Global and Regional Security Multilateralism in Japan’s Foreign Policy

This chapter analyzes Japan’s experience with, and motivations for participating in, security multilateralism. It considers the historical legacies of a lack of multilateral interaction when international relations in East Asia were governed by the Sinocentric tributary system, the security multilateralism of the Washington system of the 1920s, Japan’s failed multilateral Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere during the Pacific War, as well as Tokyo’s security isolationism during the Cold War, before turning to Japan’s pivot from 1991 toward embracing regional security multilateralism. It argues that Japan’s promotion of security multilateralism since 1991 is part of a broader shift away from security isolationism and toward global and regional security engagement on bilateral and multilateral levels. Japan’s 1992 decision to begin participating in UN peacekeeping and its promotion of the ASEAN Regional Forum’s creation through the 1991 Nakayama proposal are examples of Japan’s post–Cold War security multilateralism. The chapter argues that Japan’s embrace of security multilateralism after the Cold War, like its embrace of security isolationism during the Cold War, has been driven by its reassurance strategy of convincing other East Asian nations that Japan can be trusted as a military power that will not repeat its pre-1945 expansionism. Moderating its alliance security dilemma vis-à-vis the US is another motivation for Japan’s promotion of security multilateralism. Since 2000 Japan has promoted the creation of other regional security multilateral forums, including the counter-piracy ReCAAP organization, the East Asian Summit, the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Plus Dialogue Partners, and the Expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum.

ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM+) as a New Element in the Emerging Security Architecture of the Southeast Asia

In the recent decades despite the existing broad network of the multilateral security formats in the Asia-Pacific region a high level of conflicts and old disputes remain, while non-military security challenges and threats are becoming more complicated. Among the most well-known are the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the East Asian Summit (EAS). Nevertheless, given the increasing destabilization in the region, one can state that the above-mentioned formats proved ineffective and as a result, new solutions need to be found. One of such possible solutions is an initiative proposed by Vietnam to create a new format known as ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM+).

Asia's Regional Architecture

Something remarkable has occurred in Asia with little fanfare over the past twenty-five years. Considered severely underinstitutionalized at the end of the Cold War, Asia’s regional architecture is now characterized by a complex patchwork of overlapping alliances and multilateral institutions. How did this happen? Why should we care? And what does this mean for the future of regional order and Asian security? Adopting a new framework grounded in historical institutionalism, this book examines the transformation of Asia’s regional architecture from 1945 to the present. The book traces institutional and political developments in Asia beginning with the emergence of the postwar US bilateral alliance system and covers the debate and contention behind the rise of several post–Cold War multilateral initiatives. These include the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, ASEAN Regional Forum, East Asian Summit, Trans-Pacific Partnership, China-Japan-Korea Trilateral Summit, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the Belt and Road Initiative, among others. Asian policy makers have endeavored to create a set of rules, norms, and institutions to build confidence, facilitate cooperation, improve governance, and ultimately bring peace and order to a region fraught with underlying historical and political tensions. Although Asia’s complex patchwork of institutions may exacerbate regional rivalries, the book demonstrates how overlapping institutions may ultimately bring greater stability to the region.

Regional Maritime Cooperation in Maintaining Maritime Security and Stability: A Test Case for ASEAN Unity and Centrality

Southeast and East Asia region has emerged as a global strategic maritime. Yet, maritime in the region remains vulnerable with overlapping claims on sea borders, piracy attacks and other transnational challenges at sea. For these purposes, some major powers in the region such as the US, China and Indonesia have launched their respective strategies in securing maritime for their interests. To harmonize the various interests, ASEAN with its counterparts in East Asia region need an ASEAN-led, inclusive and comprehensive regional maritime mechanism and strategic partnership between ASEAN member states and its dialog partners to maintain good order at sea. In November 2015, the East Asian Summit eventually launched a joint statement on Enhancing Regional Maritime Cooperation to justify the centrality of ASEAN and to counter the failure of ASEAN Defense Minister Meeting. In such case, ASEAN member states need to manage their disunity to minimize hindrances of the realization and implementation of the plan. This paper mainly elaborates the reasons why the region needs regional maritime cooperation and challenges that ASEAN have to deal with in order to implement the ASEAN unity and centrality in promoting maritime cooperation and regional stability. To explain the maritime strategies of ASEAN and its dialogue partners, this study uses qualitative methods and utilizes states’ documents as well as ASEAN statements particularly on maritime issues.

Security in Asia-Pacific Region and Russian Interests

Asian-Pacific region remains the world economy’s driving force. Against this background, old unresolved problems as well as emerging new challenges could worsen stability. Necessity of working out balanced structures to maintain regional stability and decrease the rising competition between the US and China, is on the agenda. In this respect, ASEAN has not lost its credibility. Its joint experience, as well as that of the East Asian summit, is worth reviewing for better use in common interests. The United States, for its part, is striving for creation of TPP as a tool for keeping its influence in East Asia. China is becoming Washington’s principal rival in the region and is working out its own alternative plans. It is in Russia’s interest to continue the drawing up of sectoral security structures under the ASEAN and EAS umbrella. From economic point of view, it is necessary to speed up implementation of the Siberia and Far East development projects.

Is a World-Class University Possible in Rural Bihar?

The Indian and Bihar government, with the support of the East Asian Summit, is resurrecting the 6th century Nalanda University, near its original site in rural northern Bihar. Significant funds have been earmarked for the project, and planning is now under way. Impressive international linkages have already been made. The concept, of course, is wonderful—to recreate in modern garb a true cultural and intellectual treasure of ancient India. The plan for the university focuses on the humanities, social sciences, ecology, and business studies—not the usual engineering and technology emphasis. But some serious practical and conceptual questions need to be asked.

Integration of East Asian Summit Countries, and USA Interests

The article is devoted to the development of economic integration in Asian-Pacific Region. The author analyses integration structures created in the region (both formal and informal) and modern concepts of East Asian integration from the point of economic and political interests of its active participants, such as China and Japan. The research of the U.S. strategic interests takes a special place in the article as they have substantial economic and political potential to influence the development of integration in APR.

Japanese Ideas of Asian Regionalism

Japan is geographically located on the fringe of Asia. Japan's location is often divided between those arguing that Japan is inside Asia and those arguing it is outside Asia. Japanese ideas of Asian regionalism are thus immensely varied. This article details a number of Japanese ideas on Asian regionalism with author/agency, scope and method specified. Special mention is made of weak integration of government agencies, thus causing proliferation of many Japanese ideas within Asia. With the increasing self-assertiveness of China, the apparent peaking out of American hegemony, and the steady rise of non-Chinese Asians, Japan tries to maintain enduring alliance with the United States, to invigorate interdependence with China, and to reinvent new relationships with the countries of the East Asian Summit. Japanese ideas of Asian regionalism take those templates as guidelines to develop new ideas of Asian regionalism.