Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T01:09:28.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Domestic legitimacy politics and varieties of regionalism in East Asia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2013

Abstract

What drives East Asian regionalism? The rise of China and the perceived decline in the influence of the United States have sparked debates about the future of the regional order, including the yet-unresolved question of whose leadership is likely to be more stable and accepted as legitimate by other regional actors. What is puzzling, however, is that persistent demands for the formation of a coherent and uniquely East Asian regional institution have come not from China or the US, as is the focus of existing studies, but rather Japan and South Korea. In this article, we propose an alternative framework that conceptualises the varieties of East Asian regionalism, emphasising the multiple pivots and variegated levels of politics involved in efforts toward regional cooperation. We find that competing proposals for East Asian regionalism since the 1990s are not determined by structural pressures or the convergence of interests but rather result from domestic legitimacy politics. Japanese and Korean leaders have, at different time periods, proposed their own alternative region-making initiatives appealing to domestically contested views on how best to seek autonomy from the region's Great Powers as a way to enhance their political standing domestically and regionally.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Southeast Asian nations, for instance, tend to view active American participation in regionalism as a means to check China's rise. See, Long, S. R. Joey, ‘The United States, Southeast Asia, and Asia-Pacific Security’, Asia Policy, 12 (July 2011), esp. p. 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a discussion of the Australian debate about institutional binding aimed at China, see Thayer, Carlyle A., ‘China's Rise and the Passing of U.S. Primacy: Australia Debates Its Future’, Asia Policy, 12 (July 2011), p. 26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For example, Jitsuo Tsuchiyama contends that Japan's alliance behaviour has been historically geared toward bandwagoning by betting always on the ‘winning horse’. Tsuchiyama, Jitsuo, ‘From Balancing to Networking: Models of Regional Security in Asia’, in Ikenberry, G. John and Inoguchi, Takashi (eds), Reinventing the Alliance: U.S.-Japan Security Partnership in an Era of Change (New York: Palgrave, 2003), p. 54Google Scholar. On the lack of balancing behaviour among East Asian states toward China. See Kang, David C., ‘Getting Asia Wrong’, International Security, 27:4 (Spring 2003), pp. 5785CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the characteristics of hierarchy in historical East Asia, see Kang, David C., East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

3 For recent reviews of regionalism in East Asia, see the Special Issue of the Japanese Journal of Political Science, with an introduction piece by He, Baogang and Inoguchi, Takashi, ‘Introduction to Ideas of Asian Regionalism’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 2:2 (2011), pp. 165–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pempel, T. J., ‘Soft Balancing, Hedging, and Institutional Darwinism: The Economic-Security Nexus and East Asian Regionalism’, Journal of East Asian Studies, 10 (2010), pp. 209–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Calder, Kent and Ye, Min, The Making of Northeast Asia (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar, Green, Michael J. and Gill, Bates (eds), Asia's New Multilateralism: Cooperation, Competition, and the Search for Community (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009)Google Scholar; Frost, Ellen L., Asia's New Regionalism (Boulder, CO: Lynne-Rienner, 2008)Google Scholar.

4 He and Inoguchi, ‘Introduction to Ideas of Asian Regionalism’, p. 169.

5 Termsak Chalermpalanupap, ‘Towards an East Asia Community: The Journey Has Begun’, available at: {http://www.aseansec.org/13202.htm} accessed 4 February 2012.

6 Acharya, Amitav and Goh, Evelyn, ‘Introduction: Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific’, in Acharya, Amitav and Goh, Evelyn (eds), Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific: Competition, Congruence, and Transformation (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2007), p. 1Google Scholar.

7 Existing studies have shown how overlapping institutions and regime complexity have influenced the politics of international cooperation, mostly in the European context. See, for example, Alter, Karen J. and Meunier, Sophie, ‘The Politics of International Regime Complexity’, Perspectives on Politics, 7:1 (March 2009), pp. 1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hofmann, Stephanie C., ‘Why Institutional Overlap Matters: CSDP in the European Security Architecture’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 49:1 (2010), pp. 101–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gehring, Thomas and Oberthür, Sebastian, ‘The Causal Mechanisms of Interaction between International Institutions’, European Journal of International Relations, 15:1 (2009), pp. 125–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Acharya and Johnston (eds), Crafting Institutions; Acharya and Goh (eds), Reassessing Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific.

9 Abdelal, Rawi, Herrera, Yoshiko M., Johnston, Alastair Iain, McDermott, Rose (eds), Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social Scientists (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 For important exceptions, see Hughes, Christopher W., ‘Japan's Response to China's Rise: Regional Engagement, Global Containment, Dangers of Collision’, International Affairs, 85:4 (2009), pp. 837–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Goh, Evelyn, ‘How Japan Matters in the Evolving East Asian Security Order’, International Affairs, 87:4 (July 2011), pp. 887902CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yuzawa, Takeshi, ‘Japan's changing conception of the ASEAN Regional Forum: from an optimistic liberal to a pessimistic realist perspective’, The Pacific Review, 18:4 (December 2005), pp. 463–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Katzenstein, Peter J. and Shiraishi, Takashi (eds), Network Power: Japan and Asia (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Katzenstein, Peter J., A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2005)Google Scholar; Calder, Kent and Ye, Min, The Making of Northeast Asia (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar; Cumings, Bruce, ‘On the History and Practice of Unilateralism in East Asia: Or, the More Things Change, the More They Remain the Same’, Pacific Focus, XXIII:2 (August 2008), pp. 139–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 On economic regionalism, see Lincoln, Edward, East Asian Economic Regionalism (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2004)Google Scholar; Grimes, William W., ‘East Asian Financial Regionalism in Support of the Global Financial Architecture? The Political Economy of Regional Nesting’, Journal of East Asian Studies, 6 (2006), pp. 353–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krauss, Ellis S., ‘Japan, the US, and the emergence of multilateralism in Asia’, The Pacific Review, 13:3 (2000), pp. 473–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stubbs, Richard, ‘Signing on to liberalization: AFTA and the politics of regional economic cooperation’, The Pacific Review, 13:2 (2000), pp. 297318CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yoshimatsu, Hidetaka, ‘Preferences, Interests, and Regional Integration: The Development of the ASEAN Industrial Cooperation Arrangement’, Review of International Political Economy, 9:1 (March 2002), pp. 123–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yuzhu, Wang, ‘China, Economic Regionalism, and East Asian Integration’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 12:2 (2011), pp. 195212CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On security regionalism, see Kawasaki, Tsuyoshi, ‘Neither skepticism nor romanticism: the ASEAN Regional Forum as a solution for the Asia-Pacific Assurance Game’, The Pacific Review, 19:2 (June 2006), pp. 219–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yuzawa, ‘Japan's changing conception of the ASEAN Regional Forum’.

13 On the emergence of the ASEAN Plus Three, see Stubbs, Richard, ‘ASEAN Plus Three: Emerging East Asian Regionalism?’, Asian Survey, 42:3 (2002), pp. 440–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For regional concerns about the US action in the wake of the Asian financial crisis, see Ravenhill, John, ‘A Three Bloc World? The New East Asian Regionalism’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 2 (2002), p. 171CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Another important trend in economic regionalism that has emerged in East Asia – one that is beyond the scope of this article – is the proliferation of free trade agreements (FTAs). For discussions of the political and economic significance of FTAs in the East Asian region, see, for example, Aggarwal, Vinod K. and Lee, Seungjoo (eds), Trade Policy in the Asia-Pacific: The Role of Ideas, Interests, and Domestic Institutions (New York: Springer, 2010)Google Scholar; Desker, Barry, ‘In Defense of FTAs: From Purity to Pragmatism in East Asia’, The Pacific Review, 17:1 (2004), pp. 326CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cai, Kevin G., ‘The ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement and East Asian Regional Grouping’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 25:3 (2003), pp. 387404CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Wang, ‘China, Economic Regionalism, and East Asian Integration’, p. 197.

15 Pempel, ‘Soft Balancing, Hedging, and Institutional Darwinism’, p. 212.

16 Another example of security regionalism is the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), which was created after the end of the Cold War to reduce uncertainty about regional interactions among Great Powers. See Kawasaki, ‘Neither skepticism nor romanticism’, pp. 231–33. Without a coherent set of security agendas, however, the 27-member ARF has remained largely a limited consultative mechanism.

17 Milner, Helen V., ‘Industries, Governments, and the Creation of Regional Trade Blocs’, in Mansfield, Edward and Milner, Helen V. (eds), The Political Economy of Regionalism (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1997), pp. 77106Google Scholar; Frieden, Jeffry, ‘Invested Interests: the Politics of National Economic-Policies in a World of Global Finance’, International Organization, 45:4 (Autumn, 1991), pp. 425–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Kim, ‘Regionalization and Regionalism in East Asia’, p. 46.

19 Katzenstein, Peter J., ‘Asian Regionalism’, in Katzenstein, and Shiraish, (eds), Network Power: Japan and Asia (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Katzenstein, A World of Regions.

20 Pempel, ‘Soft Balancing, Hedging, and Institutional Darwinism’.

21 Katzenstein, Peter J., ‘East Asia – Beyond Japan’, in Katzenstein, Peter J. and Shiraishi, Takashi (eds), Beyond Japan: The Dynamics of East Asian Regionalism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006), p. 2Google Scholar.

22 Edward Mansfield and Etel Solingen show that regionalism may be politicised domestically in a number of ways. Political leaders, for instance, may choose particular forms of regionalism to overcome resistance from entrenched interest groups. In times of economic downturn, entering a preferential trade agreement (PTA) can help the government by ‘committing the leader to an open trade regime with member-states, signaling to voters he or she will not allow trade policy to be shaped by special interests – and that he or she is not responsible for poor economic performance’. Mansfield, Edward D. and Solingen, Etel, ‘Regionalism’, Annual Review of Political Science, 13 (2010), p. 150CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Solingen, Etel, Regional Orders at Century's Dawn: Global and Domestic Influences on Grand Strategy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998)Google Scholar. For a synthetic account of aggregated domestic interests and intergovernmental bargaining as a driver of European integration, see Moravcsik, Andrew, The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

24 Solingen, Etel, ‘ASEAN Cooperation: The Legacy of the Economic Crisis’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 5 (2005), pp. 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Richard Stubbs, ‘Signing on to liberalization, pp. 298–303. Also Yoshimatsu, ‘Preferences, Interests, and Regional Integration’, p. 129.

26 As Helen Nesadurai argues in her analysis of ‘ambiguous trends’ among ASEAN governments on their commitment to and implementation of trade liberalisation, ‘the degree of support political elites enjoy and their political legitimacy depend on how they meet the needs of a variety of domestic groups, including social and ethnic groups, business actors, and citizens more broadly’. In other words, decision-makers must make external policy decisions ‘within distinct domestic social and political contexts’. See Nesadurai, Helen, Globalisation, Domestic Politics, and Regionalism: The ASEAN Free Trade Area (London and New York: Routledge, 2003), p. 19Google Scholar.

27 The Keidanren was reportedly concerned about deteriorating relations with China during the Abe government. See ‘Nippon Keidanren urges Abe govt to mend ties with China, S. Korea’, mainichi Daily News (27 September 2006).

28 Choi, Young Jong and Caporaso, James A., ‘Comparative regional integration’, in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth A (eds), Handbook of International Relations (New York: Sage Publications, 2002), p. 486Google Scholar.

29 OhmyNews (3 June 2004), available at: {http://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/view/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0000189713} accessed 3 February 2012.

30 Presidential Committee on Northeast Asian Cooperation Initiative, available at: {http://nabh.pa.go.kr}. Among the four special advisory committees, the first two concern foreign and national security affairs and inter-Korean cooperation, while the third and fourth committees respectively deal with economic cooperation and societal and cultural cooperation.

31 The Japanese Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko, for instance, stated in September 2011 that there is no need for Japan to propose a larger regional vision such as an East Asia Community. Hangyoreh (7 September 2011).

32 On the still-primacy of national identity and the nation-state model, see Rodrik, Dani, The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy (New York: W. W. Norton, 2011)Google Scholar.

33 Calder and Ye, The Making of Northeast Asia.

34 Pempel, T. J., ‘Challenges to Bilateralism: Changing Foes, Capital Flows, and Complex Forums’, in Krauss, Ellis and Pempel, T. J. (eds), Beyond Bilateralism: U.S.-Japan Relations in the New Asia-Pacific (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003), pp. 2930Google Scholar.

35 Akaha, Tsuneo, ‘Japan's Multilevel Approach toward the Korean Peninsula After the Cold War’, in Armstrong, Charles K., Rozman, Gilbert, Kim, Samuel S., and Kotkin, Stephen (eds), Korea at the Center: Dynamics of Regionalism in Northeast Asia (Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2006), p. 184Google Scholar.

36 On the legitimating effects and strategic consequences of leaders’ rhetoric, see Krebs, Ronald and Jackson, Patrick T., ‘Twisting Tongues and Twisting Arms: The Power of Political Rhetoric’, European Journal of International Relations, 13:1 (March 2007), pp. 3566CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Goddard, Stacie E., ‘Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy’, International Organization, 60:1 (Winter 2006), pp. 3568CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Choo, Jaewoo, ‘South Korea and East Asian Regionalism: Policies, Norms and Challenges’, in Thomas, Nicholas (ed.), Governance and Regionalism in Asia (New York: Routledge, 2009), p. 94Google Scholar.

38 On Japan's multilevel and multitiered range of economic policy options, see Ellis S. Krauss, ‘The US, Japan, and trade liberalization’, The Pacific Review (2003), p. 325.

39 On Asianism versus Pacificism, see Inoguchi, Takashi, ‘Japanese Ideas of Asian Regionalism’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 12:2 (2011), pp. 233–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Ralph A. Cossa, ‘Evolving U.S. Views on Asia's Future Institutional Architecture’, in Green and Gill (eds), Asia's New Multilateralism, p. 33.

40 He and Inoguchi, ‘Introduction to Ideas of Asian Regionalism’, p. 175.

41 Ibid., p. 170.

42 Meyer, Peggy Falkenheim, ‘Sino-Japanese Relations: The Economic Security Nexus’, in Akah, Tsuneo (ed.), Politics and Economics in Northeast Asia: Nationalism and Regionalism in Contention (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999), pp. 141–2Google Scholar.

43 Corning, Gregory P., ‘Between bilateralism and regionalism in East Asia: the ASEAN-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership’, The Pacific Review, 22:5 (December 2009), p. 642CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Hundt, David and Kim, Jaechun, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 12:2 (2011), pp. 251–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 For a discussion of the different (and long-standing) faultlines in Japanese security debates (such as reliance on the US and allowing for a more active military role), see Samuels, Richard J., Securing Japan (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Samuels, Richard J., ‘Japan's Goldilocks Strategy’, Washington Quarterly, 29:4 (Autumn 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the US alliance as a source of security debates and broader national identity politics in South Korea, see Suh, Jae-Jung, Power, Interest and Identity in Military Alliances (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moon, Chung-in and Suh, Seung-Won, ‘Identity Politics, Nationalism, and the Future of Northeast Asian Order’, in Ikenberry, G. John and Moon, Chung-In (eds), The United States and Northeast Asia: Debates, Issues, and New Order (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007)Google Scholar.

46 Choo, ‘South Korea and East Asian Regionalism’, pp. 93–115.

47 Sneider, Daniel, ‘The New Asianism: Japanese Foreign Policy Under the Democratic Party of Japan’, Asia Policy, 12 (July 2011), pp. 99129CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Easley, Leif-Eric, Kotani, Tentsuo, and Mori, Aki, ‘On the Foreign Policy of the Democratic Party of Japan’, Asia Policy, 9 (January 2010), pp. 4566CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Lake and Rothchild use the concept of ‘outbidding’ to explain how moderate voices and positions increasingly disappear due to heightened political competition. Lake, David A. and Rothchild, Donald, ‘Containing Fear: The Origins and Management of Ethnic Conflict’, International Security, 21:2 (Fall 1996), pp. 4175CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Beeson, Mark, ‘East Asian Regionalism and the End of the Asia-Pacific: After American Hegemony’, The Asia-Pacific Journal, 2:2 (10 January 2009)Google Scholar.

50 Sohn, Injoo, ‘Learning to Co-operate: China's Multilateral Approach to Asian Financial Co-operation’, The China Quarterly, 194 (June 2008), pp. 320–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51 Togo, Kazuhiko, ‘Japan's Strategic Thinking in the Second Half of the 1990s’, in Rozman, Gilbert, Togo, Kazuhiko, and Ferguson, Joseph P. (eds), Japanese Strategic Thought toward Asia (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), p. 97Google Scholar.

52 Ibid.

53 Komori, Yasumasa, ‘The New Dynamics of East Asian Regional Economy: Japanese and Chinese Strategies in Asia’, Pacific Focus, XXI:2 (Fall 2006), p. 121Google Scholar.

54 Singh, Bhubhindar, ‘ASEAN's Perceptions of Japan: Change and Continuity’, Asian Survey, 42:2 (March/April 2002), p. 289CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Park, Cheol Hee, ‘Japanese Strategic Thinking toward Korea’, in Rozman, Gilbert, Togo, Kazuhiko, and Ferguson, Joseph P. (eds), Japanese Strategic Thought toward Asia (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), p. 196Google Scholar.

56 Singh, ‘ASEAN's Perceptions of Japan’, p. 289.

57 Yuzawa, ‘Japan's changing conception of the ASEAN Regional Forum’, p. 486.

58 Tilton, Mark, ‘Seeds of an Asian European Union? Regionalism as a hedge against the United States on telecommunications technology in Japan and Germany’, The Pacific Review, 20:3 (September 2007), pp. 305–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 Office of the President, 1999, cited in Moon, Chung-in and Rhyu, Sang-Young, ‘Rethinking Alliance and the Economy: American Hegemony, Path Dependence, and the South Korean Political Economy’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 10:3, 2010, pp. 441–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Hundt and Kim, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’, p. 257.

61 Corning, Gregory P., ‘Between bilateralism and regionalism in East Asia: the ASEAN–Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership’, The Pacific Review, 22:5 (December 2009), p. 643CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 Hundt and Kim, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’, p. 257.

63 Moon and Rhyu, ‘Rethinking Alliance and the Economy’, p. 452.

64 Rozman, Gilbert, Northeast Asia's Stunted Regionalism: Bilateral Distrust in the Shadow of Globalization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 229CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Ibid., p. 276.

66 Moon and Rhyu, ‘Rethinking Alliance and the Economy’, p. 453.

67 Hwee, Yeo Lay, ‘Japan, ASEAN, and the Construction of an East Asian Community’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 28:2 (August 2006), p. 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 Singh, ‘ASEAN's Perceptions of Japan’, p. 289.

69 Gilson, Julie, ‘Complex regional multilateralism: “strategizing” Japan's responses to Southeast Asia’, The Pacific Review, 17:1 (March 2004), p. 81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Ibid., p. 83.

71 Komori, ‘The New Dynamics of East Asian Regional Economy’, p. 127.

72 Sudo, Sueo, ‘Japan's ASEAN Policy: Reactive Or Proactive In The Face Of A Rising China In East Asia?’, Asian Perspective, 33:1 (2009), p. 156Google Scholar.

73 Terada, Takashi, ‘The origins of ASEAN+6 and Japan's initiatives: China's rise and the agent–structure analysis’, The Pacific Review, 23:1 (March 2010), p. 80CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74 Sung-han Kim, ‘Northeast Asian Regionalism in Korea’, Council on Foreign Relations (December 2009), (cited 4 October 2010), available at: {http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NEAsiaSecurityKim.pdf}. Cited in Hundt and Kim, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’, p. 253.

75 Choo, ‘South Korea and East Asian Regionalism’, pp. 42–5.

76 Moon and Rhyu, ‘Rethinking Alliance and the Economy’, pp. 461–2.

77 Global Korea: The National Security Strategy of the Republic of Korea, Seoul; Cheong Wa Dae, cited in Moon and Rhyu, p. 460.

78 Moon and Rhyu, p. 458.

79 Ibid., p. 461.

80 This is a term (and sentiment) that has shown staying power, widely seen and heard in politicians’ comments, media reports, and everyday conversations. Most recently, an article making headlines in the Joongang Ilbo discussed the damaging of gukgyuk from a pending misdemeanor charge against a South Korean government official who reportedly harassed a female intern during his visit to Washington DC earlier this year. See ‘“I Have No Prior Contact with Yoon Chang-jung, but I volunteered to defend him because…”’ Joongang Ilbo (15 July 2013).

81 Hwan, Kim Sung, Cheongwadae Jeongchaek Sosik (Blue House Policy Briefing), 47 (29 January 2010)Google Scholar.

82 Ibid.

83 Hundt and Kim, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’, p. 260.

84 Choi, Jong Kun and Moon, Chung-in, ‘Understanding Northeast Asian regional dynamics: inventory checking and new discourses on power, interest, and identity’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 10 (2010), p. 359CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

85 ‘U.S. warned Japan about Hatoyama's foreign policies: NYT’, The Japan Times (6 May 2011).

86 Inoguchi, Takashi, ‘Japanese Ideas of Asian Regionalism’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 12:2 (2011), p. 239CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87 Democratic Party of Japan, ‘Statement of Principle’, trans. Louisa Rubinfien (28 September 1996), available at: {http://www.smn.co.jp/takano/who.text5.html}, cited in Daniel Sneider, ‘The New Asianism’, p. 105, emphasis added.

88 Sneider, ‘The New Asianism’, p. 109.

89 Ibid., p. 124.

90 Ibid., p. 113.

91 ‘No clear vision for Japan-proposed East Asian Community’, People's Daily (25 October 2009).

92 Ko Hirano, ‘China wary of Hatoyama's “East Asian community”’, Japan Times (3 October 2009).

93 Lim Wonhyuk, ‘Regional Multilateralism in Asia and the Korean Question’, in Green and Gill (eds), Asia's New Multilateralism, pp. 92–3.

94 Moon, Chung-in and Li, Chun-fu, ‘Reactive Nationalism and South Korea's Foreign Policy on China and Japan: A Comparative Analysis’, Pacific Focus, 15:3 (December 2010), pp. 331–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

95 Roh Moo-hyun, ‘On history, nationalism, and a Northeast Asian Community’, Global Asia (16 April 2007) [reprinted in Japan Focus, 19 May 2007].

96 Hundt and Kim, ‘Competing Notions of Regionalism in South Korean Politics’. p. 258.

97 Pastreich, ‘The Balancer’.

98 Munhwa Ilbo (15 April 2005).

99 Donga Ilbo (15 April 2005).

100 Akaha, Tsuneo, ‘Japan's Multilevel Approach toward the Korean Peninsula After the Cold War’, in Armstrong, Charles K., Rozman, Gilbert, Kim, Samuel S., and Kotkin, Stephen (eds), Korea at the Center: Dynamics of Regionalism in Northeast Asia (Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 2006), p. 186Google Scholar.

101 Rozman, Gilbert, ‘Regionalism in Northeast Asia’, Armstrong, Charles K., Rozman, Gilbert, Kim, Samuel S., and Kotkin, Stephen (eds), Korea at the Center: Dynamics of Regionalism in Northeast Asia (Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 2006), p. 164Google Scholar.

102 Bates Gill and Michael J. Green, ‘Unbundling Asia's New Multilateralism’, in Green and Gill (eds), Asia's New Multilateralism, pp. 1–29; Cossa, ‘Evolving U.S. Views on Asia's Future Institutional Architecture’.

103 Rozman, Northeast Asia's Stunted Regionalism, p. 141.

104 Gavan McCormack, ‘Okinawa and the “beautiful country”’, Asia Times (7 June 2007).

105 Mochizuki, Mike M., ‘Japan's Shifting Strategy toward the Rise of China’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 30:4–5 (August–October 2007), p. 468CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

106 Speech by Mr. Taro Aso, minister for Foreign Affairs on the Occasion of the Japan Institute of International Affairs Seminar, ‘Arc of Freedom and Prosperity: Japan's Expanding Diplomatic Horizons’ (30 November 2006), available at: {http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/fm/aso/speech0611.html}.

107 Remarks by H. E. Mr. Taro Aso, minister for Foreign Affairs at the 60th Meeting of the Board of Counsellors at Nippon Keidanren (25 December 2006), available at: {http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/fm/aso/speech0612.html}.

108 Yul Sohn, ‘Japan's New Regionalism: China Shock, Values, and the East Asian Community’, Asian Survey, 50:3 (May/June 2010), pp. 497–519; Bates Gill and Michael J. Green, ‘Unbundling Asia's New Multilateralism’, in Green and Gill (eds), Asia's New Multilateralism (2009), pp. 1–29.

109 David Fouse, ‘Japan's “values-oriented diplomacy”’, New York Times (21 March 2007).

110 Rozman, Northeast Asia's Stunted Regionalism, p. 150.

111 Sohn, ‘Japan's New Regionalism’.

112 The case studies analysed in this article offer plausibility probes of our theoretical framework. Possible extensions of this research include content analysis of leaders’ speeches and official policy statements in order to demonstrate more systematically the types of variation in regionalism initiatives in East Asia.

113 Pempel, ‘Soft Balancing, Hedging, and Institutional Darwinism’, p. 230.

114 Mearsheimer, John J., The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: Norton, 2001)Google Scholar.

115 Tsuchiyama, ‘From Balancing to Networking’, p. 54; Huntington, Samuel P., ‘Japan's Role in Global Politics’, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 1:1 (2001), p. 141CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

116 Huntington, ‘Japan's Role in Global Politics’, p. 141.

117 Beeson, ‘East Asian Regionalism and the End of the Asia-Pacific’, p. 2.

118 Ikenberry, Liberal Leviathan, pp. 356–7.

119 Kissinger, Henry, On China (New York: The Penguin Press, 2011), pp. 528–9Google Scholar.

120 Lacking its own strategy toward North Korea, China also issued a ‘three-step’ proposal for resuming the Six Party talks, which would begin with inter-Korean talks and then US-North Korean negotiations, followed by the Six-Party talks. Sunny Lee, ‘China proposes Seoul lead nuclear talks’, Asia Times (15 April 2011).

121 We thank an anonymous reviewer for alerting us to this larger point. Similarly, William Tow and Brandon Taylor argue that the lack of consensus among regional actors on what the regional security architecture actually means contributes to the difficulty of establishing an effective regional security mechanism. See Tow, William T. and Taylor, Brendan, ‘What is Asian security architecture?’, Review of International Studies, 36 (2010), p. 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

122 Feigenbaum, Evan A. and Manning, Robert A., ‘The United States in the New Asia’, Council Special Report, 50 (November 2009)Google Scholar, Council on Foreign Relations; Also, Gill and Green, ‘Unbundling Asia's New Multilateralism’, p. 24.

123 Beeson, Mark, Regionalism and Globalization in East Asia: Politics, Security and Economic Development (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007), p. 227Google Scholar.

124 ‘President Hu calls for cooperation’, People's Daily (16 April 2011).

125 ‘Abe promotes expanding regional ties’, Yomiuri Shimbun (30 December 2012).