Speaking recently at Chatham House, Herman
van Rompuy, president of the European Council, used a theatre metaphor to refer
to Europe's role on the world stage. He said: "Faced with the new play of
global interdependence and global governance, we [the European Union] need a
presence in all the world's regions."
While
acknowledging the importance of Asia for European interests, his message about
Europe's influence in that part of the world was straightforward: "Europe
is clearly not a Pacific power and will not become one."
Catherine
Ashton, the EU's chief diplomat, delivered a more confident message during her
visit to Asia last month, stating that developing comprehensive relations with
Asia is one of the EU's major strategic objectives and that the EU wants to be
an "active and constructive" player in Asian regionalism. To bring Mr
van Rompuy's metaphor to modern times, in a movie about the politics of the
Asia-Pacific region, would Europe play a leading role or only be a background
actor?
The
foundations of an EU strategy for the region were laid in 2007 when the council
published the East Asia policy guidelines. A revision of the document has been
on the EU agenda for some time but a final agreement on the outcome has yet to
be reached, which leaves the club of 27 with policy prescriptions that are
often outdated.
The
EU's ties to the region are significant. The EU is China's biggest and Asean's
third-biggest trading partner. It is also the largest investor in Asean
countries with an average of 20.6% of foreign direct investment over the past
three years. The scope of the EU's cooperation with the region is broad and
encompasses not only a number of free trade agreements _ either already in
force (South Korea) or under negotiation (Asean, India, Malaysia, Singapore,
and Japan) _ but also bilateral summits, participation in regional forums and
parliamentary dialogues with Asian officials.
Ms
Ashton's visit to the region in April and the adoption of the EU-Asean action
plan for deepening cooperation on political and security issues, human rights,
maritime cooperation, terrorism, and disaster relief was publicised as bringing
this relationship to a new level. At the EU-Asean ministerial meeting, Ms
Ashton expressed her hope for an early signing of the Asean Treaty of Amity and
Cooperation, which would then pave the way for the EU's participation in the East
Asia Summits.
During
the same visit, the European delegation confirmed the EU's willingness to
strengthen political dialogue with Indonesia and Vietnam. A newly opened office
of the EU in Myanmar further symbolises the EU's long-term commitment to the
region.
But the
expectations towards the EU are much higher than what has already been
undertaken. Prior to the EU's recent activism in the region, the United States
has launched diplomatic moves in Brussels and European national capitals in an
attempt to involve European colleagues more in Asia. But there is a genuine
fear that Ms Ashton's recent excursion was a one-off gesture rather than a sign
of a genuine change in EU foreign policy. Diplomats in Washington are already
fretting about next month when Ms Ashton and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
are due to make a joint statement at the Asean Regional Forum.
The EU,
on the other hand, seems to have doubts whether teaming up with the US is the
path it should follow and, if so, until what point. More importantly, the EU is
lacking the vision and inspiration for the role it wants to play on the
Asia-Pacific stage. How can the EU overcome its current inertia?
A
survey conducted recently by the EU Institute for Security Studies of about 100
European and US experts suggests there are two main ways to proceed.
Shock
therapy: protecting economic and trade interests is a clear priority for both
the EU and the US, but only 35% of respondents saw the EU and US interests in
this issue as convergent. At the same time, promotion of regional integration
clearly stands out in the survey as an issue on which European and US interests
are viewed by 18% of experts as somewhat or very divergent. Emphasising the
prospect of transatlantic disagreements in the region and the damage they could
cause to transatlantic partnership might serve as a form of shock therapy and
galvanise the EU.
Reassurance:
providing the EU with a new mission with which it feels comfortable might be
another solution. According to the survey results, there seems to be a clear
potential division of labour on a variety of issues. US respondents were of the
opinion that the EU's involvement in the Asia-Pacific region could offer most
added value in the area of protecting economic and trade interests (93%),
promotion of human rights (94%) and engaging regional actors on issues of
global governance (83%). US potential for exerting influence in the field of
human rights and transparency in currency practices was regarded as somewhat
limited.
The
EU's capacity to engage regional actors on issues of global governance is
important and could serve as an excellent point of departure. Given the
region's many geopolitical hotspots and occasional flare-ups combined with its
importance in global trade, every friction or confrontation could have severe
consequences if not contained. To enhance stability and keep frictions to a
minimum, the region needs a solid regional structure founded on rules by which
all actors abide.
Engaging
regional actors on issues of global governance and promoting respect for
international law _ ambitious and reassuring - would be appreciated both in the
region and in the US. At the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, US Secretary of
Defence Leon Panetta reconfirmed his country's "solid commitment to
establish a set of rules that all play by is one that we believe will help
support peace and prosperity in this region". However, given memories of
the selective approach of the US to international law in the Bush era, US
attempts to get involved in such a manner will only aggravate the mistrust that
increasingly characterises the US-China relationship.
Conversely,
the EU has fostered the image of a normative power and a similar role in the
Asia-Pacific not only perfectly matches its soft-power profile but is also
compatible with US strategies in the region. The EU may not have the resources
to act as a global policeman but it is in the EU's own interests to communicate
its vision of the region where all actors play by the same rules and are
committed to a peaceful resolution of disputes.
A
crisis in the South China Sea would have catastrophic consequences for EU
commerce in the region. At the same time, commodity prices would skyrocket,
putting already fragile European economies at additional risk. Engaging with
the region at an early stage would also ensure the EU's seat at the negotiation
table should a conflict scenario ever materialise.
Europe
has to realise that although it may not be among the Oscar winners this time,
it is in the EU's hands to at least receive a nomination and some attention on
the red carpet.
Patryk
Pawlak & Eleni Ekmektsioglou
Business & Investment Opportunities
YourVietnamExpert is a division of Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd, Incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Strategy, Investment and Management, focusing Healthcare and Life Science with expertise in ASEAN. We also propose Higher Education, as a bridge between educational structures and industries, by supporting international programmes. Many thanks for visiting www.yourvietnamexpert.com and/or contacting us at contact@yourvietnamexpert.com
No comments:
Post a Comment