Skip to main content

Europe—Asia: The Historical Limits of a ‘Soft’ Relationship

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

Abstract

It has now been more than a decade since Europe—Asia relations took off with some fanfare, as the first Asia—Europe Meeting (ASEM) convened in Bangkok in March 1996. Until that event, Europe—Asian relations, historically dependent on the relationships of the colonial era, had paled in the post-colonial period. Not only had the United States, during the Roosevelt era of the Second World War and its aftermath, effectively displaced the Old World as the leading western presence in East and Southeast Asia, but it had also inherited the Wilsonian policy of favouring independence over colonial ties. Partly to fight Japan, partly out of genuine belief, the United States created lasting relationships with many of Asia’s new elites after the Second World War, while these very same elites sought to distance themselves from the old colonial powers. It is therefore useful to gauge the progress in the Asia—Europe relationship by the same yardstick we might apply to the relationship that exists between Asia and the United States.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Acharya, A., ‘Europe and Asia: Reflections on a Tale of Two Regionalisms’, in B. Fort and D. Webber (eds), Regional Integration in East Asia and Europe: Convergence or Divergence? ( London: Routledge, 2006 ), pp. 312–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avila, J.L., ‘EU Enlargement and the Rise of Asian FTAs: Implications for Asia — Europe Relations’, Asia–Europe Journal, 1 (2003), 213–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergsten, F.C., Open Regionalism, Working Paper 97–3 ( Washington: Institute of International Economics, 1997 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkofsky, A., Comparing EU and Asian Integration Processes–The EU a Role model for Asia?, European Policy Centre, Issue Paper No. 22, Brussels (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobrow, D.B., ‘The US and Asem: Why the Hegemon did not Bark’, CGSR Working Paper No. 17/98 ( Coventry: Warwick University, November 1998 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boisseau du Rocher, S., and Fort, B. (eds), Paths to Regionalization: Comparing Experiences in Europe and East Asia ( Singapore: Marshall Cavendish, 2005 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Camroux, D., and Lechervy, C., ‘“Close Encounter of a Third Kind?” the Inaugural Asia–Europe Meeting of March 1996’, The Pacific Review, 9 (3) (1996), 442–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dejean de la Batie, H., La politique chinoise de l’Union neuropéenne, Policy Paper No. 1 ( Paris: Centre Asie Ifri, April 2002 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission, Towards a New Asia Strategy, COM (94) 314 final, Brussels (13 July 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council, Presidency Conclusions (8–9 March 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, B., and Huang, Y., ‘Sources and limits of China’s Soft Power’, Survival, 48(2) (Summer 2006 ), 17–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilson, J., ‘Japan’s Role in the Asia–Europe Meeting: Establishing an Interregional or Intraregional Agenda?’, Asian Survey, 39(5) (September–October 1999), 736–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hänggi, H., ASEM and the Construction of a new Triad ( Geneva: Graduate Institute of International Studies, April 1999 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hänggi, H., Roloff, R., and Rüland, J. (eds), Interregionalism and International Relations ( London: Routledge, 2006 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, J.G., and Mastanduno, M. (eds), International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific ( New York: Columbia University Press, 2003 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maull, H.W., Segal, G., and Wanandi, J. (eds), Europe and the Asia-Pacific ( New York: Routledge, 1998 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pempel, T.J., Remapping East Asia: the Construction of a Region ( Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, G., ‘Thinking Strategically About ASEM: The Subsidiarity Question’, in Europe–Asia: Strengthening the Informal Dialogue, Project directed by François Godement, Cahier de l’Ifri no. 19 ( Paris: IFRI, 1996 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs, R., ‘ASEAN Plus Three: Emerging East Asian Regionalism?’, Asian Survey, 42(3) (May–June 2002), 440–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takashi, S., ‘Outline of ASEM: A Regional Forum as a Jealousy Driven Mechanism’, Journal of Japanese Trade and Industry, 16 (5) (1997), 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, E.Z., Yuan, M., and Tanaka, A. (eds), The Golden Triangle of the US–China– Japan Relationship 1972–1989 ( Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002 ).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2008 François Godement

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Godement, F. (2008). Europe—Asia: The Historical Limits of a ‘Soft’ Relationship. In: Balme, R., Bridges, B. (eds) Europe—Asia Relations. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230583467_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics