North-East Asia: Two Scenarios of the Future

In Asia and the wider Pacific region, a new cycle in political thinking is on the rise. The region in general continues to move towards a period of relative peace and stability in the post-Cold War era. Bilateral relations between countries that were distant for so long have greatly improved in recent years. Simultaneously, an awareness of the need for multilateralism in economic, security and cultural cooperation has gained renewed strength among the major countries in the region. However, these positive signs of development may be misleading. Although the region as a whole has moved towards deepening economic interdependence, the structure of security relations in the post-Cold War era is fraught with uncertainty. While the need for a new security order is widely recognized, a more durable security order has not yet emerged. In particular, North-East Asia remains a dangerous place.

North-East Asia2 has been one of the primary arenas of international conflict and competition over the past century. The region has been subjected to a recurring pattern of major power rivalries and military interventions, colonialism and revolutionary nationalism, and international as well as civil conflicts. However, unprecedented economic growth in recent decades enabled the region to achieve enhanced social well-being and political stability. Economic prosperity also helped major regional powers to improve their bilateral relations with every country in East and South-East Asia, perhaps with the exception of North Korea. Furthermore, the post-Cold War international environment fostered positive incentives for cooperative international behaviour. In consequence, direct military conflict between the major powers in North-East Asia has now become a remote possibility for the first time in this century.

As we approach the next century, the critical question is whether the states and peoples of North-East Asia can create a dependable political and security structure which will bring more enduring peace, increase cooperation and deepen trust commensurate with their economic success. Or, will North-East Asia remain a region of "warring states" with incessant crises and periodic wars?3 Perspectives on the region's future differ between adherents of varying models of power and international relations. The optimists are usually guided by the "liberalist" model,4 while sceptics tend to project the future primarily in terms of political "realism". Optimist arguments focus on the pacifying effects of growing trade and economic interdependence, slow but steady movement toward democracy and the trend towards the proliferation of multilateral organizations and institutions.

On the other hand, the realists tend to refute the validity of the liberalist faith and, instead, argue that peace is possible when state powers are balanced or when one effectively dominates the others. Sudden hegemonic shifts or changes in the power balance will cause, according to this school, a loss of credibility, and disequilibrium, and may lead to war among states. Similarly, the realist sceptics fear that rapid economic and political changes taking place in post-Cold War North-East Asia will bring about changes in the power constellation, leading to uncertainty. This uncertainty in turn increases the chances of misperception, miscalculation and conflict. The realists also argue that the emerging multipolar system in the region is destabilizing. With the United States' role as a core, preponderant power player diminishing, it will be difficult for the major powers in North-East Asia to maintain a stable equilibrium in the long run.

In the pages that follow, I will lay out the tenets of the contending arguments so that an effective action strategy can be mapped to bring about a "preferred" order in North-East Asia. I will first outline a set of positive developments in the region following the logic of the liberal-optimist model of international interdependence. I will then examine the uncertainty factors, focusing mainly on the realist mode of analysis.5

Date: 2015-01-11; view: 819