The European Union and East Asia
Show Less

The European Union and East Asia

Interregional Linkages in a Changing Global System

Edited by Peter W. Preston and Julie Gilson

The global system has seen sweeping changes in recent years and this has precipitated a revival of interest in the relationship between Europe and Asia. This book examines the extent and nature of the regional linkages between East Asia and the European Union. Issues discussed include: the reactions and approaches of both regions to the Asian Crisis; postcolonialism and the balance of power in Europe-Asia Relations; trade relations between Europe and Asia and the revival of the Silk Road; and the development of the role of Asia-Europe Meetings.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 6: Europe-Asia: the formal politics of mutual definition

Julie A. Gilson


Julie A. Gilson INTRODUCTION The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) presents a new kind of partnership between novel partners. Its purpose, as the European Commission restated in April 2000, is to ‘establish a new relationship between the two regions’ and ‘build a comprehensive partnership among equal partners’.1 Since it began in 1996, ASEM has been criticized for its inability to be more than a mere talk shop2, whilst simultaneously fears over greater ‘institutionalization’ have been voiced from both groups of participants. Ostensibly, then, ASEM is a no-win arrangement for its participants, for either it continues to function as a casual clubhouse and takes no major decisions or else it deepens its institutional roots, to threaten vested interests already existing within each region. In fact, ASEM raises several interesting questions about the nature and purpose of institutionalized relations and needs to be examined in its own right. It conducts its affairs as an explicitly region-to-region grouping, whilst at the same time (to date, at least) dispensing an ‘Asian way with western agenda’, thus accommodating within its own framework apparently contradictory modes of decision making and failing to problematize the difficult issues which the discussion of such modes of behaviour should provoke. ASEM began life as an informal channel of communication between the heads of state or government of its 25 participating countries (plus the president of the European Commission), and a host of practitioners involved at other levels of activity.3 Designated from the beginning as an informal armchair dialogue that was not to...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.