日本第一VS.和平崛起:冷戰前後東北亞國際秩序的衝突與整合

After the end of the Cold War, the interactions of international community have gradually moved from the confrontation of high-politics to the non-traditional security of low-politics such as economic cooperation and competition. East Asia’s economic integration is mainly influenced by the US-led “Asia-Pacificism”, Chinese and Japanese “East- Asianism” as well as the ASEAN-proposed “Aseanism”. The interactions among these three regionalisms have formed the major pillars for the development trend of East Asia’s economic integration. The realization of Chinese “continental East-Asianism and Japanese “oceanic East-Asianism” focuses on the operations of “East Asian Summit” and the construction of “East Asian community”. In the process of regional integration, ASEAN is one of the most important “actors”; however, in the operations of ASEAN+3 and East Asian Summit, ASEAN has no sufficient capability to establish a path for East Asia’s integration. ASEAN’s role is more like a “pioneer” than a “power source” for regional integration. The real “power source” for East Asia’s integration is China and Japan. While China plays such a role as “active leader” for the development of East Asia Summit, Japan is an “integrator” for the summit. Both countries compete with each other for the dominance of East Asia’s integration. In essence, the development of East Asia’s integration will depend on Chinese and Japanese relations. This thesis intends to study the differences between East-Asianisms proposed by China and Japan respectively. It also examines the cooperation and competition between the two. How these two countries make use of East Asia Summit as platform to realize their own ideas concerning the development of East Asianism is another concern of this study. It should be noted that the US factor is a key force that can influence the future development of East Asia’s economic integration. To be sure, to examine Chinese and Japanese East Asianism must consider the role of the US, thus the complexity of analysis will be increased.

The Department of East Asian Studies at the University of Vienna was established on January l, 2000 by merging the Institutes of Sinology and Japanese Studies. Initially comprising the pillars Sinology, Japanese, and Korean Studies, the fourth pillar, the Chair of East Asian Economy and Society (EcoS), was established in 2007. The first Head of Department was Erich Pilz (2000-2001), followed by Sepp Linhart (2001-2012), both leading researchers on Japanese history, society, and culture. The current head is Rudiger Frank (since 2012), specialized in East Asian politics and economics, in ge- neral and North Korea, in particular. In addition to six professors, the Department of East Asian Studies currently has a staff of about 50 permanent and temporary researchers and lecturers (Institut fur Ostasienwissenschaften der Universitat Wien, 2001-2013).In addition to language courses, the disciplines Sinology, Japanology, and Koreanol- ogy offer strong social and cultural science studies. EcoS focuses on current political, security, and economic relations in East Asia and the respective national political and economic systems. The Department of East Asian Studies applies a broad area defini- tion of East Asia by incorporating North-East and South-East Asia. In this context, South-East Asia, in particular the role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in promoting East Asian regionalism, has always figured prominently in the respective EcoS courses. Yet, in order to demonstrate the growing international rel- evance of this region, it has been a strategic aim of Rudiger Frank to institutionalize South-East Asian Studies at the EcoS Department to complement its range. In Octo- ber 2013, the position of a university assistant at the postdoc level was created. Two university assistants (praedoc) and one study assistant, concentrating on North-East Asia, complete the EcoS team. Overall, the teaching and research program at EcoS reflect the interconnectedness of North-East and South-East Asia. For instance, two key areas of research are state socialist systems (notably China, North Korea, and Vietnam) and climate change, the environment, and energy.Since October 2008, EcoS offers a four-semester Master of Arts (MA) as well as a PhD course on East Asian Economy and Society. Since an adaption of the curriculum in 2011, the MA is offered exclusively in English, and South-East Asia features explic- itly as an area of research in addition to the North-East Asian countries China, Japan, and the two Koreas. The Master course promotes the inter- and transdisciplinary comparative analysis of international relations and of domestic politics and econom- ics in the region in the twentieth and twenty-first century. In their Master thesis, students have to compare specific topics in at least two countries, either in North- or South-East Asia. The program provides students with a broad range of possibilities to specialize in topics of their choice. In addition, students have to acquire basic lan- guage skills in an East Asian language, particularly in Chinese, Japanese, or Korean. An admission requirement is a Bachelor or an equivalent college or university degree; eligible majors are, for instance, Japanese, Korean, and Chinese Studies, (Internation- al) Business Studies, or Political Science. The five core modules are Contemporary East Asian Language, East Asian Economy, East Asian Politics, East Asian Society and Research, and Master's Colloquium.Due to the popularity of the program in other European but also East Asian coun- tries, student numbers have far exceeded the initial planning for 25 students per study year (217 Master students in the summer term 2013). Due to the shortage in staff, room, and teaching resources, the rectorate decided to introduce admission re- quirements, starting with winter term 2013/2014. Since then, students have to apply for admission to EcoS; inter alia, they have to submit a demanding letter of motiva- tion, detailing their research interests and goals after graduation. …

As the Asian economies have grown larger and become more complex, they have also be-come more integrated at both the regional and the subregional level. Yet although economic integration has increased, regionalism in the sense of economic cooperation at both the pan-Asian and subregional levels has lagged behind. Regionalism or economic cooperation in terms of bilateral or multilateral FTAs is a relatively new phenomenon, but one that has in-creased rapidly in recent years. However, the progress of Asian regionalism faces several challenges. Also, the increasing number of FTAs could lead to a “spaghetti-bowl effect” and reduce trade volume instead of increasing it. In addition to resolving the existing challenges, actors in the region need to convert some of the existing FTAs into a broader one that can serve as a hub for further integration. Given the potential economic gains and future eco-nomic dynamism of the region, this paper suggests the pursuit of the Comprehensive Eco-nomic Partnership in East Asia (CEPEA) rather than the East Asia Free Trade Area (EAFTA). In dem Mase, in dem die asiatischen Okonomien gewachsen sind und an Komplexitat ge-wonnen haben, hat auch ihre regionale und subregionale Integration zugenommen. Dennoch hinkt Regionalismus im Sinne okonomischer Kooperation auf panasiatischer oder subregio-naler Ebene hinterher. Bilaterale oder multilaterale Freihandelszonen sind ein relativ neues Phanomen, erleben in jungster Zeit allerdings ein rapides Wachstum. Gleichwohl steht der Fortschritt des asiatischen Regionalismus vor einer Reihe von Herausforderungen. Die zu-nehmende Zahl von Freihandelsarrangements konnte zu einem „Spaghetti-Schussel-Effekt“ fuhren und das Handelsvolumen eher verringern als steigern. Die Akteure der Region mus-sen einige der bestehenden Freihandelszonen in eine weiter gefasste uberfuhren, die als Drehscheibe weiterer Integrationsprozesse fungieren kann. Angesichts der potenziellen wirt-schaftlichen Zuwachse und des kunftigen Dynamismus der Region pladiert der Beitrag da-fur, eher die Comprehensive Economic Partnership in East Asia (CEPEA) als die East Asia Free Trade Area (EAFTA) voranzutreiben.

As the FTAs took effect in the 1990s, Japan started to gravitate towards Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) to respond to multiple challenges and competition wrought by the international business community. Initially, Japan had to confront/overcome its trade diversion by easing on competition abroad spearheaded by NAFTA and Mexico- EU FTA which contributed hugely to Japan's trade deficit. To respond to these losses, Japan deployed and capitalized on the architect of the Asia Pacific to counter emerging networks of bilateral FTAs to advance Japan's opportunities and leverages in East Asia/ASEAN markets. To ensure success, Japan's FTA negotiations were navigated by Keidanren. Generally speaking, since 2000, multilateralism and trade arrangements have restored their reputation to thrive in finance, trade and security in the regional architecture of the Asia Pacific landscape. Regarding trade, multilateralism networks embody itself in the FTAs networks as ＂ASEAN + N＂; TPP; RCEP; China-Japan- Korea FTA inter alia. Specifically, Japan responded with such shifts enthusiastically by combining its diplomatic and developmental goals to thrive. But as the wind of change took effect in recent years, the different approaches initiated by the United States and China (TPP and RCEP) also represented two doctrines in the Asian Pacific regional economic integration that have had adverse implications. Before, the Asia Pacific integration was spearhead and denominated by the ＂Asia Pacific Doctrine＂ and ＂East Asia Doctrine＂. Currently, the Asian Pacific integration revolve around the TPP and RCEP. The question becomes: How can Japan operate and manipulate these two mega-FTAs as leverage to thrive in the neo-regionalism and multilateralism frameworks? The lacunae of this article explores/analyze the impacts and implications of TPP and RCEP arrangement to Japan.

When in November 2001, the leaders of the Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian states met for the “ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) plus three (China, Japan and Korea),” President Kim Dae‐Jung of South Korea proposed the exploration for an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) and thereby opened a new chapter of East Asian integration. The special Northeast Asian perspective on regional co‐operation became clear by the simultaneous decision to hold annual meetings of finance and trade ministers of China, Japan and Korea. At the same time, bilateral agreements, like a free trade area between Japan and Singapore, the tentative large free trade area between ASEAN and China and the work‐in‐progress on a Korean‐Japanese Free Trade Area, show the devotion and sometimes even obsession of current policy‐making with reaching regional trade agreements. Regional integration, it seems, is finally on the Northeast Asian agenda. In this paper, the preconditions and perspectives of economic integration in Northeast Asia will be explored. Since economic integration is in various ways linked to political factors, the second section discusses the geo‐political situation of Northeast Asia today. The third section deals with the economic perspectives of different forms of trade integration, followed by an analysis of various attempts for greater macro‐economic and financial co‐operation and a short conclusion.

East Asia is a powerhouse of economic and social development, with cultural industries that have burgeoned as countries in the region have generated consumer economies and a middle class. Despite ongoing security tensions, growing evidence suggests that a vigorous cultural trade in such commodities as comics, cinema and TV drama is creating a shared regional popular culture. The widespread diffusion of the Internet, and the concomitant rise of non-professional online publishing and social networking, is creating new communities among the consumers of these cultural commodities. Rivalry for leadership in the sphere of the culture industries provides a fertile field for the study of soft market power versus hard political power. The competing national discourses of the Korean Wave (hallyu) and Japans Gross National Cool indicate a struggle for new forms of influence in the East Asian region, a struggle that is becoming more intense as China, too, starts to exert soft power influence on a global scale in the form of cultural industries and foreign aid. Complicated Currents: Media Flows, Soft Power and East Asia addresses transnational production and consumption of media products such as cinema, television dramas, popular music, comics and animation in Japan, South Korea and China. Its multidisciplinary approaches include cultural studies, gender studies, media studies, and a content analysis of the popular discourse of otherness in the East Asian context. While suggesting the emergence of a shared East Asian popular consumer culture, it critically examines the proposition that such a shared popular culture can resolve tensions between nation-states, and highlights the appropriation of popular culture by nation-states in an attempt to exercise soft power. Complicated Currents: Media Flows, Soft Power and East Asia will be of interest to researchers and students in Asian Studies, Cultural Studies and Media Studies, and will be particularly useful to researchers in the emerging area of Inter-Asian Cultural Studies.

Korean Abstract: 2015년 10월 EU는 신통투자전략을 발표하여 2006년 이래 지속되어온 통상정책의 새로운 기조를 이어나갔다. EU 차원에서 보다 강력하고 광범위한 통상투자정책의 수단을 구사하여 해외시장 접근성을 강화하고, EU의 이해가 걸려 있는 비관세, 서비스, 지재권, 지속가능발전 이슈 등을 상대국에 관철시켜나가고자 한다. EU의 이러한 움직임은 EU 규범의 글로벌화를 촉진하고, 신통상정책의 주요 수단인 FTA를 통해서 역내 고용과 성장에 큰 도움을 주고자 하는 분명한 목표를 갖고 있다. 이 연구는 EU 신통상정책을 심도있게 분석하여 EU의 이러한 의도가 어떻게 구현되고 있는지를 살펴보고 있다. 아울러 EU의 신통상정책이 한국의 통상정책의 방향과 내용에 주는 시사점을 찾고자 하였다. English Abstract: Since the Global Europe Initiative in 2006, the EU has conducted active trade policy measures to contribute to economic growth, job creation and social cohesion in the community. One of the conspicuous features of the new trade policy is that the EU does its best to support EU companies to benefit from better market access through new trade policy tools. Comprehensive and high-leveled bilateral FTA initiatives, among others, have rapidly emerged as a major tool of the new trade policy to achieve the goals. The aim of the research is to illuminate how the goals of the new trade policy have been achieved through EU's FTA strategies. To do this, this research focuses on the three topics of EU standards, evaluation process of market openness and the global value chain (GVC), that is, how much EU's FTA strategies have contributed to achieving globalization of EU standards, job creation through careful evaluation processes and economic growth of the community by utilizing GVCs.... (The rest is omitted.)

To analyze and comment on the evolution of strategic relations in Northeast Asia, the thesis focuses on three aspects: regional power structure, dynamics of power and strategic thinking of Great power, and the management policy for preserving regional order. First of all, following the ‘911 incident’in 2001, the U.S.A launched the war and declared victory in succession. However, through 2006, the economic cost, the pinning down of troops and the criticism of the international community has resulted in unfavorable effects on the international status and influence of U.S.A. Meanwhile, China maintains a high economic development rate, expands the modernization of its military, and improves its international influence. Furthermore, Japan makes use of the fact of ‘the rise of China’ to gain more support from U.S.A., revises the law to lessen restrictions on external action, and strengthens its military arms with the justification of needing to bear the security of the area more responsibly. Second, because the rise of China has already shaken American influence, and China will overtake Japan as the Great power in this region, transitions in the regional power structure have to be faced. Therefore, the U.S.A. and Japan cooperate in strengthening regional security, while successively adopting a foreign policy of friendly association with China, too. To these ends, the U.S.A. and Japan have attempted to promote China into the current corporate international order, encouraging China to shoulder the responsibility of being a major world power; thereby reducing the threat that a rising China presents. For its part China, in a key period of rise, knows very well that it must safeguard the environment of its steady and peaceful rise, accept pursuing domestic reform, adopt a friendly diplomatic policy to stabilize neighboring countries, and cultivate influence externally. Third, though the U.S.A. hesitates to get involved in the Sino-Japanese East China Sea dispute, to 'maintain peace and stability ' is a common understanding on the question of the Taiwan Straits. On the North Korean Nuclear Issue, six-party talks still go on continuously so that the situation does not out of control. In alliances management, preparation for the establishment of a regional Economic Cooperation Organization of East Asia would be meaningful but a great deal of restrictions and challenges are waiting to be overcome. Finally, the U.S.A’s present goal to cooperate with Japan to prevent China’s expansion of force could be complicated by Japan’s own resumption of economical growth in recent years and the strengthening of the armed forces. Japan’s ‘re-rise' definitely adds parameters to the regional order of Northeast Asia.

The government of Taiwan has passed the ”Free Trade Zone Establishment Statue” in 2003 and promulgated the new law on July 23 in the same year. Under this new law, six free trade zones (FTZ), namely, Kaohsiung FTZ, Taipei FTZ, Taichung FTZ, Suao FTZ, Taoyuan FTZ have been approved and launched into operation. The FTZ facility performs a variety of functions. In the aspect of operation: pragmatic (the zone harbored companies, representative offices, and business centers) and diversity in operation (restructuring, processing, and manufacturing). In the aspect of costing: easing the constraints on the proportion for hiring foreign workers and preferential treatment in taxation. In the aspect of efficiency: the customs declaration process has been simplified, which allows for free flows of goods and business personnel as well as the holding of exhibition and trade events. In the aspect of service: one-stop administrative service and integrated coordination by a cross-agency task force.The division of labor in Asia has been transforming over the years. With the launch of the ASEAN + 1 (China economic zone), the regional economy in East Asia is expected to perform much better. In addition, global economy is in the process of diverting to Asia, which will turn China into the dual-role of ”World Factory” and ”World Market”. Indeed, China will be the engine driving global economy forward. In the wake of economic integration in East Asia, economic and trade development of Taiwan should aim at East Asia with the establishment of corporate headquarters by Taiwanese investors in the region. By taking the advantages of Taiwanese investors in China and the integration of export market with gravity in the EU and America, coupled with the added value from the free trade zones, goods can be shipped out via Kaohsiung Port. A number of factors will make Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone the base for outsourced processing and assembly in Asia. They are the legal rules governing the free trade zones that provide incentives for the investors and the high efficiency of the government, the supply of materials, assembly, engineering management and technological-know-how of the manufacturers, the professional knowledge of marine transport, warehouse storage, and logistics, and the distinguished location and management of Kaohsiung Port.The development strategy of Kaohsiung FTZ in the short run: integration of government resources, establishment of a global logistics task force at the national level, integration of flow volume of goods from Taiwan firms, attracting goods of Taiwan origin back to Taiwan for adding value and shipment. In addition, the establishment of a Taiwan-centered logistic network through the acquisition of bonded logistics facilities in China is also important. Pool up domestic investment in international logistics and to increase the volume of logistics in the domestic market of China will be vital for expanding the territory of logistic services. The free trade zones should be opened to enterprises from China for processing and adding value, and as a buffer zone for linking China to the world. The development strategy in the long run: domestically, national resources should be integrated through the free trade zones in trading and operation in order to build up the zone into a modernized harbor city. Internationally, the policy of stretching out the territory of Taiwan shall be adopted whereby free trade zones shall be extensively developed for the integration of resources of the Taiwanese investors and building up Taiwan into a global logistic hub. In the advent of regional economic integration, this study is an attempt to explore interactions of Kaohsiung FTZ with the outside world, the operation environment provided by the zone, and the strategic mindsets of cooperation between China and Taiwan through the integrated operation in the zone, and the development of free trade zone. The findings of this study are expected to contribute to development of Kaohsiung FTZ in the future.

1. The United States security strategy in East Asia perceives emergence of another regional power, the People of Republic of China, as a competitor. This makes US to reorient its policy in the region.2. Developments in Science and technology make the U.S. Army pre-eminent in the Asia-Pacific, in addition to improving its military edge.3. The U.S. Army will use the fighting capacity built by the scientific-military bases through the garrison/ bases in Japan and South Korea in the North East Asia. Its logistic system is more conspicuous now.4. Logistics support for US Army in Southeast Asia is scientific and technological. The weapons of the previous overall arrangement, which were not strategic in Northeast Asia, are in the Southeast Asia. It is apparent that the US wants, in principle, to subordinate the countries in the region, separate the districts from its bases, before and after the action.

The Asian financial crisis in 1997 heavily damaged some East Asian countries and induced cooperative dialogues among them. In 1999, financial cooperation officially staged itself among other topics of regional cooperation in ASEAN Plus Three (APT). Regional financial dialogues after 1999 focused on three important issues: emergency liquidity support, regional bond market and the birth of a possible common currency. In this dissertation, the concepts of “bias” and “mobilization of bias” are mobilized for analyzing the development of regional financial cooperation in the three issues. The Chiang Mai Initiative initiated by Japan and supported by APT unanimously in 2000 started the cooperation on emergency liquidity support, and has evolved into a multilateralized reserve pool of 240 billion dollars in size. Moreover, competition between China and Japan for leadership in East Asia not only stifled the AMF proposal, but also promotes CMI and CMIM. China and Japan, the biggest two in East Asia, share the common interest and sentiment as a camp of East Asian regionalism resist the globalist drive led by the U.S. for regaining regional autonomy on development path. The later developments in reducing the proportion of IMF-linked bail-out resources and the establishment of AMRO show consistency on pursuing regional autonomy as the management of financial crisis is concerned. As for the regional bond market cooperation, the dissertation offers its explanation of APT members’ choices between integrating market to enlarge regional bond market and keeping regulation on cross-border movement of capital to stabilize exchange rate. By analyzing the Annual Report on Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions 2011 and the actions that APT countries took in promoting the Asia Bond Fund and the Asian Bond Market Initiative, the author defines various preferences of individual APT countries for bond market cooperation and the priority of preserving exchange rate stable for some of them. Therefore, though the scale of local currency bond outstanding grows, mobilization of local bond markets is still in a low level. In addition, dispersed actions of APT countries in ABMI cooperation didn’t help enhancing the role of bond market in domestic finance, nor balancing the existing over reliance of local funding demand on banking. It is presented that the bias of the existing “East Asia dollar standard system” has contributed to Japan’s long lasting deflation. That’s why Japan keens to encourage regional monetary cooperation in East Asia for decomposing the system. Given this desire of Japan, the 1997 Asia financial crisis and the 2008 American subprime mortgage default presented golden chances for Japan to persuade her neighbors to join regional monetary cooperation. However, moving toward a regional common currency though helps reducing heavy reliance on dollar and releasing worries on devaluation of dollar reserves, the default of Euro zone countries extends the flaw of common currency cooperation as well. Considering that it takes time to form a regional common currency, as well as the issues declared in the flaws of Euro case, China unilaterally accelerates controllable RMB internationalization in 2009 as an alternative. Therefore, it is very unlikely to set off the necessary regional cooperation in constructing a common currency in a decade. RMB internationalization will continue to consume China’s motivation for participating common currency cooperation in East Asia. Besides, RMB internationalization is an acceptable solution to Japan for it’s helpful to decomposing the East Asia dollar standard system.

This paper firstly analyzes the triangular relations among the PRC, ASEAN, and Taiwan and the different strategic interests of each side, the deep concern in Southeast Asia of China would be more political and diplomatic; for the ASEAN's perspective, it would be more comprehensive; for Taiwan's perspective, it would be more economic. Obviously, it's not smart for each side to pursue or build a hard-line alliance against any big power in East Asia. Secondly, this paper presents some evidences in multilateral, bilateral and unilateral level to clarify the Triangular Relations on Sino-ASEAN, ASEAN-Taiwan and Cross-Straits relations. Thirdly, The paper explain the influence the New Bandwagoning Scenario in East Asia. Especially the Taiwan Ma Ying-jeou's government has tried to improve the better relations with China since May 2008, that means cross-straits relations may probably help to slove the obstacles between Taiwan and ASEAN member states. Taiwan will assume an ”attitude of practical participation” in striving for its goal of being included in regional economic integration. Which is a global trend and that major economies, including China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and India, Taiwan wants to enter into FTAs with ASEAN to create a stronger and larger economic entity and boost their mutual economic and trade relations.” Taiwan expects that under the ASEAN charter and by means of a practical model, it can begin dialogue and cooperation with the organization and proceed to meaningful participation in ”ASEAN + N” regional dialogue and negotiations.

Region-building is on the move in East Asia. The past decade has seen lots of initiatives and movements, especially in the economic realm. Yet, to date there is still no blueprint for East Asia to deepen cooperation and integrate into an East Asian community. An embryonic form of East Asian regionalism has emerged with the regular ASEAN+3 meetings between leaders, ministers and senior officials. There also exists a patchwork of cooperation at different levels and in different areas such as in trade and finance. But recent tensions in relations between Japan and China, and Japan and Korea over various issues cast doubts as to how fast and how far East Asian regionalism can go.

In the early years of the twenty-first century proposals reflecting two distinct “visions” of Asia-Pacific integration were being advanced for consolidating the regional trade architecture through the establishment of region-wide trade agreements. The rise of East Asian regionalism was reflected in proposals for an East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) and Comprehensive Economic Partnership for East Asia (CEPEA), envisaged as major elements in an agenda for building an economically integrated East Asian region. APEC’s “trans-Pacific vision”, of integrating economies on both sides of the Pacific through achievement of APEC’s Bogor goals of free trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region, was refreshed in modified form with the proposal for a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), conceived in principle as a free trade agreement embracing all APEC members.In 2006 APEC leaders sought to emphasise complementarity between the two “visions” by formally adopting a Regional Economic Integration agenda in which the FTAAP was recognized as a “long-term prospect”. At Yokohama in 2010 the leaders set out the way forward in more concrete terms, when they unambiguously endorsed the FTAAP as the end-point to be reached in the evolution of the Asia-Pacific regional trade architecture, while at the same time endorsing a “two-track” approach to its eventual achievement. The leaders stated that achievement of the FTAAP is to be based on progress made within both a “trans-Pacific track”, represented by the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), involving economies from both sides of the Pacific, and an “East Asian track”, now represented by the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a successor initiative to the EAFTA and CEPEA, with participation at this stage limited to the sixteen “ASEAN Plus Six” economies on the western side of the Pacific. Six of the 21 APEC economies are currently participating in both “tracks”, while four are participating in neither track. Four of the RCEP participants are not members of APEC.The leaders left open the question of how the two “tracks” might evolve and eventually converge into the FTAAP. In the meantime, attention is focused on the substance of the TPP and RCEP agreements being negotiated within each “track”, and their implications both for the size and distribution of the prospective economic benefits of each agreement, and for the prospects of each agreement for gaining acceptance from other economies in the Asia-Pacific region as the “model” for the eventual FTAAP.Of the two agreements, the TPP at this stage appears to have the more ambitious and comprehensive agenda. After three years negotiations have advanced to the point where failure, while still possible, would be a major surprise, but there are many sensitive issues remaining to be resolved. In addition to the expected market access issues of particular sensitivity to individual participating economies, other highly sensitive issues involve rules of origin, intellectual property, pharmaceutical evaluation pricing and subsidy programmes, management of electronic data flows, labour and environment. These and other issues are discussed in detail in the paper. How these issues are eventually resolved will be important in determining both the extent to which the TPP lives up to its stated ambition of being a “high quality” agreement and also its prospects of being accepted as a “model” for an eventual FTAAP.The RCEP negotiations are only just beginning. It is correspondingly more difficult to evaluate its likely content and its potential as a basis for the eventual FTAAP. It appears likely that the most substantive provisions will be those on trade in goods, trade in services, and investment, prospects for which are analysed in detail in the paper. In these areas the RCEP faces formidable challenges in consolidating existing arrangements among the participating economies to a level that would mark an impressive step towards the eventual FTAAP. On the other hand the RCEP may be better placed than the TPP to develop rules of origin that foster deep integration among the production systems of participating economies. Provisions on intellectual property and competition policy are included in the proposed content of the RCEP, but it would be a surprise if these provisions approach the depth of commitment being sought in the TPP. Like the TPP before it, RCEP faces all the issues involved in establishing agenda priorities and modalities for negotiating an agreement among countries that in many cases are already linked by existing agreements, or in some cases by ongoing negotiations. The complexities and difficulties will be compounded by the likelihood that the participating economies will come to the negotiations with widely divergent levels of ambition. Especially under these conditions ASEAN’s determination that the RCEP should be an ASEAN-led process also means that RCEP negotiations could turn out to a defining test of ASEAN’s ability to maintain its leadership role in regional economic integration.

Continued rapid industrialization is expected to make East Asia the largest source region for air pollution in the coming decades. This chapter reviews the import and export of air pollutants, mainly carbon monoxide and ozone, by long-range transport to and from East Asia. Air pollutant sources and transport characteristics dominated by the monsoon regime over Northeast and Southeast Asia are summarized. Over Northeast Asia both import and export of air pollution contribute significantly to the intercontinental transport of pollution. Trans-Eurasian transport of air pollution by westerly flows from Europe to Northeast Asia, and trans-Pacific transport of Northeast Asian pollution to the Pacific and North America have been verified by both observations and model studies. The influence of Siberian forest fires on pollutants over Northeast Asia has also been clearly identified. Over continental Southeast Asia, import of air pollution occurs mainly from source regions over the Indian subcontinent during the summer monsoon and from Northeast Asia during the early winter monsoon. Biomass burning within the region, however, strongly dominates regional pollution. The transoceanic export of air pollution from Southeast Asian biomass burning is known to be one of the most significant sources of ozone and CO over the North Pacific in the springtime.