It’s difficult situating Russia in the context of the BRICs and BRICSAM. Various articles seem to stumble in their effort to place Russia in the correct circle of influence. As far back as first CIGI Policy Brief in International Governance, (May, 2007) (the date tells you it’s not that long ago) Andy Cooper, CIGI Distinguished Fellow, tackled the curious place of Russia. The title of his piece raised the question of Russia’s leadership position – “The Logic of the B(R)ICSAM Model for G8 Reform.” Though the Brief focused principally on adequacey of the G7/8 governance, the rather unique term raised, not for the first time the place of Russia in the G7/8 as well as in BRICSAM. Russia evidences multiple identities. It is a member Continue reading
Including ASEAN
As I have argued in previous blog posts, regional entities are unique organizational and institutional elements of contemporary international relations. How we take them into account remains a question. In my view, they could represent significant new ‘state’ actors in the global and regional governance architecture.
And so we have included ASEAN in CIGI’s expanded BRICs constellation – BRICSAM. Paul Bowles, an economist at the University of Northern British Columbia (yes, there is such an institution – at Prince George and through the north and I am assured by Paul it is quite beautiful) has undertaken an examination of ASEAN in the context of CIGI Andy Cooper’s Economic Diplomacy Project (ably assisted by Agata Antkiewicz – Research Coordinator). This Project focuses Continue reading
Unique 21st Century Regionalism
Regional organizations and institutions are significant aspects of governance and multilateralism in global relations. Certainly, in the recent past much attentioin has been focused on the growth and consequences of regional trade organizations – NAFTA, the EU and the spaghetti bowl of other small and large regional trade agreements and organizations. But there has been, and continues to be, regional political and security organizations as well. The granddaddy of the them all is the North American Treaty Organization (NATO) – that bridges the North American-Europe divide. But there are a host of more than bilateral agreements that dot the regional landscape and create regional Continue reading
The Meaning and Possibilities of ‘Big’
In Second World Parag Khanna declared early in the Introduction – “Big is Back.” Now as I pointed out earlier, this reference was to a main element of his analysis that three ‘Empires’ – the United States, the EU and China now concentrate power in the world. As Khanna suggests, “These two [China and the EU] are the world’s three natural empires: each geographically unified and militarily, economically, and demographically strong enough to expand.” I’ve already noted that Parag’s choice of Empire is unfortunate and raises images and imples motivation and behaviors that are inapt, though Continue reading
The Other Dimension – “Liberal Democracy versus Authoritarianism”
A recent blog entry took a first look at Fareed Zakaria’s, ” ThePost-American World” and compared a number of BRICSAM-related features in his book to the well received volume by Parag Khanna, ” The Second World.” I won’t go over trod ground but I thought that Ian Buruma’s insightful analysis in his piece in the April 21st New Yorker an article entitled, “After America: Is the West being overtaken by the rest?” raised one critical dimension distinguishing the BRICSAM countries and worth exploring here.
One notable features in Parag’s analysis is his apparent distataste for democracy . Note in particular his rather Continue reading
Evolving Global Architecuture – Second World versus the “Rise of the Rest”
A ‘second wave’ of global analysis grips international relations inquiry. The first wave appeared after 1993 and could be characterized as the ‘Unipolar Moment.’ Analysts woke up and recognized that the comfortable world of Superpowers and bipolarity had evaporated and in its stead there stood the United States. Much of the analysis including from such luminaries as former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former National Security Advisor (under Jimmy Carter) Zbigniew Brezinski sallied forth to declare the US hegomony as a brief moment with the system destined to revert to Continue reading
China’s Challenges – Some Reflections on Dean Kishore Mahbubani
I had the real pleasure earlier in the week to participate in an excellent show on China on TVO’s The Agenda. For those not familiar with TVO or its premier public affairs show – The Agenda with Steve Paikin TVO is Ontario’s public broadcaster. It has an education mandate and among its most successful programs is The Agenda (truth reveled Steve Paikin – the well known broadcaster and TV personality and the broadcaster for the The Agenda is my neighbor – not his fault). One of The Agenda’s principal producer’s Daniel Kitts put together a most interesting program entitled, “China’s Challenges”. Centred on Kishore Muhbubani’s new book, “The New Asia Hemisphere: The Irresistable Shift of Global Power to the East,” Steve first spent part of the show one-on-one with Muruhbubani, the Dean of Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore and then expanded it to include: Elizabeth Economy C.V. Starr senior fellow and director for Asian Studies at Continue reading
Absent With Apology
To one and all I do regret my absence in the last days. As a rule you can expect a posting every other day. With that in mind, I offer my apologies However, good things have been happening at CIGI. In particular on the weekend, we held a Conference on Saturday and Sunday on “China’s New Economic Diplomacy.” The Project led by Senior CIGI Fellow, Greg Chin – known affectionately as Zong Yi – is a focused Project in the general activity CIGI has been carrying on in the area Continue reading
‘To Be, or Not to Be’
Leslie Elliott Armijo, a visiting scholar at Portland State University has, as guest editor of Vol 31, Number 4 (Winter 2007) produced a very interesting volume for Asian Perspective.* A special issue on the BRICs, this volume and its individual author chapters on the BRICs are well worth spending some focused time. Let me at this moment just comment on Armijo’s opening piece, “The BRICs Countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) as Analytical Category: Mirage or Insight?” pp. 7-42.
As noted earlier, this search for a single analytic category is a key inquiry. Are we look at a group of countries that individually, partially, or collectively can or will be able to influence the course of international politics and global governanace? In summing up her examintaion, Armijo writes, “This article has asked whether the term “BRICs countries” is a viable analytical category. The four do not share domestic political institutions, international goals, or economic structures and challenges. If the category, nonetheless, provides insight, it must be because this set of countries holds similar implications for the larger system—the international political economy—within which it is embedded.”
For a good part of the chapter she examines – from three distinct perspctives – liberal economic, realist and liberal institutionalist – whether there is an analytic category – the BRICs. She brings useful quantitative examination and especially in the examination of power from a realist perspective, the review ranges beyond the usual national capabilites to more interesting FDI and foreign exchange measures. Nevertheless, the result is still a conclusion that what gives rise potentially to influence is not built on ‘power’ alone of the four.
Armijo concludes with an examination of liberal institutionalism and the consequence of ‘hard’ and ‘soft power’ and the use of organizations and institutions to shape and influence international relations. Driven by the liberal institutionalist logic, influnce is a product of, “not only what
material capabilities the BRICs possess, but also what they and their leaders want.” As a result she finds that the BRIC 4 are divided into to subcategories” those that are authoritarian – China and Russia, and those democratic – India and Brazil. While the former may well promote economic development and prosperity, might well tackle the environment, it would only be the latter that might have an interest in the future in promoting universal rights and democratic progress and possibly a developmental approach to address the wide economic divergences of the global economy. Though Armijo rejects the single analytic concept of the BRICs she remains attracted to examining how these 4 may well have an influence on future global governance.
* Asian Perspective is joint product of the Institute for Far Eastern Studies, Kyungnam University, Seoul South Korea and the Mark O. Hatfield School of Government, Portland State University
The Ground is Shifting
While many observers have been fixed on the violence in Tibet (Zangzu Zizhiqu), potentially highly significant political events have been taking place in Taiwan. Ma Ying-jeou, the KMT Presidential candidate won a resounding victory over DPP candidate Frank Hsieh 58% to 42%. Further 2 contentious referendum defining under what name Taiwan would seek UN membership were defeated.
In a short but useful RSIS Commentary “Fundamental Change in Taiwan Politics,” March 26, 2008 by Arthur Ding currently a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at S. Rajarantram School of International Studies (RSIS) Nanyang Technological University, Singapore sets out the regional implications of this significant Taiwan vote. A quick note on RSIS Commentaries. This is a prolific series edited by Yung Razali Kassim (RSISPublication@ntu.edu.sg) at NTU in Singapore. Though uneven, the RSIS Commentaries provide an abundant on-the-ground survey of issues concerning South, Southeast and East Asia.
Politically on Taiwan now, the KMT has both the Presidency and a majority of the Taiwan Parliament. The new President has endorsed the “1992 consensus” (agreement that there is one China but with the two sides having different interpretations of what that means). In the ‘near future’ Ding suggests that we are likely to see the resumption of a dialogue at the semi-official level between the Mainland and Taiwan. These talks have been suspended since 1999 and the first DPP President, Lee Tung-hui.
But the real challenge is a question of “Rising China” and the effectiveness of regional governance in Asia. China has become a significant player in regional goverenance from the ASEAN +1 and +3 the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) and the 6-Party Talks. China has brought new vigor to regional governance in Asia and has promoted a ‘dialogue and consensus’ approach that eschews power politics and focuses on building trust and a consensus for the approach to regional governanace. This growing Chinese regional commitment and the promotion of ‘dialogue and consensus’ has gone a significant distance to allaying fears on the part of China’s neghbors over China’s role in Asia. And while the Chinese mainland leadership sees a real difference over the question of Taiwan – that is that Taiwan is a domestic issue – the degree of collaboration and cooperation with the Island represents a real test of ‘the consensus and dialogue’ approach throughout regional governance. An aggressive ‘hard’ approach could well doom China’s current regional governance strategy.