East Asian Security Architecture: Where to from Here? Beth Greener Reviews Developments in Regional Security Co-Operation and Urges Continuing New Zealand Engagement

By Greener, Beth | New Zealand International Review, January-February 2009 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

East Asian Security Architecture: Where to from Here? Beth Greener Reviews Developments in Regional Security Co-Operation and Urges Continuing New Zealand Engagement


Greener, Beth, New Zealand International Review


East Asian security architecture is, as many scholars seem to enjoy pointing out, neither particularly complete in reach and depth nor excessively concrete in terms of levels of permanency. Indeed Alan Romberg, a senior associate at the Henry L. Stimson Centre, has argued that 'Security Architecture' is too grand a term for what currently exists in East Asia and what is likely to exist in the foreseeable future. What we have, rather, is a set of security issues and relationships 'with little prospect that this will change significantly'. (1)

But these relationships do constitute the security architecture of East Asia, albeit an architecture that comes in many overlapping forms, with varying levels of formality and status. At present such architecture includes: multilateral fora such as the Six Party Talks, various ASEAN initiatives, Asia-Pacific Economic Community (APEC), Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO), Track II diplomatic relationships, as well as more or less formalised bilateral and trilateral arrangements. Furthermore, not only is there now discussion of a possible North Asia peace and security mechanism as heir to the Six Party Talks, East Asian architecture could well come to encompass broader arrangements if more is made of the ASEAN system, or if there are new developments with the US alliances and relationships in the region, or if the much discussed 'Concert of Democracies' is realised. In assessing the future of East Asian architecture in the region, there are many options to consider, and across these there are four main issues that confront us: the first is the question of one architecture or many; the second is who is in and who is out of such structures; the third is what issue comes under the remit of that architecture and the last is at what level of government--heads of state or other?

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Future options

In 2008 it appears as if Russia will help oversee the development of a new North Asia peace and security mechanism as successor to the Six Party Talks--though the inner workings of this process are not yet known. However public and academic discussions range over a wide range of possibilities, from a narrower mechanism that focuses on traditional inter-state security concerns such as weapons of mass destruction proliferation in North-east Asia only to a broader arrangement. The latter could focus on non-traditional security threats too and could even potentially be worked in with various economic tracks that would work to provide incentives for improved security conditions. (2) Hence retired US Ambassador La Porta has argued that 'transcendent Northeast Asia issues, especially energy, finance, trade and transportation, should be locked into a gradualistic consultative framework sooner than later'. (3)

And, indeed, in addition to the question of key focuses the question of 'who is in and who is out' also still prevails. In 2007, for example, a bipartisan working group in the United States called for a new four-party agreement between the two Koreas, China and the United States. Moreover this initial phase was to be followed by the 'aggressive exploration' of a 'multilateral organization for security and cooperation in Northeast Asia that could grow out of the current six-party arrangement' and that would be modeled on the ONCE. (4) Similarly at the Shangri-La dialogue Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called for a more inclusive Asia-Pacific community that would bring in the United States, India, China and Japan. So what are the choices currently on the table for creating a new North Asia (or rather an even broader) regional security mechanism?

Possible base

ASEAN and its offspring are seen as a possible base from which to construct a more concrete security mechanism. Relationships already exist in the form of:

* ASEAN: Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, Cambodia

* ASEAN plus One: China

* ASEAN plus Three: China, South Korea, Japan

* ASEAN plus CER: New Zealand and Australia

* East Asia Summit (EAS): ASEAN plus the above and India (sixteen countries) and Russia with observer status

* ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF): the above plus Bangladesh, Canada, North Korea, Mongolia, Pakistan, PNG, Russia, East Timor, United States, and Sri Lanka

* Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM): ASEAN plus Three and European Union

* ASEAN-Russia summit.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

East Asian Security Architecture: Where to from Here? Beth Greener Reviews Developments in Regional Security Co-Operation and Urges Continuing New Zealand Engagement
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?