Articles

Regionalism in the Age of Asia

By Kim Dae-jung
Published: September 2006 (Vol. 1 No.1)

THE 21ST CENTURY is an age where globalization and regionalism both coexist and
compete with each other. Though the tide of globalization is strong, there is also a
countervailing need for regionalism. Globalization can only succeed on the basis of
healthy regionalization. In this respect, Asia's rise is highly significant. The region is
emerging as the epicentre of the world, not only in terms of history and culture, but also
in its economic growth potential and position in international politics. As the world shifts
from an age where Asia was observed only from the perspective of Western society to
an age where Asia meets the rest of the world from its own perspective, we are
witnessing a future in which Asia will be further integrated and become truly globalized.
The world is shifting from an age that was long centred on the West to a new age
centring on Asia.
 
The task entrusted to us in this "Age of Asia"  is to expand democracy and promote
peace, to contribute to the welfare of humanity and global stability. In Asia, there are still
countries where democracy and human rights are under threat and where the shadows
of the Cold War linger, such as on the Korean Peninsula. There are still places where
poverty threatens human dignity and human security. Without strengthening democracy
and eradicating poverty, we cannot expect to have peace. These tasks cannot be
resolved without dialogue and cooperation within and among regions. Efforts to
establish an East Asian community, such as the East Asia Forum (EAF) and the East
Asia Summit (EAS), are all responses to the challenges of this new age.
 
It is true, however, that despite its vast potential and real capabilities, Asia currently
lacks the kind of solidarity that one sees manifested in the European Union and the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It is also true that a huge gap exists
between some Asian countries in terms of development and competitiveness.
Therefore, Asia should, on the one hand, work for balanced benefits and development
among its countries and, on the other hand, prepare for cooperation and competition
with other leading regional communities.
At the ASEAN Plus Three Summit held in Vietnam in November 1998, I raised the need
for an East Asian community and proposed the establishment of the East Asian Vision
Group (EAVG) to pursue this goal. I believed that East Asia was unable to mount an
effective collective response when the 1997 financial crisis simultaneously devastated
several economies, because there was not yet an organization for regional economic
cooperation — despite the fact that the world was becoming more integrated with the
emergence of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
 
In October 1999, the EAVG was launched in Seoul with the countries of the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), plus Korea, China and Japan, along with
representatives from business and academe. The aim was to promote regional trade
and investment, and strengthen cooperation in industries and national resources. The
EAVG met five times between its founding and May 2001, and issued a report on the
basic direction and mid- to long-term vision of cooperation in six sectors: the economy;
finance; politics and security; environment and energy; society, culture and education;
and institutions. The EAVG suggested that the ASEAN Plus Three Summit be
developed into the East Asia Summit and that the East Asia Forum be established.
There have also been various efforts by the East Asian Study Group, which replaced
the EAVG, to establish the East Asia Summit and the East Asian Free Trade Area as
mid- to long-term goals.
 
Despite such considerable achievements, there are still many obstacles to overcome. In
particular, the complicated and often tense relationships between Korea, China and
Japan over historical issues have combined with domestic political interests to stir up
nationalism, undermining the atmosphere of cooperation in the region. The international
politics of the North Korean nuclear issue, rather than leading to the dissipation of Cold
War sentiments, is strengthening those forces that aspire to revive the Cold War.
 
Enabling regionalism to take root in Asia and forming the East Asian community are, in
fact, tasks that need much effort and time. The East Asian Economic Caucus (EAEC)
proposed by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia met strong
opposition from the United States, which suspected it of having political intentions. As a
result, it failed to progress. Also, when I proposed the EAVG in 1998, Southeast Asian
countries were apprehensive. They expressed misgivings, feeling that what I was
advocating was aimed at expanding the influence of Northeast Asian countries in
Southeast Asia. However, as the example of the European Union has shown, Asia will
eventually take the same course of integration. I am confident now that there is wide-
spread understanding of this in Southeast Asia, and already much progress has been
made towards achieving such a goal.
 
Resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue and peace on the Korean Peninsula are
very important conditions for achieving an East Asian community and bringing peace to
Asia. Despite reduced tensions and increased exchanges and cooperation on the
Peninsula since the Inter-Korean Summit and the announcement of the South-North
Joint Declaration on June 15, 2000, military antagonism still remains. To resolve the
nuclear issue, North Korea must completely give up its nuclear weapons program and
accept thorough inspections. In return, the United States should provide security
assurances and lift economic sanctions on the North Korean economy. This can be
realized through an improvement in U.S.-North Korean relations and a resumption of
the Six-Party Talks and their real success. The issue of the Korean Peninsula goes
beyond inter-Korean relations. It is an issue that concerns the whole of Asia and the
world. Moreover, peace on the Peninsula is not just limited to the military level, but
directly linked to economic prosperity, human rights and democracy.
 
Back in 1971, when I was the main opposition party's presidential candidate, I proposed
Asian regionalism is the product of economic interaction, not political planning. As a
result of successful, outward- oriented growth strategies, Asian economies have grown
not only richer, but also closer together.that the four surrounding powers — the U.S.,
Soviet Union, China and Japan — should guarantee peace on the Korean Peninsula.
My suggestion was to encourage the four powers to deter any chance of war and
guarantee security. It was a realistic goal that sought not only to end the state of war,
but also to eliminate the undemocratic structure of South Korean society at the time,
because Cold War logic and the inter-Korean confrontation justified the existence of an
authoritarian dictatorship.

The members of the current Six-Party Talks are the same four powers that I proposed
at that time, plus the two Koreas. I believe the Six-Party framework should not restrict
itself to being just a temporary meeting to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue. I
believe it should develop into a permanent multilateral organization for the promotion of
peace and democracy on the Korean Peninsula and in East Asia. Such an idea was
reflected in the "Kwangju Declaration"  announced on June 17, 2006 as a result of the
2006 Kwangju Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates held in Kwangju June 15-17.
Significantly, the summit was held on the occasion of the sixth anniversary of the June
15 South-North Joint Declaration. The Nobel Peace Prize winning individuals and
organizations that participated came to a consensus on the issues of democracy,
human rights, poverty reduction, and peace in Asia. Their agreement was reflected in
the Declaration.
 
There is no reason to be pessimistic about the future of democracy and peace in Asia
and the establishment of an East Asian community. Though many obstacles still exist,
efforts from each country will help brighten the future of Asia. This is a region rich in
diversity and high standards of culture; it is a vast area where the experiences of self-
achieved, successful democratization are spreading; and where the development of
information technology and common economic benefits are helping to hasten the
integration of Asia and bring lasting peace. East Asia can also be a shining example for
the rest of the world as a place where various great religions and cultures —
Confucianism, Buddhism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam — coexist and
cooperate. In light of the clash of civilizations happening in other parts of the world, this
remains a source of great hope for Asian integration.
 

Dr. Kim Dae-jung is a former President of the Republic of Korea and 2000 Nobel peace
laureate.

 
REACTION PAPER

Regionalism is a newer component of Asia’s growth in which trade, financial

transactions, direct investment, technology, labour and tourist flows, and other
economic ties are progressively connecting Asia’s economy.
The global economy’s gravitational influence in shifting to Asia. The region’s
industry is already comparable to Europe and North America, and it’s global influence is
growing wherein the cycle of poverty has been broken in several Asian countries. As we
noticed in the article, countries, regions and globalizations was discussed so we can
see that these three are connected with each other in the means of improving the
economy. Asian economies are mostly linked through markets which can assist Asia in
addressing regional difficulties while also providing better foundations for its global role.
The government and entrepreneurs at the highest possible level appear committed to
moving the regional mission forward, but leaders must have enthusiasm and
determination in order to accomplish excellent results, which will take trust.
And also in Asian Regionalism is the product of economic interaction, not political
planning. As a result of successful, outward-oriented growth strategies. Asian
economies have growth not only richer, but also closer together.
THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD
FINAL EXAMINATION

SUBMITTED TO:
MS. LORRAINE M. MOLINA
SUBMITTED BY:
EILEEN S. PUNO (BEED-1)