Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-xq6d9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-11T02:18:51.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

East Asian Regionalism and the End of the Asia-Pacific: After American Hegemony

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2025

Mark Beeson
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The economic crisis that currently grips the world will have many consequences, not least for the US. A decade ago during the East Asian crisis, the US lectured East Asian elites on the shortcomings of ‘crony capitalism’ and close business relationships. Such claims look bizarrely anachronistic as the US government finds itself having to nationalise or bail-out large chunks of the domestic economy brought low by an inadequately regulated, predatory, but politically-influential financial sector. It is not just that the material significance of the US economy will be diminished as a consequence of this crisis, however, so will its ideational influence and authority. The Washington consensus centered on the dismantling of state regulation and the unfettered working of the market, had few admirers in East Asia even before the current crisis; [1] the current turmoil will further diminish its appeal and make alternatives more attractive. This diminution of the US's overall ideological and economic importance compounded by its failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is likely to undermine its influence in East Asia and its standing as both a regional and a global power. One consequence of this process may be to strengthen the attractiveness of exclusively East Asian regional organisations—especially if China's economic development continues to cement its place at the centre of an increasingly integrated regional economy. I suggest that the US's hegemonic influence over East Asia is consequently likely to decline and so is the significance of the ‘Asia-Pacific’ region of which it is notionally a central part.

Type
Research Article
Information
Asia-Pacific Journal , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , January 2009 , e2
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2009

References

Notes

[1] M. Beeson and I. Islam (2005) Neoliberalism and East Asia: Resisting the Washington Consensus', Journal of Development Studies, 41 (2): 197-219.

[2] B. Hettne and F. Soderbaum, ‘Theorising the Rise of Regionness’, New Political Economy, 5: 3 (2000), pp. 457-73.

[3] For a more detailed explanation of these positions, see M. Beeson (2006) ‘American ascendancy: Conceptualising contemporary hegemony’, in Beeson, M (ed.), Bush and Asia: America's Evolving Relations with East Asia, (London: RoutledgeCurzon): 3-23.

[4] R. Gilpin, Robert (1981) War and Change in World Politics, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).

[5] E. Adler and S. Bernstein (2005) ‘Knowledge in Power: The Epistemic Construction of Global Governance’, in Barnett, M and Duvall, R. (eds.), Power in Global Governance, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 294-318.

[6] J.G. Ikenberry (1998), “Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of the American Postwar Order”, International Security, Volume 23, Number 3, pp 43-78.

[7] R.W. Cox (1987), Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History, Columbia University Press, New York

[8] J. Agnew and S. Corbridge (1995) Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory and International Political Economy, (London:Routledge).

[9] M. Beeson and R. Higgott (2005) Hegemony, institutionalism and US foreign policy: Theory and practice in comparative historical perspective', Third World Quarterly, 26 (7): 1173-88.

[10] A. Wyatt-Walter, ‘Regionalism, Globalization and World Economic Order’, in L. Fawcett and A. Hurrell (eds.) Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organization and International Order (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 77, emphasis in original.

[11] A. Hurrell, ‘Regionalism in Theoretical Perspective’, in L. Fawcett and A. Hurrell (eds.) Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organization and International Order (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), p 4.

[12] See, M. Alagappa, ‘Asian practice of Security: Key Features and Explanations’, in M. Alagappa (ed.) Asian Security Practice: Material and Ideational Influences (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), pp. 611-76

[13] A. Acharya, Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order (London: Routledge, 2001).

[14] S. Narine, ‘ASEAN into the Twenty-first Century: Problems and Prospects’, The Pacific Review, 12: 3 (1999), pp. 357-80.

[15] P. Korhonen, ‘Monopolising Asia: The Politics of Metaphor’, The Pacific Review, 10: 3 (1997), pp. 347-365.

[16] C. Dent, ‘Networking the Region? The Emergence and Impact of Asia-Pacific Bilateral Free Trade Agreement Projects’, The Pacific Review, 16: 1 (2003), pp. 1-28.

[17] See, M. Beeson (2007) Regionalism, Globalization and East Asia: Politics, Security and Economic Development, (Basingstoke: Palgrave)

[18] R. Stubbs (2005) Rethinking Asia's Economic Miracle, (Basingstoke: Palgrave).

[19] C. Hemmer and P. J Katzenstein, ‘Why is there no NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism and the Origins of Multilateralism’, International Organization, 56: 3 (2002), pp. 575-607; J. Joffe, ‘“Bismarck” or “Britain”? Toward an American Grand Strategy after Bipolarity’, Foreign Affairs, 14: 4 (1995), pp. 94-117.

[20] M. Schaller, ‘Securing the Great Crescent: Occupied Japan and the Origins of Containment in Southeast Asia’, Journal of American History, 69: 2 (1982), pp. 392-414.

[21] W. Hatch and K. Yamamura, Asia in Japan's Embrace: Building a Regional Production Alliance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

[22] M. Beeson (2005) ‘Politics and markets in East Asia: Is the developmental state compatible with globalisation?‘, in R. Stubbs and G. R.D. Underhill (eds.), Political Economy and the Changing Global Order, 3rd Edition, (Ontario: Oxford University Press): 443-53.

[23] See, for example, Haggard, S. (2000) The Political Economy of the Asian Financial Crisis, (Washington: Institute for International Economics).

[24] R. A. Higgott, ‘The Asian Economic Crisis: A Study in the Politics of Resentment’, New Political Economy, 3:3 (1998), pp. 333-56.

[25] W. Bello (1998) ‘East Asia: On the Eve of the Great Transformation?‘ Review of International Political Economy 5 (3):424-444.

[26] M. Beeson (1999) ‘Reshaping Regional Institutions: APEC and the IMF in East Asia’, The Pacific Review, 12 (1): 1-24.

[27] P. Bowles, ‘Asia's Post-Crisis Regionalism: Bringing the State Back in, Keeping the (United) States Out’, Review of International Political Economy, 9:2 (2002), p. 245.

[28] T. Terada, ‘Constructing an “East Asia” Concept and Growing Regional Identity: From EAEC to ASEAN+3‘, The Pacific Review, 16:2 (2003), pp. 251-77.

[29] R. Stubbs, ‘ASEAN Plus Three: Emerging East Asian Regionalism?‘, Asian Survey, 42: 3 (2002), pp. 440-55.

[30] M. Beeson (2009) Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and Beyond, (London: Routledge).

[31] D. Webber (2001) ‘Two Funerals and a Wedding? The Ups and Downs of Regionalism in East Asia and Asia-Pacific After the Asian Crisis’, The Pacific Review, 14 (3): 339-372

[32] It is widely acknowledged that it is unwise for small, developing economies to open their capital accounts prematurely, before they have the regulatory capacity and capital markets to cope with such massive inflows and outflows off capital. It is also recognised that this was precisely the policy that was being encouraged by the US and the IFIs despite the dangers. See, R. Wade (2001) ‘The US Role in the Long Asian Crisis of 1990-2000‘, The Political Economy of the East Asian Crisis and Its Aftermath: Tigers in Distress, Lukanskas, A. and Rivera-Batiz, F. (eds.), (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar): 195-226.

[33] H. Dieter and R. Higgott, ‘Exploring Alternative Theories of Economic Regionalism: From Trade to Finance in Asian Co-operation’, Review of International Political Economy, 10:3 (2003), pp. 430-454.

[34] S. N. Katada, ‘Japan and Asian Monetary Regionalisation: Cultivating a New Regional Leadership after the Asia Financial Crisis’, Geopolitics, 7:1 (2002), p. 86.

[35] C.R Henning (2002) East Asian Financial Cooperation, (Washington: Institute for International Economics).

[36] E.J. Lincoln (2004) East Asian Economic Regionalism, (Washington: Brookings Institution): 194.

[37] T.J. Pempel, (2005) ‘Firebreak: East Asia Institutionalizes Its Finances.‘ Paper presented to Regionalisation and the Taming of Globalization?, University of Warwick, October: 2.

[38] J.A. Amyx (2004) ‘A regional bond market for East Asia? The evolving political dynamics of regional financial cooperation’, Pacific Economic Paper No 342, (Canberra: Australia-Japan Research Centre): 8. In the same paper Amyx also detail the rapid development of a bond market in East Asia, something that could have a similarly long-term integrative impact.

[39] M.Beeson (2005) ‘Re-thinking regionalism: Europe and East Asia in comparative historical perspective’, Journal of European Public Policy, 12 (6): 969-85.

[40] Higgott, R. (2004) ‘US foreign policy and the “Securitization” of economic globalization’, International Politics 41 (2): 147-175.

[41] Joffe, ‘“Bismarck” or “Britain”?’, ‘(see n. 38 above)’.

[42] M. Mastanduno, ‘Incomplete Hegemony: The United States and Security Order in Asia’, in M. Alagappa (ed.) Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), p. 200.

[43] G. Rozman (2004) Northeast Asia's Stunted Regionalism: Bilateral Distrust in the Shadow of Globalisation, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

[44] A. Friedberg, ‘Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia’, International Security, 18:3 (1993/94), pp. 5-33.

[45] T. Berger (2000) ‘Set for stability? Prospects for Conflict and Cooperation in East Asia’, Review of International Studies 26:405-428.

[46] S. Narine, ‘ASEAN and the Management of Regional Security’, Pacific Affairs, 71:2 (1998), pp. 195-214.

[47] T. Kivimaki, ‘The Long Peace of ASEAN’, Journal of Peace Research, 38: 1 (2001), pp. 5-25.

[48] See, M. Beeson (2009) Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and Beyond, (London: Routledge).

[49] S.W. Simon (2004) ‘Southeast Asia: Back to the Future?‘ in Strategic Asia 2004-05: Confronting Terrorism in the Pursuit of Power, eds A.J. Tellis and M. Wills. Washington: National Bureau of Asian Research:261-299.

[50] A. I. Johnston, ‘Socialization in International Institutions: The ASEAN Way and International Relations Theory’, in G. J. Ikenberry and M. Mastanduno (eds.) International Relations and the Asia-Pacific (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), pp. 107-62.

[51] David C. Kang, ‘Getting Asia Wrong: The Need for New Analytical Frameworks’, International Security, 27:4 (2003), p. 66.

[52] D. Shambaugh (2004/05) ‘China engages Asia’, International Security, 29 (3): 64-99.

[53] I.J. Alastair (2003) ‘Is China a status quo power?‘, International Security, 27 (4): 5-56

[54] G. McCormack (2004) ‘Remilitarizing Japan’, New Left Review 29:29-45

[55] H.W. French and N. Onishi (2005) ‘Economic ties binding Japan to rival China’, The New York Times, October 31.

[56] The Economist (2008) ‘Profit over patriotism’, June 21, p 83.

[57] PRC, Views of a Changing World 2003 (Washington: Pew Research Centre, 2003).

[58] J. Glassman, J. (2006) ‘US foreign policy and the war on terror in Southeast Asia’, in G. Rodan, K. Hewison and R. Robison The Political Economy of South-East Asia: An Introduction, ed. 3rd edn. (Melbourne: Oxford University Press), pp 219-237.

[59] M. Alagappa, ‘Managing Asian Security: Competition, Cooperation and Evolutionary Change’, in M. Alagappa (ed.) Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), p. 594.

[60] Alagappa, ‘Managing Asian Security’, p. 599.

[61] Buzan and Waever, Regions and Powers, p. 129, ‘(see n. 10 above)‘.

[62] M. Beeson (2003) ‘ASEAN Plus Three and the rise of reactionary regionalism’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 25 (2): 251-68.

[63] Stubbs, ‘ASEAN Plus Three’, ‘(see n. 57 above)‘.

[64] T.J. Pempel, (2008) ‘How Bush bungled Asia: militarism, economic indifference and unilateralism have weakened the United States across Asia’, The Pacific Review 21(5): 547-581.

[65] See J. Ravenhill (2008) ‘Trading out of crisis’, in A. MacIntyre, T.J. Pempel and J. Ravenhill (eds.), Crisis As Catalyst: Asia's Dynamic Political Economy. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press): 140-63.

[66] See, M. Beeson (2008) ‘The United States and East Asia: The decline of long-distance leadership?‘, in Christopher M. Dent (ed.), China, Japan and Regional Leadership in East Asia, (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar): 229-46.

[67] Rachman, G. (2008) ‘China's economy hits the wall’, Financial Times December 15.