Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/63760
|
| Title: | 南韓在東亞區域建制中的角色：中等國家推動區域主義之個案研究
South Korea`s Role in Building an East Asian Community: A Middle Power Advancing Regionalism |
| Authors: | 戈荷西
Jose Guerra Vio |
| Contributors: | 彭慧鸞
Poong, Hwei Luan
戈荷西
Jose Guerra Vio |
| Keywords: | Middle Power
Regionalism
East Asia
Northeast Asia
South Korea
Regional Institutionalization
Middle Power
Regionalism
East Asia
Northeast Asia
South Korea
Regional Institutionalization |
| Date: | 2013 |
| Issue Date: | 2014-02-10 15:06:57 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | This dissertation examines South Korea as an emergent middle power in East Asia, and how this is being reflected on its diplomatic behavior in relation to the processes of regionalism. The literature of middle powers suggests that countries such as South Korea can play useful roles to promote cooperation in several specific areas. In East Asia, the need for regional institutionalization became evident since the Asian Financial Crisis (AFC) of 1997-98, yet the attempts of China and Japan for regional leadership are often viewed as problematic. Hence, this research confirmed its main hypothesis which points to South Korea as a capable middle power to lead East Asian regionalism. Thus, in those particular instances where Korea has chosen to display middlepowermanship – as a catalyst, facilitator and/or manager of regionalist projects – the advancement in the processes of regional institutionalization in East Asia was generally observed.
In doing so, this research looked into South Korea’s foreign policy behavior towards East Asian regional processes and towards Northeast Asia as a subregion. Regional institution-building attempts, as well as the creation of regional governance were the main aspects observed; hence this research falls within the theoretical boundaries of international political economy and international relations. Neoliberal theories related to neo-functionalism, institutionalism and especially inter-governmentalism were considered to understand regionalism, while preferring a constructivist point of view to explain the relations among states. A qualitative type of methodology was favored, including interviews with policy-makers and experts, as well as archival research of primary and secondary sources. Ultimately, this study has both practical and theoretical contributions, since the literature on middle powers does not often consider applications to regionalism, a process which is usually advanced and led by great powers. Thus, study conclusions suggest several improved practical understandings of East Asian regionalism in general, recommendations for its continuing advancement and possible future strategies for South Korea’s role in it as the regional middle power.
This dissertation examines South Korea as an emergent middle power in East Asia, and how this is being reflected on its diplomatic behavior in relation to the processes of regionalism. The literature of middle powers suggests that countries such as South Korea can play useful roles to promote cooperation in several specific areas. In East Asia, the need for regional institutionalization became evident since the Asian Financial Crisis (AFC) of 1997-98, yet the attempts of China and Japan for regional leadership are often viewed as problematic. Hence, this research confirmed its main hypothesis which points to South Korea as a capable middle power to lead East Asian regionalism. Thus, in those particular instances where Korea has chosen to display middlepowermanship – as a catalyst, facilitator and/or manager of regionalist projects – the advancement in the processes of regional institutionalization in East Asia was generally observed.
In doing so, this research looked into South Korea’s foreign policy behavior towards East Asian regional processes and towards Northeast Asia as a subregion. Regional institution-building attempts, as well as the creation of regional governance were the main aspects observed; hence this research falls within the theoretical boundaries of international political economy and international relations. Neoliberal theories related to neo-functionalism, institutionalism and especially inter-governmentalism were considered to understand regionalism, while preferring a constructivist point of view to explain the relations among states. A qualitative type of methodology was favored, including interviews with policy-makers and experts, as well as archival research of primary and secondary sources. Ultimately, this study has both practical and theoretical contributions, since the literature on middle powers does not often consider applications to regionalism, a process which is usually advanced and led by great powers. Thus, study conclusions suggest several improved practical understandings of East Asian regionalism in general, recommendations for its continuing advancement and possible future strategies for South Korea’s role in it as the regional middle power. |
| Reference: | Books
1. Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined communities: reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism, 2nd edn. London: Verso.
2. Babbie, Earl. 2009. The Practice of Social Research. 12th Edition, Wadsworth Publishing.
3. Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.
4. Buzan, Barry and Ole Waever. 2003. Regions and Powers. The Structure of International Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Cooper, Andrew. 1997. Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers After the Cold War. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
6. Cooper, Andrew; Richard A. Higgott and Kim R. Nossal. 1993. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a changing world order. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press.
7. Coser, Lewis A. 1977. Masters of Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social Context. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. New York.
8. Evans, Gareth and Bruce Grant. 1991. Australia`s Foreign Relations. Melbourne, Melbourne University Press.
9. Gilpin, Robert, and Jean M. Gilpin. 2001. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton University Press.
10. Hall, Rodney Bruce. 1999. National Collective Identity, Social Constructs and International Systems. Columbia University Press.
11. Holbraad, Carsten. 1984. Middle Powers in International Politics. New York, St. Martin`s Press.
12. Hudson, Valerie. 2007. Foreign Policy Analysis, Classic and Contemporary Theory. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. Plymouth, UK.
13. Katzenstein, Peter. 2005. A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
14. Keohane, Robert. 1989. International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder, Co. Westview Press.
15. Keohane, Robert. 2002. Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World. London: Routledge.
16. King, Gary; Robert Keohane and Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry, Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton University Press.
17. Krasner, Stephen D. 1983. International Regimes. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
18. Kwon, Youngmin. 2002. Regional Community-Building in East Asia. Yonsei Monograph Series on International Studies. Yonsei University Press.
19. Murase, Tetsuji. 2004. The East Asian Monetary Zone and the Roles of Japan, China and Korea. Mimeo, Keio University.
20. Organski, A.F.K. 1958. World Politics. New York, Knopf.
21. Pastor, Robert. 1999. A Century`s Journey: How the Great Powers Shape the World. New York: Basic Books.
22. Ping, Jonathan. 2005. Middle Power Statecraft: Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Asia Pacific. Burlington, Ashgate Publishing Company.
23. Preston, P.W. 1997. Political/Cultural Identity, Citizens and Nations in a Global Era. Sage Publications.
24. Robyn, Richard. 2005. The Changing Face of European Identity. Routledge.
25. Soeya, Yoshihide. 2011. Japan As A `Normal Country?: A Nation in Search of Its Place in the World. University of Toronto Press.
26. Yoshimatsu, Hidetaka.2008. The Political Economy of Regionalism in East Asia: Integrative Explanation for Dynamics and Challenges. New York. Palgrave Macmillan.
Journal Articles
27. Acharya, Amitav. 1997. Ideas, identity and institution-building: from the ‘ASEAN way’ to the ‘Asia-Pacific way’? The Pacific Review, 10(3): 319-346.
28. Breslin, Shaun. 2004. Greater China and the Political Economy of Regionalization. East Asia, 21(1): 7-23.
29. Cai, Kevin. 2005. The China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement and Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China 14(45): 585-597.
30. Cox, Robert. 1989. Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order. International Journal, 44(4) : 823-862.
31. Huntington, Samuel. 1999. The Lonely Superpower. Foreign Affairs, 78(2): 35-49.
32. Jordaan, Eduard. 2003. The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relation: distinguishing between emerging and traditional Middle Powers. Politikon, 30(2): 165-181.
33. Keohane, Robert and Joseph Nye. 1987. Power and Interdependence Revisited. International Organization, 41(4): 725-753.
34. Kindleberger, Charles P. 1981. Dominance and Leadership in the International Economy: Exploitation, Public Goods, and Free Rides. Symposium in Honour of Hans J. Morgenthau. International Studies Quarterly, (25)2: 242-254.
35. Komori, Yasumasa. 2009. Regional Governance in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific. East Asia, 26: 321-341.
36. Kugler, Jacek. 1999. Extensions of Power Transitions: Application to Political Economy. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, 5(3): Article 1.
37. Lake, David A. 1993. Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch with Potential? International Studies Quarterly, (37)4: 459-489.
38. Malnes, Raino. 1995. Leader and Entrepreneur in International Negotiations: A Conceptual Analysis. European Journal of International Relations, 1(1): 87-112.
39. Park, Sung-Hoon and Jeong Yeon Lee. 2009. APEC at a Crossroads: Challenges and Opportunities. Asian Perspective, 33(2): 97-124.
40. Peng, Dajin. 2004. Invisible Linkages: A Regional Perspective of East Asian Political Economy. International Studies Quarterly, 46(3): 423-447.
41. Qin, Yanqing. 2010. International Society as a Process: Institutions, Identities, and China’s Peaceful Rise. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3: 129-153.
42. Ravenhill, John. 1998. Cycles of Middle Power Activism: Constraint and Choice in Australia and Canadian Foreign Policies. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 52(3): 309-327.
43. Riddell-Dixon, Elizabeth. 2005. Canada’s Human Security Agenda: Walking to Talk? International Journal, 60: 1067-92.
44. Robertson, Jeffrey. 2007. South Korea as a Middle Power: Capacity, Behavior, and now Opportunity. International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 16(1): 151-174.
45. Rozman, Gilbert. 2007. South Korea and the Sino-Japanese Rivalry: a Middle Power`s Options with the East Asia Core Triangle. The Pacific Review, 20(2): 197-220.
46. Samuelson, Paul A. 1954. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4): 387-389.
47. Soesastro, Hadi. 2006. Regional Integration in East Asia: Achievements and Future Prospects. Asian Economic Policy Review, 1: 215-234.
48. Solis, Mireya and Saori Katada. 2007. Understanding East Asian Cross-Regionalism: An Analytical Framework. Pacific Affairs, East Asian Cross-Regionalism 80(2): 229-258.
49. Stubbs, Richard. 2002. ASEAN Plus Three. Emerging East Asian Regionalism? Asian Survey, 42(3): 440-455.
50. Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy is what states make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. Journal International Organization , 46(2): 391-425.
51. Wendt, Alexander. 1994. Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review, 88: 384-96.
52. Yoshimatsu, Hidetaka. 2005. Political Leadership, Informality, and Regional Integration in East Asia: The Evolution of ASEAN Plus Three. European Journal of East Asian Studies, 4(2): 205-232.
53. Yoshimatsu, Hidetaka. 2010. Understanding Regulatory Governance in Northeast Asia: Environmental and Technological Cooperation among China, Japan and Korea. Asian Journal of Political Science, 18(3): 227-247.
54. Young, Oran. 1989. The Politics of International Regime Formation: Managing Natural Resources and the Environment. International Organization, 43(3): 349-375.
55. Young, Oran. 1991. Political Leadership and Regime Formation: on the Development of Institutions in International Society. International Organization, 45(3): 281-308.
56. Zhang, Xiaoming. 2006. The Rise of China and a Community Building in East Asia. Asian Perspective, 30(3): 129-148.
Book Chapters
57. Bélanger, Louis and Gordon Mace. 1999. Building Role and Region: Middle States and Regionalism in the Americas. In The Americas In Transition: The Contours of Regionalism, eds. Louis Bélanger and Gordon Mace. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. 1999. Electronic Version (http://www.ciaonet.org/book/mace/index.html): 111-126.
58. Bélanger, Louis and Gordon Mace. 1997. Middle Powers and Regionalism in the Americas: The Cases of Argentina and Mexico. In Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers After the Cold War, ed. Andrew Cooper. London: Palgrave Macmillan: 164-183.
59. Choo, Jaewoo. 2009. South Korea and East Asian Regionalism, Policies, Norms and Challenges. In Governance and Regionalism in Asia, ed. N. Thomas. London: Routledge: 93-115.
60. Cox, Robert. W. 1996. Social Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory (1981). In Approaches to World Order, Robert W. Cox and Timothy J. Sinclair eds. New York: Cambridge University: 85-123.
61. Evans, Paul. 2005. Between Regionalism and Regionalization: Policy Networks and the Nascent East Asian Institutional Identity. In Remapping East Asia, The Construction of a Region, ed. T.J. Pempel. Cornell University Press: 195-215.
62. Hall, Stuart. 2003. Cultural Identity and Diaspora. In Theorizing Diaspora: a reader, eds. Jana Evans Braziel and Anita Mannur. Blackwell: 233-246.
63. Henrikson, Alan. 1997. Middle Powers as Managers: International Mediation within, across and outside Institutions. In Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers After the Cold War, ed. Andrew Cooper. London: Macmillan: 46-72.
64. Higgott, Richard and Martina Timmermann. 2008. Institutionalizing East Asia: Learning Lessons from Europe on Regionalism, Regionalization, Identity and Leadership. In Institutionalizing Northeast Asia: Regional steps towards Global Governance, eds. Martina Timmermann and Jitsuo Tsuchiyama. United Nations University Press, Tokyo: 43-62.
65. Ikenberry, John and Michael Mastanduno. 2003. Introduction: International Relations Theory and the Search for Regional Stability. In International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific. Columbia Univeristy Press. New York: 1-21
66. Keohane, Robert. 1993. Institutional Theory and the Realist Challenge after the Cold War. In Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate, ed. David Baldwin. New York: Columbia University Press: 269-300.
67. Keohane, Robert and Joseph Nye. 2000. Introduction. In Governance in a Globalizing World, eds. Joseph Nye and J.D. Donahue. Washington, DC. Brookings: 1-41.
68. Kim, Byung-kook. 2008. Between China, America, and North Korea: South Korea’s Hedging. In China’s Ascent: Power, Security, and the Future of International Politics, ed. Robert S. Ross and Zhu Feng. New York: Cornell University: 191-217.
69. Kim, Heungchong and Yunjong Wang. 2007. Financial integration in East Asia : which role for Korea? In Korea in the new Asia : East Asian integration and the China Factor, ed. Francoise Nicolas. Routledge: 52-68.
70. Kim, Heungchong. 2009. The Political Economy of European Economic and Monetary Union Negotiation and Implication for East Asia. In Towards monetary and financial integration in East Asia, eds. KoŻichi Hamada, Beate Reszat, Ulrich Volz. Edward Elgar Publishing: 41-60.
71. Krasteva, Anna. 2005. The concept of Identities. In Cultural Identity, Pluralism and Globalization, Volume I, ed. John P. Hogan. The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, Washington D.C.: 94-128.
72. Lee, Sook-Jong. 2008. Korean Perspectives on East Asian Regionalism. In East Asian Multilateralism Prospects for Regional Stability, eds. Kent E. Calder and Francis Fukuyama. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore: 198- 213.
73. Malamud, Andres. 2003. Presidentialism and Mercosur: A Hidden Cause for a Successful Experience. In Comparative Regional Integration, Theoretical Perspectives. ed. Finn Laursen. The International Political Economy of New Regionalism Series. Ashgate: 53-74
74. Neack, Laura. 1995. Linking State Type with Foreign Policy Behaviour. In Foreign Policy Analysis: Continuity and Change in its Second Generation, eds. Laura Neack, Jeanne A.K. Hey and Patrick J. Haney. Englewood Cliffs. N.J. Prentice-Hall: 215-228.
75. Nossal, Kim and Richard Stubbs. 1997. Mahathir`s Malaysia: An Emerging Middle Power? In Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers After the Cold War, ed. Andrew Cooper. London: Palgrave Macmillan: 147-163.
76. Oelsner, Andrea. 2003. Two Sides of the Same Coin: Mutual Perceptions and Security Community in the Case of Argentina and Brazil. In Comparative Regional Integration, Theoretical Perspectives. ed. Finn Laursen. The International Political Economy of New Regionalism Series. Ashgate: 185-206
77. Oshimura, Takashi. 2008. The function and dysfunction of identity in an Institutionalizing Process: The case of Northeast Asia. In Institutionalizing Northeast Asia: Regional steps towards Global Governance, eds. Martina Timmermann and Jitsuo Tsuchiyama. United Nations University Press, Tokyo: 118-130.
78. Osterud, Oyvind. 1992. Regional Great Powers. In Regional Great Powers in International Politics, ed. Iver B. Newmann. Basingstoke: St. Martin`s Press: 1-15.
79. Peters, Guy. 1998. Political Institutions, Old and New. In A New Handbook of Political Science, eds., Robert E. Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingeman. Oxford University Press: 205-219.
80. Rozman, Gilbert. 2008. Northeast Asian Regionalism at a Crossroads: Is an East Asian Community in sight? In Institutionalizing Northeast Asia: Regional steps towards Global Governance, eds. Martina Timmermann and Jitsuo Tsuchiyama. United Nations University Press, Tokyo: 83-97.
81. Timmermann, Martina. 2008. Introduction, Institutionalizing Northeast Asia Challenges and Opportunities. In Institutionalizing Northeast Asia: Regional steps towards Global Governance, eds. Martina Timmermann and Jitsuo Tsuchiyama. United Nations University Press, Tokyo: 1-18.
82. Van Langenhove, Luk and Maria Cristina Macovei. 2009. Regional formations and Global Governance. In World-Regional Social Policy and Global Governance New research and policy agendas in Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America, eds. Bob Deacon, Maria Cristina Macovei, Luk Van Langenhove and Nicola Yeates. Routledge: 9-26.
83. Verdun, Amy. 2011. The Role of the Benelux in the European Integration Process: Implications for East Asia. In Regionalism, Economic Integration and Security in Asia: A Political Economy Approach, eds. Jehoon Park, T. J. Pempel and Heungchong Kim. Edward Elgar Publishing: 92-101.
84. Yoshimatsu, Hidetaka. 2009. Japan and Regional Governance in East Asia: Expanding Involvement, Stagnated Influence? In Governance and Regionalism in Asia, ed. N. Thomas. London: Routledge: 66-92.
Other Sources
85. Acharya, Amitav. 2007. The Imagined Community of East Asia? Paper presented to the 48th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, Chicago. February 28th- March 3rd.
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/8/1/0/5/p181055_index.html
86. Byun, See-woon. 2011. The China-South Korea-Japan Triangle: The Shape of Things to Come? Asia Pacific Bulletin, East-West Center, Washington. Number 115, June 06.
87. East Asia Study Group Final Report. 2002. Presented at the ASEAN + 3 Summit, Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Official document available online:
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/asean/pmv0211/report.pdf
88. East Asia Vision Group Final Report. 2001. "Towards an East Asian Community: A region of Peace, Prosperity and Progress." Handed personally by its ghost writer Lee, Shin-wha.
89. East Asia Vision Group II Final Report. 2012. Presented at the ASEAN + 3 Summit, Phnom Penh, Cambodia. "Realising an East Asia Economic Community by 2020." Handed Personally by Korean MOFAT official, Head of ASEAN, APT and EAS Divisions.
90. Hurrell, Andrew et al. 2000. Paths to Power: Foreign Policy Strategies of Intermediate States. Working Paper Number 244. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Latin American Program.
91. Kasahara, Shigehisa. 2004. The Flying Geese Paradigm: A Critical Study of its Application to East Asian Regional Development. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Discussion Papers No. 169.
http://ideas.repec.org/p/unc/dispap/169.html
92. Kim, Sung-han. 2009. Northeast Asian Regionalism in Korea. In New Regional Security Architecture for Asia, CFR project directed by Sheila A. Smith. Council on Foreign Relations:
www.cfr.org/content/publications/.../NEAsiaSecurityKim.pdf
93. Lee, Shin-wha. 2008. The Evolution of Korea`s Strategy for Regional Cooperation. In [Gukchegwon gyeyongu] Work supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant funded by the Korean Government. 13(1): 89-113. (KRF-2006-005-J02503)
94. Leonard, Mark and Hans Kundnani. 2013. Think Again: European Decline. Foreign Policy:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/29/think_again_european_decline
95. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Republic of Korea. Diplomatic White Paper 2009: http://www.mofat.go.kr
96. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Republic of Korea. Diplomatic White Paper 2011: http://www.mofat.go.kr
97. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Republic of Korea. Global Korea: The National Security Strategy of the Republic of Korea, 2009: http://www.mofat.go.kr
98. Munakata, Naoko. 2002. Whither East Asian Economic Integration? CNAPS Working Paper. Brookings Institute.
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2002/06northeastasia_munakata.aspx.
99. Munakata, Naoko. 2003. The Impact of the Rise of China and Regional Economic Integration in Asia: A Japanese Perspective. Statement before the US - China Economic and Security Review Commission. December 4, 2003.
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/cnaps/munakata20031204.pdf
100. Park, Geun-hye. 2012. A Plan for Peace in North Asia, Cooperation among Korea, China and Japan Needs a Correct Understanding of History. In The Wall Street Journal. November 12th, 2012.
101. Soeya, Yoshihide and Geun Lee. 2012. The Rise of China and the Changing Trends of Middle Power’s China Policy: The case of Korea and Japan. Public Symposium at the Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University. April 27th.
102. Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat First Annual Report. Year 2011-2012. Obtained Directly with the Organization.
103. Yun, Chunji. 2002. Japan`s FTA Strategy and the East Asian Economic Bloc. Japan in the World SEKAI 6 99. Translated by Tomita Mari.
http://www.iwanami.co.jp/jpworld/text/FTA01.html |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
亞太研究英語博士學位學程(IDAS)
98265506
102 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098265506 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [亞太研究英語博/碩士學位學程(IDAS/IMAS)] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 550601.pdf | 1554Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 300 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
