第 2 回東アジア・シンクタンク・ネットワーク（ＮＥＡＴ）総会（概要メモ）
2004 年 8 月 2４日
日本国際フォーラム
8 月 16〜17 日に、タイ・バンコクにて第 2 回東アジア・シンクタンク・ネットワーク（ＮＥＡＴ）総会が開催された。この総会は、タイのＮＥＡＴカントリー・コーディネータ（以下ＣＣ）である同国タマサート大学東アジア研究所が主催し、ＡＳＥＡＮ+３のうち、フィリピン（欠席）を除く９カ国よりシンクタンク代表者・有識者が約 80 名参加して、開催された。
今次総会は、「東アジア共同体に向かって」との総合テーマのもとで、「経済協力」「政治・
安全保障協力」「社会・文化協力」「制度化」の４つのサブ･テーマにつき、議論を重ねたが、その結論は 11 月にラオス・ヴィエンチャンで開催予定の次期ＡＳＥＡＮ＋３首脳会議に提出されることとなった。その議論の大要については、今次総会議長国であったタイより別途「プレス･リリース」が発表されたので、ご参考までに別添１として添付する。
なお、今次総会においては、NEAT の設立運営規則制定をめぐる「ビジネス・ミーティ
ング」が開催され、「ＮＥＡＴ基本規則および枠組み」が採択されたが、その制定経過については別途当フォーラム理事長伊藤執筆の「ＮＥＡＴ設立運営規則制定始末記（報告）」があるので、あわせてご一読賜りたい。
尚、オープニング・セッションではサロージ・タイ外務省顧問が、昼食会ではソラジャ
ック・タイ外務次官が、夕食会では伊藤憲一日本国際フォーラム理事長が、それぞれ基調
スピーチを行った。伊藤理事長スピーチのテキストは別添２のとおり。
日本国際フォーラム事務局において取りまとめた今次総会の概要は、下記の通りであった。
Ⅰ

今次総会本会議における議論

１．第 1 セッション「東アジア共同体に向かって」(1) 「東アジア共同体」の拠って経つ基盤として、ＡＳＥＡＮ協和宣言Ⅱ（「バリ・コンコード」）で提起された、①安全保障共同体、②経済共同体、③社会・文化共同体という三つの柱を援用するアプローチがもっとも現実的であるとの問題提起があったが、「東アジア共同体」への形成過程については、①機能的(functional)アプ
ローチ及び②積み上げ型(building-block)アプローチを重視し、③既存の組織（ASEAN 等）を有効活用し、④メンバーシップについてはむやみに拡大せず、まずは協力の進化(deepening process)を重視することが重要だとの指摘が、多くの論者よりなされた。

1

(2) 共同体意識を高め、重厚なものにしていくために、政・財・官・学のエリート層の協力のみならず、市民層・シビルソサエティの幅広い共同体意識の形成が不可欠だと提起され、そのための留学生、ジャーナリスト、多セクターの労働者同士のより活発な交流の必要性が提言された。
(3) 「東アジア共同体」の形成にとっての最重要の問題の一つとして、日中両国の関係の深化が必要だとされ、靖国神社参拝問題や、サッカー「アジア・カップ」での中国人サポーターの問題などに言及しつつ、日中両国が思慮のある関係を育み、友好関係を増進することを求める声が提起された1。
２．第２セッション「経済協力」(1) 域内の貿易・投資に関する協力に関して、現在二国間で締結が進んでいる FTA をどのような手順で束ねてゆくか、また日中韓三国間の北東アジア FTA をどのように推進してゆくべきか、との問題が提起された。ASEAN+3 については、CEP による経済効果が大きいが、政治的なドライブが難しいので、協力可能な分野を積み上げていき、early harvest を重視することが重要だとの指摘があった。
(2) 域内の金融協力に関しては、チェンマイ合意のフォローアップとアジア債券市場の確立が重要であるとの指摘のほか、東アジアにおける通貨早期警戒システムを創設すべきことが提言された。またチェンマイ合意が二国間取決めの束にすぎず、金額も小さく、サーベランス・メカニズムが十分に確立していないとの問題提起があり、「地域における最後の貸手」(regional lender of last resort)としての役割を強化し（現在の金額を 2 倍にする）、IMF を補完すべきだとの提言がなされた。
さらに地域における為替レートの協調、そのための「共通バスケット」の導入、各国の国内債券市場の成熟化の重要性等が提言された。
３．第３セッション「政治・安全保障協力」(1) ASEAN+3 における政治・安全保障協力については、①二国間同盟関係（米国とのハブ・アンド・スポークスの同盟関係）、②多国間協力関係（ARF・六者協議等）、③その他のアド・ホックな協力関係が混在する中で、「東アジア」という地域を安全保障協力の基盤としていかに位置づけるかが議論の対象となった。
(2) アド･ホックな協力関係としては、①東アジアにおける海洋協力（SLOC の安定、
海賊対策、捜索・救難協力等）、②対テロ協力（情報協力、法執行協力、警察協力、
サイバー・テロ等）、③エネルギー協力（原子力の安全に関する協力、石油共同備
蓄体制の整備）、④拡散防止協力（大量破壊兵器、ミサイル等）、⑤国際組織犯罪対策協力（トラフィッキング等）等があるが、それぞれに機能的協力を深めると８月１７日付け『バンコク・ポスト』紙は、”Japan, China urged to reconcile, take lead”と題する記事を掲載し、NEAT 総会第１セッションにおける日中の議論を紹介した。
1

2

同時に、こうした諸協力を「非伝統的安全保障」(non-traditional security)や「人間の安全保障」(human security)といった概念の下で整理することも示唆された。
４．第４セッション「社会・文化協力」(1) 多様な社会的・文化的背景からなる「東アジア」をアイデンティティの対象として捉えるためには、「多様性の中の一体性」(unity among diversity)を強調する以外になく、「他者を尊重し、多様性を包含する」ことが東アジアのコミュニティ・ビルディングの基礎となるべきだとの認識が共有された。また、社会・文化協力を通じたアイデンティティの形成なくして、他の分野における裾野の広い協力も困難であることが指摘された。
(2) 東アジアとしてのアイデンティティ形成の可能性の基底には、①第二次大戦後の独立と近代化のプロセスによって培われた国家建設の経験、②1980 年代以降の経済発展と域内相互依存の高まり（また、逆説的にアジア経済危機の経験）、③中華文化圏・インド文化圏・イスラム文化圏の「融合地」としての地域性、④調和と規律を重んじる文化的特徴等があるが、反面そのアイデンティティ形成を困難にする要素として、①多様な文化的背景、②経済格差、③安全保障上の懸念、④歴
史的残滓とナショナリズム、⑤民主主義・市場経済等の価値共有のギャップなどの問題もあることが、指摘された。
(3) 社会・文化分野でも多くの「機能的協力」の深化の必要性が提起され、具体的には、①留学生・ジャーナリストの交流拡大、②メディア間協力（「東アジア・メディア・プラットフォーム」の創設）、③大学・研究所間交流の拡大、④国際交流基金・ASEAN 学術交流基金等を利用した文化プログラムの拡大等のアイディアが提起された。
５．第５セッション「制度化」(1) 東アジアの地域統合を強化するためには制度化(institutionalization)を避けて通るわけにはゆかない、という意見が多数を占める中で、その内容とプロセスについては様々な意見が提起された。制度化の原則については、①ASEAN の制度化の経験を活かす、②ASEAN+3 内のメンバーの平等性を尊重する、③ASEAN+3 の制度化を深めながら、その後周辺国への拡大を考える、③域外国・機関に対しては開放性(openness) と適合性(compatibility)を保つ、などが議論された。
(2) 「東アジア・サミット」（EAＳ）については、2005 年にマレーシアで、その後 2007
年に中国で開催されるとの観測が浸透しつつある中で、①EAＳは、しばらく
ASEAN+3 首脳会議と並存させ、役割分担を考える、②EAＳの下で、問題領域に応じた専門部会を設置する、③ASEAN+3 を超えた将来のメンバーシップについても議論する、といったアイディアが提起された。

3

(3) 政府レベル（トラック１）、非政府レベル（トラック２）、市民社会レベル（トラック３）のそれぞれが有機的な連携関係の下で、重層的な共同体形成をはかるべ
きだとの意見が出され、その中で NEAT は代表的なトラック２として重要な役割を担うべきだと合意された。
Ⅱ 今次総会ビジネス･ミーティングにおける議論
今次総会においては、３回にわたりビジネス･ミーティングが開催され（８月１５日「ワーキング・ディナー」、１６日「緊急臨時ビジネス･ミーティング」、１７日「セッション６：
ビジネス･ミーティング」）、フィリピンを除く全加盟国 CC が出席して、NEAT の設立運営
規則の制定および今後の運営方針等について、審議した（フィリピン CC もメール、電話等
で実質的には議論に参加した）。その概要は、下記のとおり。なお、設立運営規則制定の経過については、前述のとおり、別途当フォーラム理事長伊藤執筆の「NEAT 設立運営規則
制定始末記（報告）」があるので、そちらをご参照賜りたい。
１．設立運営規則の制定
設立運営規則の正式名称は、当初の「憲章」(Charter)が大げさであるとして退けられ、「NEAT 基本規則および枠組み」(Basic Rules and Framework of the Network of East
Asian Think-Tanks )となったが、その概要は、下記の通りである。
(1) ＮＥＡＴはＡＳＥＡＮ＋３各国が自国のＣＣとして指定するシンクタンクをメンバーとし、その数は各国１機関とする。
(2) ＮＥＡＴの最高意思決定機関はＣＣ会議(Country Coordinators’ Meeting)とし、その議長は前回および次回総会主催国ＣＣとし、その意思決定はコンセンサス方式とする。
(3) ＮＥＡＴの継続性維持のため、中国 CC（第 1 回会議主催）及びタイ CC（第 2 回
会議主催）の両者をインテリム・コーディネータと定めるが、その任期は２００６年までとする。
(4) NEAT 事務局は、次回総会主催国 CC が、前回総会主催国ＣＣおよびインテリム・コーディネータの補佐を得て運営する。NEAT ウェブサイトは、ＣＣ会議の指揮下で、中国に設置する。
(5) NEAT 年次総会は、主催国 CC が招集し、議長となる。各国からの総会出席者の名簿は、各国ＣＣが作成し、議長に提出する。
(6) 年次総会の開催経費はその主催国が負担するが、航空運賃と宿泊費は参加者負担とする（なお、「CLMV 諸国からの参加費用は、別途主催国が支援する」との了解
は、文章化せず、口頭了解として確認された）。
(7) NEAT の運営に関わる費用については、ASEAN＋3 各国政府に支援を要請する。
将来「NEAT 基金」を創設する努力をする。

4

２．今後の運営方針(1) 第 2 回 NEAT 総会の成果は、主催したタイ CC が、「プレス・リリース」及び「会議メモランダム」の形でとりまとめることになった。とくに、「メモランダム」
については今次総会の要約と政策提言を内容に盛り込み、各 CC の回覧を経て、
ASEAN+３局長級会合及び首脳会合に提出する予定。また、NEAT と ASEAN+3
政府間プロセスがより密接な連携関係を構築するために、トラック１と２を繋ぐ会合の設置を提案することになった。
(2) 第 3 回 NEAT 総会は、2005 年に日本が主催することを申し出て、了承された。
以後、2005 年の NEAT 総会閉幕日まで日本 CC が NEAT 事務局機能を（中国
CC、タイ CC の協力を得つつ）担うこととなった。
(3) 第 3 回 NEAT 総会に向け、３つの作業部会（政治・安全保障／経済／社会・文化）を設置することが合意された。それぞれの作業部会のリードオフを担う CCを募集するとともに、各国ＣＣに各作業部会の具体的なテーマ設定について意見を求めることになった。
(4) 各作業部会のメンバーは、リードオフ担当国 CC によって個人メリット･ベース
で人選され、次期総会に向けて政策提言案ペーパーを用意することになった。
作業部会の経費は、原則としてリードオフ担当国 CC が負担することが了解された。
(5) 第 3 回総会では、「全体会議セッション」のほかに、各作業部会の政策提言案ペーパーを審議するため３作業部会ごとに分かれた「分科会セッション」を組織することが了解された。
(6) 以上の運営方針をより具体化するため、日本ＣＣの主催でできるだけ早い機会に第１回ＣＣ会議を開催することが要請された。

別添１：Press Release: The 2nd Annual Conference of the Network of East AsianThink-tanks (NEAT)
別添２：”A Japanese Perspective of the Community Building in East Asia” (Text of theDinner Speech by Ito Kenichi on August 16, 2004 at the 2nd NEAT Conferencein Bangkok, Thailand)

5

別添１

Press ReleaseThe 2nd Annual Conference of Network of East Asian Think-Tanks (NEAT)
16 –17 August 2004
Bangkok, Thailand

The 2nd Annual Conference of the Network of East Asian Think-Tanks (NEAT) was heldin Bangkok, Thailand on 16 –17 August 2004. The meeting was jointly organized by theInstitute of East Asian Studies, Thammasat University, Saranrom Institute of Foreign Affairs,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, and Thailand Research Fund. The meeting wasattended by participants from the ASEAN +3 countries with the following institutions as theCountry Coordinators : Brunei Darussalam Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies, Ministry ofForeign Affairs, Brunei; General Department of ASEAN, Ministry of Foreign Affairs andInternational Cooperation, Cambodia; Center for East Asian Studies, China Foreign Affairs
University, China; Center for East Asian Cooperation Studies , Indonesia; The Japan Forumon International Relations,Inc. Japan; Korean Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (KISEAS),
Korea; Institute of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Laos; Institute of Strategic andInternational Studies (ISIS) Malaysia; Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies(MISIS) Myanmar; Philippine Institute for Development Studies, The Philippines; East Asian
Institute, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Institute of East Asian Studies,Thammasat University, Thailand; and Institute for International Relations, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Vietnam.
At the opening session, Associate Professor Yupha Klangsuwan, Director of Institute of
East Asia Studies, Thammasat University, the organizer of the 2nd NEAT Conference, delivered
the opening remarks. Ambassador Wu Jianmin, President of University of Foreign Affairs ofChina, the organizer of the 1st NEAT Conference, also delivered the opening remarks. H.E.Mr.
Saroj Chavanaviraj, Advisor to Minister of Foreign Affairs of Thailand delivered the Opening
Address.
1. Towards an East Asian Community
The theme of the meeting was “Towards an East Asian Community”. The participants
exchanged views on how to promote East Asia Cooperation and East Asia Community. There
were a variety of views and recommendations some of which can be summarized as follows:• Some participants had the view that the long term vision of East Asian cooperation is tocreate the East Asian Community. But the task is how to define what the East Asian
Community is. One approach is to define it the way we define the ASEAN Community: that
it will be based on three pillars: East Asian Security Community, East Asian Economic
Community, and East Asian Socio-Cultural Community.

6

•

•

The participants called for increased efforts to foster a greater sense of community and tobuild an East Asian identity, not just among the government leaders but also among theordinary people in the region. It should focus on the people-to-people approach.
East Asia cooperation should not start from scratch or from zero but it should be based on
the existing cooperation (i.e. from ASEAN cooperation). The cooperation should be basedon the “functional” approach by starting from the easy and less sensitive areas; it should
focus on deepening before widening the integrative process; it should use building block
approach; and it should evolve into an open regional community and open regionalism.
2. Economic Cooperation

The participants exchanged views on how to promote economic cooperation in East Asia.
There were a variety of views and recommendations some of which can be summarized asfollows:• For the long-term goal, the possibility of establishing the East Asia Economic Community
in which there is a free flow of goods, services, investment and capital could be explored.
The single market, the economic union with common external policy could also be
examined.
• The setting up of the East Asia Free Trade Area (EAFTA) should be on the high priority list.
The building block approach could be used by consolidating the existing FTAs in theregion.
• ASEAN +3 Leaders should consider setting up an official expert group to start thefeasibility study of EAFTA in 2005 and present a recommendation report in 2007.
• Because of the existence of many regional and bilateral FTAs arrangements in East Asia, it isimportant that these arrangements adhere to a common framework and principle with a viewto standardize and harmonize overlapping FTAs arrangement.
• On financial cooperation, as a long-term goal, we could explore the possibility of establishing
the East Asian Monetary Union, the East Asian Monetary Fund as the lender of last resort bypooling some portions of massive foreign exchange reserves held by ASEAN+3, a common
or single currency, appropriate regional exchange rate regime, and development ofregional bond market.
• Further step should be made in strengthening financial cooperation through doubling the sizeof SWAP arrangements under the Chang Mai Initiative.
• An expert group could be set up to start feasibility study for a regional monetary fund.
• There were also proposals to establish the ASEAN+3 entrepreneur forum, East Asia trade andinvestment facilitation initiative, energy initiative focusing on energy policy coordination.
3. Political and Security Cooperation
On political and security cooperation, the participants exchanged views on how topromote the cooperation in East Asia .There was a variety of views and recommendations someof which can be summarized as follows:• In order to enhance mutual understanding and common security awareness andperceptions, a joint study on mutual perceptions of each other and common threats and theincrease of security dialogues and exchange of experts and observers were needed.
• It was recommended that NEAT members are to be actively involved in the making ofaction plans for institutionalization of regional security cooperation in East Asia.

7

•
•

•
•

For the long-term goal, we could explore the possibility of setting up the East Asia Security
Community taking into account the evolution of the ASEAN Security Community.
New measures to establish the modalities for the East Asian Security Community could be
explored. The measures can include: confidence-building measures, preventive diplomacy,
and conflict resolution mechanism.
Some participants suggested strengthening regional mechanisms for cooperation on
non-traditional security issues.
On the issue of human security, initiatives for the cooperation in the areas of infectious
diseases, drug trafficking, human trafficking were recommended.

4. Socio-Cultural Cooperation
The participants exchanged views on how to promote socio-cultural cooperation in East
Asia. There were a variety of views and recommendations some of which can be summarized asfollows:• Cultural diversity was the strength of East Asian region; the regional identity building should
therefore be based on the process of unity among diversity.
• As a long-term goal, we could explore the possibility of establishing the East AsianSocio-Cultural Community bonding East Asia together as a community of caring societies.
• Regional solidarity and identity could also be developed through expanded personnel
exchanges among East Asian countries at all levels.
5. Institutionalization
The participants exchanged views on institutional aspects of East Asian Community building.
There were a variety of views and recommendations some of which can be summarized asfollows:• Some participants recommended that ASEAN should remain the driving force for theevolution of structure and process of regional community-building. But there should becontinuing discussions on the modality that should avoid marginalization of ASEAN but at
the same time give greater ownership to China, Japan, and Korea.
• Some participants expressed the views that ASEAN+3 Summit frameworks should remain
the vehicle to advance the process of cooperation. The evolution of East Asian Summit(EAS) is a desirable objective, but it should be part of an evolutionary process that builds onthe comfort level and parallel with the ASEAN+3 frameworks. In a process of finding theright modality, in the mean time, as a practical approach, the dual-track approach byengaging in the process of cooperation through both the ASEAN+3 mechanism and at thesame time supporting holding the EAS at the suitable time could be considered.
• Some participants express the views that it is important to move the current “10+3” process
into an East Asian Summit (EAS). Declaration on East Asian Community could be issued.
The EAS could commission NEAT to prepare the Roadmap to East Asian Community.
• Some participants felt that further discussion is needed concerning the issue of thesecretariat of East Asia Cooperation. The issue is that should we establish a new
secretariat or using the ASEAN Secretariat by setting up the new ASEAN+3 unit within the
ASEAN secretariat. Some participants also suggested setting up new coordinating
mechanism for all ASEAN+3 activities and meetings.
• Setting up the national focal point for East Asia Cooperation is suggested.
• The possibility of establishing the “East Asia Information Center” should be explored.

8

•

•

•

•

•

•

In terms of membership, some participants felt that the principle is that it should be
inclusive rather than exclusive. East Asia should not just include ASEAN countries, China,
Japan, and South Korea. In the long term, it should expand to have a region-wide
coverage.
In order to build the East Asian Community, it was necessary to involve various actors,
including government officials (Track One), academics (Track Two) and other private
sectors and civil society (Track Three).
6. Organization of NEATThe Country Coordinators’ meeting adopted the “Basic Rules and Framework of the
Network of East Asian Think-Tanks (NEAT) which incorporates the purposes and functionsof NEAT, membership, Country Coordinators meeting, secretarial work, the Annual
Conference and funding.
The meeting discussed the activities for future cooperation which include issue for further
studies, setting up three working groups to study regional security, economic andsocio-cultural issues, the future workshops and roundtables, and joint research andpublication.
The meeting agreed that the Memorandum Paper incorporating policy recommendations
from the 2nd NEAT would be prepared and submitted to the ASEAN+3 Meeting
particularly to the ASEAN+3 Summit in November 2004.
The meeting agreed that Japan’s Country Coordinator will be the host for the 3rd Annual
Conference of NEAT.

----------------------------------------------------

9

別添２
nd

The 2 Network of East Asian Think-tanks (NEAT) Conference
Dinner Speech by Prof. Ito Kenichi, President & CEO of The Japan Forum on International
Relations (JFIR)
August 16,2004
Bangkok, Thailand

A Japanese Perspective of the Community Building in East Asia
Excellencies and Distinguished Representatives,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is my honor to be able to speak in this dinner meeting before the distinguished participants of the
2nd Annual Conference of the Network of East Asian Think-Tanks(NEAT). Taking advantage ofthis honorable occasion, I would like to address myself to you on the topic of “A Japanese
Perspective of the Community Building in East Asia.”
It is true that until recently we, Japanese, tended to be more passive, if not indifferent, to the conceptof an East Asian community. Of course, it didn’t mean that we, Japanese, failed to understand theimportance of the regional cooperation in East Asia. On the contrary, Japan has always been one of
the major promoters of the regional cooperation in East Asia. Suffice it to say that Japan was oneof the countries that played a leading role in tackling with the 1997 financial crisis in East Asia, as
demonstrated by her contribution to the successful role played by the Chian Mai Initiative in the
resolution of the crisis. But still, we, Japanese, must be said to have been behind the move
advocating community building in the region. This passiveness of Japan’s attitude toward theconcept of an East Asian community until the recent past might have been explained partly by her
reluctance to take an initiative in anything that might be associated with the memory of “The Greater
East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere” which was advocated by Japan during the Second World War.
Having said that, however, I can say that such was the case only until yesterday. Today, joining
with you in the 2nd Conference of NEAT, we are more determined to go along with you in the
direction of the creation of an East Asian community. In what were called “Issue Papers,” whichwere presented by the Government of Japan to the ASEAN+3 Foreign Ministers Meeting held inJakarta last month, it was stated that community building had now emerged as a shared future goal in
East Asia. What has brought about the change of our attitude? Or, better to say, what has
enlightened us? In my personal case, it was my experience to attend the 1st NEAT Conference held
in Beijing last September. I saw there for the first time in my life Asians coming from different
countries speaking in one voice and working for one purpose. I was touched by the aspiration of
the people assembled in that NEAT conference.
After returning home from Beijing, we, those who attended the conference, called on ourcountrymen to organize an all-Japan intellectual platform where we can deepen our understanding of
the concept of an East Asian community by way of conducting research and promoting policy
debates among ourselves. Thus, “The Council on East Asian Community (CEAC)” wasinaugurated in Tokyo on May 18 this year. As of today, the membership of CEAC consists ofrepresentatives of 12 public policy think tanks and 15 business corporations in addition to 50
individuals who are mostly scholars but also include some journalists and politicians. In response
to our call, 9 government ministries such as Foreign Ministry, Finance Ministry, Trade and Industry
Ministry, Education and Science Ministry etc. also joined the activities of CEAC in their advisory
capacity of Counselors. Actually, all the members of the current Japanese delegation to this 2nd
10

Conference of NEAT are members of CEAC. One of the first topics which we discussed among
ourselves was whether an East Asian community was really necessary and feasible. I am happy toreport to you that the arguments we had were very positive and constructive.
Based on the results of such arguments within CEAC, but not in the name of CEAC as CEAC will
not be ready to announce its unified view until any time soon yet, I would like to present to you
today rather my personal view on the topic of “A Japanese Perspective of the Community Buildingin East Asia.” After the end of the Cold War the trend of regionalism spread all over the world
hand in hand with another trend of globalization. However, it was conspicuous until the recent pastthat two regions in the world were devoid of such regionalism. One was Middle East and anotherwas East Asia. Whereas it was understandable that Middle East failed to have its regionalism
because of the political, economic and cultural consequences of Arab-Israel confrontation, theabsence of regionalism in East Asia was never as much justifiable as in the case of Middle East.
Certainly, it was true that this part of the world has been long characterized by the unique diversity
in levels of economic development, traditional values, culture, ethnicity, religion, language, politicalregimes, etc. During the Cold War era political and ideological barriers hindered closer regional
cooperation. But these excuses had to give way to the more powerful forces of integration which
had brought about a gigantic change in the region, i.e. a drastic expansion of intra-regional
exchanges and interdependence, particularly after the end of the Cold War. Today’s East Asia is a
center of vast economic potential and dynamism. Now, a third of the world population resides inthis region. Its share of the global GDP accounts for one fifth, and countries in the region now holdabout a half of the world foreign reserves. The 1997 financial crisis in East Asia awakened peopleof the region to the need of a regional approach to secure their prosperity. It is said that a friend inneed is a friend indeed. Thanks to the crisis, we realized that our friends indeed were nobody but
our neighbors in the region.
Let me now proceed to the question of how to build a regional community in East Asia. When I
think about the history of regional integration in East Asia, I cannot help admiring the efforts madeby ASEAN nations. In East Asia where many handicaps exist for regional integration, ASEAN has
always played a leading role. It has hosted a number of key forums of regional cooperation,
including ASEAN＋１s, ASEAN＋3, PMC and ARF. These forums have nurtured the basis ofcommunity building in East Asia. It is known to us all that the NEAT conference itself for which
we meet here this evening was made possible under the framework designed by the ASEAN＋3. In
contrast to the European Union, where rule-making and institutionalization has been a driving force
for integration, in East Asia the idea of community building was originally inspired by the progressof various functional cooperation. To list just a few of them, we can mention Economic Partnership
Agreements, Chiang Mai Initiative, Asian Bond Market Initiative, Asia Broadband Initiative,
Mekong Region Development, and many other cooperation in the fields of terrorism, illicit drugtrafficking, sea piracy, non-proliferation, energy security, environmental protection, food security,
health, intellectual property, etc. I must say that this approach to the community building was
better fit to the reality of East Asia as diversity was more salient here than in other regions. I am ofthe opinion that the functional approach is a natural choice for community building in East Asia.
Having said that, however, I have to hurriedly add that community building cannot be achieved by
the mere promotion of the functional cooperation alone. If left alone at the mercy of either market
forces or arbitrary diplomatic bargaining, it can drift and lose sense of direction. Here I would liketo call your attention to the importance of the creation of a “sense of community” or a “shared
identity as an East Asian.” A European friend of mine once told me that he was then a German butthat he would become a European once European integration had been achieved. He further addedthat then his German identity would not matter for him anymore. We, East Asians, are still at thestage of talking about “economic integration,” or at best “economic community.” Through thestrengthening of our functional cooperation, we may be soon able to talk about “energy community,”“environmental community” and many other types of “community” in the not so distant future.
Here, however, we must be reminded that we need a beacon that guides us in the direction toward11community building. Simple proliferation of functional cooperation alone is sure to lead us
nowhere. Of course, it is true that the functional cooperation facilitates the so-called “enmeshment
process,” which is indispensable for forging a “sense of community” in East Asia. But“enmeshment process” as such alone again fails to provide us with a beacon that is to guide us in our
direction toward community building. Some other people argue that to narrow the developmental
gaps among countries in the region is the most important means for achieving a “shared identity as
an East Asian.” I agree with them. But let me add that narrowing the developmental gaps is oneof the means to achieve an objective of a “shared identity”. By nature, it fails to be a beacon thatguides us to the objective of “shared identity.” What then can be the beacon that can give us asense of direction toward our goal of “community building”?
What will take us in the direction
toward the objective of a “sense of community” and a “shared identity as an East Asian”? In
Europe it was their conviction that they will never turn Europe into a battlefield again that played therole of such a beacon in their process of integration.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We need something more powerful than a “common interest”. Something beyond a “common
interest” is needed. That is a “common value” to be shared by everybody in the region. It is mystrong conviction that a “sense of respect” for each other and a “principle of equality” among eachother are prerequisite for any meaningful “community building” in the region. This must be veryclear to anybody if he or she is reminded that the opposite “sense” and “principle” are a “sense of
superiority” and a “principle of domination.” Every nation, rich or poor, must be respected. No
nation, big or small, is allowed to dominate. On the basis of this “sense of respect” and this“principle of equality,” we can and should build confidence among ourselves. Our region must
become a region where each of us can be confident that our neighbors will never resort to the threator use of force as a means to settle international disputes. This is what is stipulated in Article 2,
Section 4 of the Charter of the United Nations. Japan has its own Article 9 of the Constitution
stating, “Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people
forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means ofsettling international disputes.” But, to tell the truth, what really matters is not a legal framework
but a state of affairs as having been achieved. Look at, for instance, Europe, where community
building has reached its highest level of development. Along the borders dividing any member
countries of the European Union, we see no tanks, missiles, fortresses directed against each other.
For many reasons other than legal, i.e. political, economic and other, the member countries of theEuropean Union have come to a stage where it can be called a “no-war community.” Let me now
conclude my speech. We need a “common value” that goes beyond a “common interest”.
Starting from the “sense of respect” and the “principle of equality” among ourselves, we can andshould build confidence among ourselves. The confidence that our neighbors will never resort tothe threat or use of force as a means to settle international disputes would take us to the higher levelof “community building.” Here, what really matters is not a legal framework but a state of affairs
as having been achieved. Our “community building” can start from “economic community,” andadd “energy community,” “environmental community,” etc. But it must, before reaching the final
stage of an “East Asian Community,” accomplish “no-war community” in the region.
Thank you very much for your kind attention..

12