Abstract
Table 6.1 illustrates the significance of Asian and EU trade in 1996. It also highlights the growing trend for national economies to form regional blocs of different types in order to respond to the major globalizing economic forces at the end of the twentieth century. In the light of international changes Japan and the EU have begun to create important networks and coalitions in the 1990s within forums as varied as the G24, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), the ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conference (PMC), the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). Although these networks have developed gradually, at different levels and with regard to different types of issues, they now constitute a fundamental component of Japan-EU relations.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For example, prospects of Finland and Sweden joining the EC increased Japanese Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in those countries — see James Darby, ‘Introduction: Japan and the European Periphery’, in his edited work, Japan and the European Periphery (London: Macmillan, 1996) pp. 4–5.
See also Takashi Inoguchi, Japan’s Foreign Policy in an Era of Global Change (London: Pinter, 1993) p. 79.
Reinhard Drifte, ‘Japan’s Security Policy and Southeast Asia’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 12 (1990) 195.
Dennis T. Yasutomo, ‘Japan and the New Multilateralism’, in Gerald L. Curtis (ed.), Japan’s Foreign Policy (London: M. E. Sharpe, 1993) p. 331.
For examinations of different aspects of Asia, see Geoffrey Wiseman, ‘Common Security in the Asia-Pacific Region’, The Pacific Review, 5 (1992) especially 58, footnote 1;
Christopher W. Hughes, ‘The North Korean Nuclear Crisis and Japanese Security’, Survival, 38 (1996) 79–103;
and Kimura Michio (ed.), Multilayered Regional Co-operation in Southeast Asia after the Cold War (Tokyo: Institute of Developing Economies, 1995).
For example, see Richard Higgott, ‘The Asian Economic Crisis: A Study in the Politics of Resentment’, New Political Economy, 3 (1998) 333–56.
North Korea had one operational nuclear reactor and two larger reactors under construction, all of a type capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium, but through the KEDO framework these plans were frozen. Instead, the three reactors were sealed, and the remaining plutonium was to be removed after temporary safe storage. For details of the US-North Korean framework agreement of 21 October 1994, see Winston Lord, ‘U.S. Policy Toward the Korean Peninsula’, U.S. Department of State Dispatch, 7 (1996) 165–8.
See Vincenzo Tornetta, ‘The Importance of ASEAN to Western Europe’, in Giuseppe Schiavone (ed.), Western Europe and South-East Asia: Cooperation or Competition? (London: Macmillan, 1989) p. 44.
Gareth Evans and Paul Dibb, Australian Paper on Practical Proposals for Security Co-operation in the Asia Pacific Region (Canberra: Australia National University, 1994) p. 1.
Christopher Hill, ‘Closing the Capabilities-Expectations Gap?’, in John Peterson and Helen Sjursen, A Common Foreign Policy for Europe (London and New York: Routledge, 1998) p. 32.
See Martha Finnemore, ‘International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy’, International Organization, 46 (1993) 566.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2000 Julie Gilson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gilson, J. (2000). Cooperation in Regional Forums. In: Japan and the European Union. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333981399_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333981399_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-41479-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-333-98139-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)