The impact of China on governance structures in Vietnam

This paper addresses the question as to how and to what degree the form of political order in Vietnam has been influenced by China. How and to what extent have Vietnam’s governance structures been converged toward or diverged from the Chinese model of political organization and rule? Similarities of governance structures in Vietnam and China are primarily the result of analogy or the fact that both regimes have faced comparable challenges first with regard to their respective national revolutionary struggles and later the establishment and institutional fostering of communist rule, acted under similar conditions and pursued similar goals which have resulted in the part convergence of the two countries’ political institutions, structures, and practices that occurred without the direct exercise of influence. The most prominent example of chasing analogous objectives certainly refers to the economic reform processes toward market systems and the integration in global economic structures without touching the main pillars of the respective political orders. Overall, the convergence of governance systems in Vietnam and China lies in principles and policy (the value system of reform) rather than in structures and polity. Vietnam’s learning from China is more a “path imitation” than “model imitation.

The Impact of Democratization on the Making of Foreign Policy in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines

For the most part foreign policy in Southeast Asia has been regarded and analyzed as an isolated policy area, separated from the structures and dynamics of the respective political systems. This seemed to be an appropriate approach as long as foreign policy was the domain of small political élites and autocratic regimes. Assuming that the processes of (re-)democratization in the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia have not only resulted in new national political orders but also have had an impact on foreign policy making the article will delve into the following questions: Do formal institutionalized and informal mechanisms and patterns exist to open the decision-making process beyond the special foreign policy interests of small political elites, and to make those interests subject to intra-systemic checks and balances? And has democratization led to the broadening of actor participation in the formulation of foreign policy interests and strategies? The study will look particularly at the role of the armed forces, parliaments and civil society organisations in the making of foreign policy.Die Außenpolitiken der südostasiatischen Staaten sind bisher zumeist als isolierte Politikfelder ungeachtet der Strukturen und Dynamiken der jeweiligen politischen Systeme betrachtet und analysiert worden. Ein solcher Zugriff schien so lange akzeptabel zu sein, wie sich Außenpolitik als die Domäne kleiner politischen Eliten autoritärer Staaten abbildete. Ausgehend von der Annahme, dass sich die Demokratisierung der Philippinen, Thailands und Indonesiens in weitreichendem Maße nicht nur auf die jeweiligen nationalen politischen Herrschaftsordnungen, sondern auch auf das Feld der Außenpolitik ausgewirkt hat, widmet sich der Aufsatz vor allem den folgenden Fragen: Existieren formale und informale Verfahren der Einflussnahme und Kontrolle, die sicherstellen, dass außenpolitische Entscheidungsprozesse nicht mehr länger ausschließlich die Interessen kleiner politischer Eliten reflektieren? Und, damit zusammenhängend, hat die Demokratisierung der drei betrachteten polities zu einer Erweiterung des Akteursfeldes bei der Formulierung außenpolitischer Interessen und Strategien geführt? Die Studie geht dabei insbesondere auf Rolle und Einfluss des Militärs, der Parlamente und zivilgesellschaftlicher Organisationen bei der Formulierung von Außenpolitik ein

The impact of China on governance structures in Vietnam

"This paper addresses the question as to how and to what degree the form of political order in Vietnam has been influenced by China. How and to what extent have Vietnam's governance structures been converged toward or diverged from the Chinese model of political organization and rule? Similarities of governance structures in Vietnam and China are primarily the result of analogy or the fact that both regimes have faced comparable challenges first with regard to their respective national revolutionary struggles and later the establishment and institutional fostering of communist rule, acted under similar conditions and pursued similar goals which have resulted in the part convergence of the two countries' political institutions, structures, and practices that occurred without the direct exercise of influence. The most prominent example of chasing analogous objectives certainly refers to the economic reform processes toward market systems and the integration in global economic structures without touching the main pillars of the respective political orders. Overall, the convergence of governance systems in Vietnam and China lies in principles and policy (the value system of reform) rather than in structures and polity. Vietnam's learning from China is more a 'path imitation' than 'model imitation'." (author's abstract

Not quite the 'Great Britain of the Far East': Japan's security, the US-Japan alliance and the 'war on terror' in East Asia

Japan, in responding to US expectations for support in the 'war on terror', has displayed a degree of strategic convergence on global security objectives, thus prompting policy-makers and observers to dub it the 'Great Britain of the Far East'. This article argues, however, that Japan is far from assuming this role. For Japan, the 'war on terror' serves more as a political pretext for legitimating long-planned changes in military security policy that are often only marginally related to the US's anti-terrorism agenda. Instead, Japan has focused much more on using the terror threat rationale as a means to push forward its response to the regional and traditional security challenges of North Korea and China, even if at times it attempts to depict both as 'new security challenges' or as involving elements of counterterrorism. The final conclusion is that US military hegemony may be weakened by Japan's and the Asia-Pacific's potential divergence from the US global security agenda

Democratization and foreign policy in Southeast Asia: the case of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus

This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Cambridge Review of International Affairs Vol. 22, Iss. 3, 2009 as published in the CAMBRIDGE REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, 2009, copyright Taylor & Francis, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09557570903104008

Book Review: Novotny, Daniel, and Clara Portela (eds) (2012), EU–ASEAN Relations in the 21st Century. Strategic Partnership in the Making

Book Review of the edited compilation: Novotny, Daniel, and Clara Portela (eds) (2012), EU–ASEAN Relations in the 21st Century. Strategic Partnership in the Making; Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 978-1-137-007 49-0, 216 page

The ASEAN economic community: what stands in the way?

For more about the East-West Center, see http://www.eastwestcenter.org/At the end of 2015 the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) will announce the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC). In theory, this agreement should produce an association-wide economic integration. However, following the announcement, and for the foreseeable future, ASEAN member states will continue in significantly less than full regional economic integration. Why? Some observers believe that the AEC plans involve an "overly ambitious timeline and too many ill-thought-out initiatives." Others point to ASEAN's traditional aversion to legally binding agreements. While progress has been made in reducing or eliminating intra-ASEAN trade tariffs, substantial non-tariff barriers to trade persist. However, for most member states, the ASEAN market is relatively small while external markets, especially China, are growing rapidly. Given this outward-orientation for ASEAN trade, is the lack of an unhindered regional market really a problem

The Fallacy of Multilateralism Rhetoric in China-Sooutheast Asia Relations – A Neo-realist Perspective on Regional Order Building

: Observadores de las relaciones China-Sureste Asiático se dejan fácilmente cegar por la retórica política. Este artículo defiende que ASEAN no ha logrado implicar a China en un marco multilateral de cooperación regional mientras que Pekín ha desarrollado una red cada vez más firme de relaciones bilaterales con miembros de esta organización, reforzando la posición de la RPC en la región. Al igual que en los casos de Pax Britannica y Pax Americana, la (re-)emergente Pax Sinica se caracteriza por la creación e imposición de reglas que favorecen un estado dominante en el centro del orden regional. Al mismo tiempo las políticas de China como un poder pre-eminente también dejan intuir el horizonte de beneficios en materia económica, de seguridad y estabilidad para los países en su zona de influencia. Por tanto, las relaciones entre China y el Sureste Asiático toman la forma de un juego de suma positiva más que de suma cero