre,
2004)(London: Routledge, 2003) Indonesia and China: The Politics of
A Troubled Relationship (London: Routledge, 1999)-ChinaRelations: The Politics of ReAsian Survey (July/August 2009)125

Rizal Sukma is Currently Executive Director at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS),
Jakarta. He received Ph.D. degree in International Relations from the London School of Economics andMilitary Reform, Islam and Politics, and Domestic
Political Changes in Indonesia. He is also Chairman of International Relations, Muhammadiyah Central
Executive Board; and a member of Board of Governor of the implementing agency for the Bali Democracy
Forum (BDF), the Institute for Peace and Democracy (IPD). He has served as a member of National
Committee on Strategic Defense Review at the Ministry of Defence, the Republic of Indonesia, and amember of National Drafting Committee for National Defence Bill (2000-2001) and the Armed Forces Bill
(2002 2003). He is the first Indonesian to receive the Nakasone Award in July 2005. He was named as one of
100 Global Thinkers 2009 by Foreign Policy magazine (US). DR. Sukma also sits as a member of regional
editorial board for Global Change, Peace and Security; and a member of International editorial board forStudies in Asian Security, Stanford University Press and East West Center. His Publication includes Security
Operations in Aceh: Goals, Consequences, and Lessons (Washington, DC: East-West Centre, 2004); Islam in(London: Routledge, 2003), and Indonesia and China: The Politics of A Troubled
Relationship-China Relations: The Politics of
ReAsian Survey, July/August 2009.
(Takashi TERADA)

2008

4
1
2010

ASEAN
39
8

3

FTA

2010

2010
2009
No.585 2009
APEC

APEC
APEC 20
2009

2005
Takashi Terada is Professor of International Relations at Organization for Asian Studies, Waseda University.
He received his PhD from Australian National University in 1999. Before taking up the current position in
April 2008, he was an assistant and associate professor at National University of Singapore (1999-2006) andassociate professor at Waseda University (2006-2008). His research interests include international relationsin Asia-Pacific, empirical and theoretical studies on regionalism and regional integration, and Japanesepolitics and fo-Structure Analysis," The Pacific Review, 23(1) 2010;"Competitive Regionalism in Southeast Asia and Beyond: Role of Singapore and ASEAN's," Mireya Solis,
Barbara Stallings, and Saori N. Katada (eds.), Competitive Regionalism: FTA Diffusion in the Pacific Rim,
(Palgrave Macmillan, 2009); "Japan and Evolution of Asian Regionalism: Responsible for Three Normative
Transformations," in Dieter, Heribert (ed.) The Evolution of Asian Regionalism: Economic and Security
Issues (Routledge 2008), and Asia-pacific Economic Co-operation: Critical Perspectives on the World
Economy, 5 Volumes, (Routledge 2007), co-edited with Peter Drysdale. His books written in Japanese
include How to Analyze Asian Political Economy (editor, Kobundo, 2010). He is the recipient of the 2005
J.G. Crawford Award.
( WANG Yizhou )
IWEP

126

2010
2007
1995
2006
2006
Construction within Contradiction: Multiple
Perspectives on the relationship between China and International Organizations)
Professor and Deputy director of School of International Studies, Peking University. Former deputy directorof Institute World Economic & Politics, Chinese Academy of Science (CASS) and Professor of international
politics, senior fellow. Graduate School of CASS, Beijing, received MA. and Ph.D degrees, 1982-1988. He
was visiting Scholar, Hungary Academy of Sciences in 1988 and Associate Professor and researcher of
CASS, 1988-1993. He became visiting Scholar, at CFIA of Harvard University during 1996-97. He became
IR theories in the West and China and trends of international institutions and Laws. His publications are
Construction within Contradiction: Multiple Perspectives on the relationship between
China and International Organizations

127