DOCSLIB.ORG

Toward an Ideal Security State for Northeast Asia 2025 Edited by L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Toward an Ideal Security State for Northeast Asia 2025 Edited by L DRAFT COPY: Not for Public Distribution Toward an Ideal Security State for Northeast Asia 2025 Edited by L. Gordon Flake Toward an Ideal Security State for Northeast Asia 2025 Edited by L. Gordon Flake www.mansfieldfdn.org The Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation, Washington, D.C. © 2010 by The Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation www.mansfieldfdn.org All rights reserved. Published in the United States of America Contributors Ralph A. Cossa, President, Pacific Forum CSIS Wendy Dobson, Professor, University of Toronto Alexis Dudden, Associate Professor, University of Connecticut L. Gordon Flake, Executive Director, The Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation Mikkal E. Herberg, Senior Research Fellow for International Energy, Pacific Council on International Policy Sung-han Kim, Professor, Korea University Chang Jae Lee, Director, Center for Regional Economic Studies, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy Akio Morishima, Chair of Board of Directors, Japan Climate Policy Center Cheol Hee Park, Professor, Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University Yinhong Shi, Director of the Center for American Studies, Renmin University Hitoshi Tanaka, Senior Fellow, Japan Center for International Exchange Wenzhao Tao, Research Fellow, Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Hugh White, Professor and Head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, The Australian National University Noboru Yamaguchi, Lieutenant General JGSDF (Ret.), Professor, National Defense Academy of Japan Daojiong Zha, Professor, Beijing University Contents Preface L. Gordon Flake . 7 The Impact of the Global Financial Crisis on Regional Economic Integration and the Development of Regional Economic Infrastructure in Northeast Asia Wendy Dobson . .15 Chang Jae Lee . .31 Nationalism, Historical Legacies and Territorial Disputes as Obstacles to Cooperation in Northeast Asia Cheol Hee Park . 45 Alexis Dudden . 53 Exogenous Shocks Such as Terrorism and Pandemics as a Threat to Regional Crisis Management Noboru Yamaguchi . .63 Daojiong Zha . .77 Implications of Climate Change and Energy Security for Regional Integration in Northeast Asia Akio Morishima . .91 Mikkal E. Herberg . 109 Implications of Strategies to Deal with North Korea for Regional Cooperation and Integration Hitoshi Tanaka . 123 Sung-han Kim . 135 The Trajectory and Implications of China’s Continuing Rise for Northeast Asian Regional Integration Hugh White . 145 Yinhong Shi . 161 The Future of the U.S. Role in the Region and Northeast Asian Regional Integration Ralph A. Cossa . 177 Wenzhao Tao . 197 Preface ortheast Asia is often considered to be a “sub-region” of East Asia or Nthe broader Asia-Pacific. In contrast to Europe, North America, or even Southeast Asia, it is characterized by the lack of regional institutions or infrastructure. Yet, Northeast Asia is home to the world’s second and third largest economies, Japan and China, and home to two of the United States’ most important allies in Asia, Japan and South Korea. It also is home to two of the most potentially dangerous unresolved conflicts across the demilitarized zone in Korea and across the Taiwan Straits. Four of the world’s strongest powers, the United States, China, Japan and Russia, have direct interests and involvement in the region. In particular, the United States’ commitment is demonstrated not just in the approximately 100,000 troops and the strong maritime presence that it maintains in the region, but also in the extensive commercial, diplomatic and civil society ties it has with nearly all countries in the region. With the dramatic economic growth of China and the growing leadership role that countries in the region play in a range of regional and global issues—such as climate change, trade liberalization, and anti-terrorism— there is little question that the importance of Northeast Asia is on the rise. As such, the trajectory of the region, and the prospects for a continued peaceful environment in which the process of economic development and regional integration might continue, is of paramount importance to the United States, the countries of Northeast Asia, and ultimately the world. Recognizing these trends, the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation, with support from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) 7  through the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) and in collaboration with the Committee on International Security and Arms Control (CISAC) of the National Academy of Sciences, organized a one- year project designed to identify the “ideal” state of peace and security in Northeast Asia in the year 2025 and further explore issues related to that ideal. The project commenced November 1, 2008 and involved two primary activities, a strategy session in Montana and an international workshop involving experts from throughout the region in Kanazawa, Japan. Strategy Session with Core Group Members A central element of this project was securing the participation of a core group of renowned experts from Asia and the Pacific to assist the project planners in defining the “ideal” security state for Northeast Asia in the year 2025 and then going several steps further to identify and prioritize a list of divergent trends or factors impacting that ideal. This core group of regional experts also helped plan the structure and focus of a July 2009 workshop in Japan and helped identify the most appropriate experts from the region to write the research papers for and participate in that workshop. The initial strategy session for the project was held in Big Fork, Montana on April 30, 2009. In addition to key representatives from the major countries and other stakeholders in the region (China, Korea, Japan, the U.S., Canada, and Australia), the strategy session also included key issue and technical specialists from among the membership of CISAC. Participants in the Montana strategy session included scholars with a broad expertise in the region, an understanding of policy, an ability to think outside of the box, and a known proclivity to actively participate in a strategy/ brainstorming type of meeting. Participants in the Montana meeting included: PaulBernstein, Vice President, Science Applications International • Corporation (SAIC) ChristopherChyba, Professor of Astrophysical Sciences and International • Affairs, Woodrow Wilson School of International Affairs, Princeton University (CISAC) 8 Preface PeterDrysdale, Emeritus Professor of Economics and Visiting Fellow • in Policy and Governance, The Crawford School of Economics and Government, The Australian National University PaulEvans, Director, Program for Canada-Asia Policy Studies, Institute • of Asian Research, University of British Columbia L.GordonFlake, Executive Director, The Maureen and Mike Mansfield • Foundation FunabashiYoichi, Editor-in-Chief, the Asahi Shimbun • DavidHamon, Deputy Director for Research and Studies, Advanced • Systems and Concepts Office (ASCO), Defense Threat Reduction Agency AlastairIainJohnston, Governor James Albert Noe and Linda Noe • Laine Professor of China in World Affairs, Government Department, Harvard University (CISAC) MichaelKeifer, Director, Asia Portfolio, Advanced Systems and Concepts • Office (ASCO), Defense Threat Reduction Agency ,LeeChung-Min, Dean, Graduate School of International Studies • Yonsei University AlanRomberg, Distinguished Fellow, Henry L. Stimson Center • BenjaminRusek, Associate Program Officer, the Committee on • International Security and Arms Control (CISAC) of The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) ZhangYunling, Director of International Studies, China Academy of • Social Sciences During the course of the strategy meeting, participants engaged in a frank and active debate over what might constitute the “ideal” state of peace and security in Northeast Asia in the year 2025. Efforts were then made to refine and tighten the definition of that “ideal” into a single bullet point document listing the characteristics of that “ideal.” The text of the consensus ideal as defined during the course of that meeting appears on page 10. 9  NOTIONAL“IDEAL” SECURITY STATE FOR NORTHEAST ASIA IN 2025 On April 30, 2009, with support from SAIC and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Mansfield Foundation and the Committee on International Security and Arms Control convened a meeting in Big Fork, Montana in an effort to identify an “ideal” security state for Northeast Asia in the year 2025. While this “ideal” was geographically focused upon Northeast Asia, the discussion incorporated the role and interests of the United States and broader international factors that impact upon the region. A core group of participants from Australia, Canada, China, Japan, Korea and the United States identified the following characteristics as representative of an ideal security state for Northeast Asia in the year 2025: • In the context of regional harmony, all countries are satisfied that their core interests are being respected and that effective mechanisms exist to address other interests as well. • Interaction among states in the region is characterized by “dependable expectation of peaceful change,” on the basis of increasing economic, social and political integration. • The North Korea issue is no longer a source of division and the Korean Peninsula as a whole participates in regional cooperation and economic development. • Northeast Asia has developed an effective framework or an institutional mechanism for addressing and managing security concerns.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Summitry Hints of a More Activist Approach
    Comparative Connections A Quarterly E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations U.S.-Southeast Asia Relations: Summitry Hints of a More Activist Approach Catharin Dalpino Georgetown University As the new State Department team settled in, the U.S. attempted to maintain the heightened momentum in relations with Southeast Asia created by the tsunami relief effort earlier this year. In May, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick travelled to Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Malaysia, using the trip to proclaim a new policy of greater attention to the region. President George Bush hosted Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) in May and Vietnamese Prime Minister Phan Van Khai in June, inaugural visit to Washington for both leaders. Also in June, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld attended the Shangri-La security meeting in Singapore and used the spotlight to criticize Beijing's presumed expansionist aims. Rumsfeld’s choice of Singapore as a venue for the remarks, combined with Zoellick’s listening tour, signaled growing interest in Washington in China’s increasing influence in Southeast Asia. Indonesia was of two minds about the U.S. A recent Pew survey reported improvement of the U.S. image there because of tsunami aid, but demonstrations in Jakarta over the Newsweek story on Islamic prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay showed fresh resentment. U.S. military cooperation moved incrementally toward a more regional approach, while several rounds of bilateral trade talks were held. Human rights remained central to U.S. policy in Burma as Washington prepared to renew sanctions and made clear its opposition to Rangoon's chairmanship of ASEAN in 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • CV of Nominee
    Navnita Chadha Behera Curriculum Vitae Office Address Department of Political Science University of Delhi, New Delhi -110007, India Ph: (91-11) 27666670 (Work); (91-124) 4370880 (Home); 9818001972 (Cell) Email: [email protected]; [email protected] —————————————————————————————————————— Research & Teaching Areas • Global Governance of Knowledge Structures • Genealogy of IR discipline and its Pedagogical Practices • International Relations Theory • International Security • Gender Issues in IR • Conflict & Political Violence • South Asia/India • Kashmir Conflict ACADEMIC POSITIONS 10/2015-Present: Head of the Department, Department of Political Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India. 3/2009-Present: Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India. 1/2007-3/2009: Professor, Nelson Mandela Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution, Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi, India. 7/2002- 12/2006: Reader, Department of Political Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India. 4/1999-9/2000: Assistant Director, Women in Security, Co-operation, Conflict Management and Peace (WISCOMP) at Foundation of Universal Responsibility, New Delhi, India. 4/1994-9/1998: Assistant Research Professor, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, India. VISITING POSITIONS 06/2015-07/2015: IBIES, Erasmus Mundus Visiting Fellow, University of Warsaw, Poland. 06/2012-07/2012: EXPERTS Visiting Fellow, University of Uppsala, Sweden. 04/2010-06/2010: Erasmus Mundus Visiting Fellow, University of Bologna, Italy 06/2010-07/2010: Erasmus Mundus Visiting Fellow, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary. 10/2001-6/2002: Visiting Fellow, Brookings Institution, Washington DC, USA. 9/1997-1/1998: Visiting Fellow, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA. 07/1996-onwards: Visiting Faculty for the training module of Indian Foreign Service Probationers, Foreign Service Institute, New Delhi, India.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol VIII, #5 Ms
    AUGUST 2002 Inside 3 In Memoriam: John Wallach 4 Islam and Democracy 5 Women, Human Rights, and Islam Vol. VIII, No. 5 6 Crises around the Globe UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE ■ WASHINGTON, DC 8 Essay Winners in Washington 10 Kosovo 12 Israeli Military 15 Former Fellow Tahseen Bashir dies Violence and the Peace Process Conflicts in Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka, and the Middle East provide valuable Above: Catholic lessons regarding the causes and effects of political violence. protesters torch a British flag in front of riot Violence often continues and sometimes intensifies negotiations. “Negotiating with Terrorists: Lessons police in Belfast during peace negotiations, but it needn’t derail them. from Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka, and Israel- before a Protes- A U.S. Institute of Peace Current Issues Briefing on Palestine” was moderated by Joseph Klaits, director tant march in May 29 addressed ways to prevent different forms of of the Institute’s fellowship program. The guest July. violence and keep violence from disrupting peace See Violence and the Peace Process, page 2 2 Violence and the Peace Process Continued from page 1 Right: Disabled speakers were John Darby, pro- combatants in fessor of comparative ethnic stud- Sri Lanka’s civil ies at the University of Notre war held a pro- Dame’s Kroc Institute, former cession in June senior fellow at the U.S. Institute in support of of Peace, and author of The peace efforts Effects of Violence on Peace Processes between the (U.S. Institute of Peace Press, government and 2001); E. Valentine Daniel, pro- Tamil rebels.
    [Show full text]
  • Escalation Control and the Nuclear Option in South Asia
    Escalation Control and the Nuclear Option in South Asia Michael Krepon, Rodney W. Jones, and Ziad Haider, editors Copyright © 2004 The Henry L. Stimson Center All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission in writing from the Henry L. Stimson Center. Cover design by Design Army. ISBN 0-9747255-8-7 The Henry L. Stimson Center 1111 19th Street NW Twelfth Floor Washington, DC 20036 phone 202.223.5956 fax 202.238.9604 www.stimson.org Table of Contents Preface ................................................................................................................. v Abbreviations..................................................................................................... vii Introduction......................................................................................................... ix 1. The Stability-Instability Paradox, Misperception, and Escalation Control in South Asia Michael Krepon ............................................................................................ 1 2. Nuclear Stability and Escalation Control in South Asia: Structural Factors Rodney W. Jones......................................................................................... 25 3. India’s Escalation-Resistant Nuclear Posture Rajesh M. Basrur ........................................................................................ 56 4. Nuclear Signaling, Missiles, and Escalation Control in South Asia Feroz Hassan Khan ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • India's Heavy Hedge Against China, and Its New Look to the United
    29 India’s Heavy Hedge Against China, and its New Look to the United States to Help Daniel Twining 30 | Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies China and India together account for one-third of humanity. Both were advanced civilizations when Europe was in the Dark Ages. Until the 19th century, they constituted the world’s largest economies. Today they are, in terms of purchasing power, the world’s largest and third-largest national economies, and the fastest-growing major economies. Were they to form an alliance, they would dominate mainland Eurasia and the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean and Western Pacific that carry a preponderance of the world’s maritime energy trade. Yet these civilization-states seem destined to compete in the 21st century. India is engaged in a heavy hedge against China—although its history of non-alignment, traditional rhetoric of anti-Americanism, the dominance until recently of analysts’ tendency to view India’s security mainly in terms of its subcontinental competition with Pakistan, and the tendency for emerging market analysts to hyphenate India and China as rising economies can obscure this reality. Tactical cooperation in climate change talks and BRICS summits should not confuse us into seeing any kind of emerging India-China alignment in global affairs. Strategic rivalry of a quiet but steady nature characterizes their ties, to the point where it affects their relations with third countries: India’s relations with Russia have cooled substantially since President Putin’s tilt toward Beijing in the wake of Russia’s isolation from the West over Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • Framework for Csis Maritime Security in East Asia
    No. 81 THE SECURITY OF REGIONAL SEA LANES Joshua Ho Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies Singapore JUNE 2005 With Compliments This Working Paper series presents papers in a preliminary form and serves to stimulate comment and discussion. The views expressed are entirely the author’s own and not that of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies The Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS) was established in July 1996 as an autonomous research institute within the Nanyang Technological University. Its objectives are to: • Conduct research on security, strategic and international issues. • Provide general and graduate education in strategic studies, international relations, defence management and defence technology. • romote joint and exchange programmes with similar regional and international institutions; organise seminars/conferences on topics salient to the strategic and policy communities of the Asia-Pacific. Constituents of IDSS include the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR) and the Asian Programme for Negotiation and Conflict Management (APNCM). Research Through its Working Paper Series, IDSS Commentaries and other publications, the Institute seeks to share its research findings with the strategic studies and defence policy communities. The Institute’s researchers are also encouraged to publish their writings in refereed journals. The focus of research is on issues relating to the security and stability of the Asia-Pacific region and their implications for Singapore and other countries in the region. The Institute has also established the S. Rajaratnam Professorship in Strategic Studies (named after Singapore’s first Foreign Minister), to bring distinguished scholars to participate in the work of the Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nexus Between Counterproliferation
    Ports in a Storm? The Nexus Between Counterterrorism, Counterproliferation, and Maritime Security in Southeast Asia By Tamara Renee Shie Visiting Fellow Issues & Insights Vol. 4 – No. 4 Pacific Forum CSIS Honolulu, HawaiHawaiii July 2004 Pacific Forum CSIS Based in Honolulu, Pacific Forum CSIS (www.csis.org/pacfor/) operates as the autonomous Asia-Pacific arm of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. The Forum’s programs encompass current and emerging political, security, economic business, and oceans policy issues through analysis and dialogue undertaken with the region’s leaders in the academic, government, and corporate areas. Founded in 1975, it collaborates with a broad network of research institutes from around the Pacific Rim, drawing on Asian perspectives and disseminating project findings and recommendations to opinion leaders, governments, and members of the public throughout the region. ii Table of ContentsTable Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................1 I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................2 II. THE IMPORTANCE OF SOUTHEAST ASIA’S MARITIME REALM...........................5 III. MARITIME TERRORISM – HOW REAL IS THE THREAT? ........................................8 MARITIME TERRORISM..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mongolia and the Prospects for a Multilateral Security Mechanism in Northeast Asia
    Mongolia and the Prospects for a Multilateral Security Mechanism in Northeast Asia A.TUVSHINTUGS1 Colonel, Mongolian Army; Deputy Director, Institute for Strategic Studies, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia Abstract The region of Northeast Asia is historically complicated and nearly all of its members prefer principles of Westphalia. The so-called North Korean nuclear issue and the coinciding interests of the Great Powers affect regional security. The region also has many problematic issues like unresolved claims among nations on territorial and historical disputes. But there are still possible foundations to succeed in enhancing Northeast Asian multilateral security institutions. Although the process of dialogue is slow, Inter-Korean relations have gained impressive ground. It must be noted that the main reason for the willingness to cooperate among Northeast Asian nations is economic interdependence, while politically and security-wise, defense dialogue is becoming a signifi cant matter. Many scholars stress the constraints of changing the current infl exible system to a much more sophisticated, cooperative, and integrated arrangement. To create such a mechanism, the region should draw from its signifi cant experience of the de-facto mechanism in the Six Party Talks and the Common Development- Based Mechanism. For maintaining regional peace and security, Mongolia always seeks to participate in the Security Mechanism of Northeast Asia and as a member of the international community. Mongolia values its model-democracy and market economy in the Northeast Asian region. The dynamic diplomacy of Mongolia pursues a Nuclear Weapon-Free Status, and participation in UN peacekeeping operations, which are appreciated by the international community. Mongolia has signifi cant resources, means, willingness, and interests to form Northeast Asian multilateral security mechanisms, and has much to contribute to the development of Northeast Asian relations.
    [Show full text]
  • Floating Between the Orient and the Occident: Japan, Australia and Their Inferiority Complex
    University of Wollongong Thesis Collections University of Wollongong Thesis Collection University of Wollongong Year Floating between the Orient and the Occident: Japan, Australia and their inferiority complex Yoko Harada University of Wollongong Harada, Yoko, Floating between the Orient and the Occident: Japan, Australia and their inferiority complex, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, Centre for Asia Pacific Social Trans- formation Studies, School of History and Politics - Faculty of Arts, University of Wollongong, 2009. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/3034 This paper is posted at Research Online. Floating Between the Orient and the Occident: Japan, Australia and Their Inferiority Complex A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree Doctor of Philosophy from UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG by Yoko Harada Bachelor of Arts Master of Social Change and Development Centre for Asia Pacific Social Transformation Studies School of History and Politics 2009 CERTIFICATION I, Yoko Harada, declare that this thesis, submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in the School of History and Politics, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged. The document has not been submitted for qualifications at any other academic institution. Yoko Harada 31 March 2009 CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES iv AUTHOR’S NOTE v ABBREVIATIONS vi ABSTRACT viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix INTRODUCTION 1 SECTION A: JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA IN PARALLEL INTRODUCTION 23 CHAPTER 1: Contemporaries in the international arena INTRODUCTION 29 REVIEWING THE ORIGIN OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 30 AN ALTERNATIVE WORLD VIEW 38 JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA IN PARALLEL 43 Japan 44 Australia 52 SHARING A POSITION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA 62 CONCLUSION 66 CHAPTER 2: Sharing an inferiority complex INTRODUCTION 69 “JUNIOR MEMBERS” OF THE WEST CLUB 70 A SENSE OF CRINGE IN EVERYDAY DISCOURSE 79 NATIONAL PSYCHE TROUBLED BY AN INFERIORITY COMPLEX 93 CONCLUSION 105 i SECTION B: AMBIGUOUS IDENTITY IN THE LIGHT OF EDWARD W.
    [Show full text]
  • Ringing in Proliferation Ringing in Proliferation Alexander H
    Ringing in Proliferation Ringing in Proliferation Alexander H. Montgomery How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb Network Ringing in Proliferation The nuclear nonpro- liferation regime has come under attack from a group of academics and policy- makers who argue that traditional tools such as export controls, diplomatic pressure, arms control agreements, and threats of economic sanctions are no longer sufªcient to battle proliferation. They point to North Korea’s reinvigo- ration of its plutonium program, Iran’s apparent progress in developing a nu- clear capability, and the breadth of the Abdul Qadeer (A.Q.) Khan network as evidence that the regime is failing.1 In addition, they claim that proliferation is driven by the inevitable spread of technology from a dense network of suppli- ers and that certain “rogue” states possess an unºagging determination to ac- quire nuclear weapons. Consequently, they argue that only extreme measures such as aggressively enforced containment or regime change can slow the ad- dition of several more countries to the nuclear club. This “proliferation deter- minism,” at least in rhetoric, is shared by many prominent members of President George W. Bush’s administration and has become the main thrust of U.S. counterproliferation policy.2 Yet current proliferators are neither as “dead Alexander H. Montgomery is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University. Please send comments to [email protected]. The author is grateful for critiques of multiple versions of this article from Paul MacDonald and Todd Sechser; comments from an anonymous reviewer for International Security; suggestions from Chaim Braun, Christopher Chyba, Lynn Eden, Scott Sagan, and Dean Wilkening; and feedback from the partici- pants in the Research Seminar at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford Institute for International Studies, Stanford University.
    [Show full text]
  • Macarthur Foundation Asia Security Initiative (MASI) Demonstrates Increasing Cooperation in Other Important Areas
    Table of Contents Table of Contents Conference Statement Agenda Annual Meeting Outline Memo Presentation Paper List of Participants Participants’ Biographies General Information Institutes’ Achievements & Future Plans List of Contact Persons for ASI Grantees 3 The East Asia Institute Australia, Indonesia, and South Korea will play stronger roles, while rising powers like China and India will take on new regional and global responsibilities. with support from It is clear that the role of Asia is now more profound than ever before, but the future of the East Asian Community remains uncertain. Therefore, enhancing regional cooperation remains as the main challenge to overcome inherited suspicion and lasting The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation mistrust. While issues such as the Cheonan incident reveal differences in the Asian states’ approaches toward North Korea, their unity in implementing sanctions against Pyongyang presents in the wake of its nuclear test in May 2009 implies a growing effort in security cooperation. On the economic front, the signing of the India-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement MacArthur Foundation Asia Security Initiative (MASI) demonstrates increasing cooperation in other important areas. The next stage will be to 2010 Annual Meeting transform these contacts into a wider and deeper cooperative network. At the same time, July 7-9, 2010 questions need to be addressed on the identity, scope, and purpose of a regional Westin Chosun, Seoul, Korea community. The challenges for the region are so complex and vast that they often involve more The second Annual Meeting of the MacArthur Foundation Asia Security Initiative comes than one country. In this new order, nations can no longer tackle problems unilaterally.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Field Operations Asia Pacific Vision Study
    Meeting the on-demand economy’s challenges: The Future of Field Operations Asia Pacific Vision Study Leading organizations leverage mobility and innovative technologies to accommodate heightened service expectations Zebra’s Future of Field Operations Asia Pacific Vision Study Zebra Technologies commissioned a APAC survey of leading organizations with field operations in five service categories: field service, fleet management, field sales, direct store delivery and merchandise courier services. The survey asked them how their organizations are evaluating and using mobile technology designed for business use as well as emerging technologies to respond to market and technological trends impacting field operations. Mobile growth and transformation in field operations $10.6 60% % TRILLION 57 + Growth of global e-commerce Mobility investment Transformative field is a growing priority operations technologies 2 zebra technologies Three Trends Driving Field Operations Changes 1. Performance and convenience expectations growing E-commerce and mobile connectivity give customers more ways to order goods and services, while online feedback platforms allow them to hold service providers to higher performance standards: • Global e-commerce retail sales are expected to reach $4.48 trillion by 2021.1 Global business-to-business e-commerce sales are much higher, estimated at $10.6 trillion in 2018.2 • In the Future of Field Operations survey, 66% said e-commerce is driving the need for faster field operations. • 90% of consumers read online reviews before visiting a business, 88% trust online reviews as much as personal recommendations and 86% hesitate to purchase from a business that has negative online reviews.3 2. Mobile technology replacing paper in the field • 58% are expanding mobile technology to enterprise-wide use — reaching 97% by 2023.
    [Show full text]