The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Destination - East Asia > Comments

Destination - East Asia : Comments

By Graham Cooke, published 31/7/2006

Australia may soon have to confront the decision of whether or not to join a European Union-style East Asian community.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
The EU does a pretty neat line in paying French farmers to be inefficient and creating stupendous levels of regulation, but it has pretty much failed in its attempts to forge a continent-wide society based on common values. The movement towards a federal European superstate seems far slower than it was a decade or so ago, partly because the newer members have only recently emerged from the Soviet empire and have no real desire to be sucked into another one.

How likely, then, is "a European Union-style East Asian community"? Not very. An East Asian trade agreement would be of some value, but an EU-style administrative behemoth seems like a pretty unconvincing option for a region of such enormous diversity. If Western and Central Europe can't get it together, how is East Asia going to succeed?

And, if such a bizarre beast did miraculously come into existence, Australia would be incredibly foolish to want to be a member of it. Our history, values and institutions have far more in common with the nonexistent EU consensus than they would with its East Asian equivalent, but not nearly enough to make EU membership an attractive option for us. The UK – obviously the EU country with which we have the most in common – is a far from enthusiastic participant in Brussels’ bureaucratic quagmire. Why? Basic differences of values and institutions.

In an era when communication and transport technologies have made it infinitely easier to keep in touch over great distances, the quaint insistence on geographical regionalism seems increasingly blinkered and anachronistic. Of course Australia needs partnerships: we should work towards freer trade wherever we can, but for closer economic, administrative and governmental integration, we should be working more closely with countries that share our basic values, our history, our institutions.

The most obvious choices are New Zealand, Canada and the UK. Moves towards a federation of these four countries would be a far more rational enterprise than any “European Union-style” cross-cultural experiment.
Posted by Ian, Monday, 31 July 2006 12:07:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The fact that Mr. Cooke works for the housing industry automatically makes him suspect. That industry is all grow, grow, grow to the detriment of population, environment and prices. It is one of the main forces behind big immigration, and anything-goes social consequences.

We have good relationships with Asia now with regard to trade, culture and defence. We don’t need to form a club for big business.
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 31 July 2006 12:28:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia should not engage directly in any EU-inspired free market. What we should be doing is focusing on developing a special partnership with the EU (the opportunity to become a full member was lost years ago) and NAFTA whilst developing linkages with asia.

Australia is, and always will be, predominately a european country. Having lived and done business in Asia for nearly 20 years and Europe for 15 years before that, it is much easier to do business with people you share a common culture with. Thus the focus should be on fostering our historical ties with Europe whilst also embracing an asian economic, but not cultural or social, future. The best way to do this is via stronger ties with the EU and US whilst developing special partnerships with ASEAN and East Asian nations.

Asian nations will never - at a fundamental level - accept us as 'one of them' so we shouldn't try to change this, but instead work on developing our own unique identity - a european-dervied culture sitting on the edge of Asia and the pacific with bright, hard-working people. We don't need to 'belong' to any grouping to be strong.
Posted by ExpatinSingapore, Monday, 31 July 2006 12:34:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arguably the future world will be based on the free movement of capital and people (distorted by politics).

If one accepts that this is the most likely future then joining a political block is a dead end. However managing a path towards free trade including labour mobility will be of long term advantage.
Obviously the various costs in transacting trade (including trade in labour) will affect the quantity and profit of the trade.
Australian trade with Asia will obviously be a major component in our trade and thus must be an important component in our development.
Posted by 58, Monday, 31 July 2006 1:35:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think the EU has been spectacularly successful in promoting democracy. It's members have traded souvereignty for stability. After WWI most of Europe was democratic, a generation later, just prior to WWII most of the new democracies had collapsed. So far no members of the EU have abandoned democracy. Indeed the prospect of EU membership has created the impetus for much democratic reform and a couple of democratic revolutions.

Sure the EU has some bad points, the CAP is a response to the decade of food rationing _after_ WWII. I think that in due time it will be removed.

An asian block would be very different. The EU covers only 5% of the worlds population and has similar cultures and religions. Asia covers more than 50% of the worlds population and is culturally and religiously very diverse. Has vastly different political systems. Most nation have very recent souvereignty and strong nationalism. The big 4 in the EU have roughly similar populations. China and India dwarf everyone else.

I'd be surprised if anything EU-like survives the first stress test. Perhaps we should take the view that it took 50 years for the EU to get where it is now.

Should we be part of an asian block? I think so. By being a player we can at least represent our interests. If it is not going in a direction we like we can always jump out.
Posted by gusi, Monday, 31 July 2006 3:18:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that the article has a lot of merit. It does mean that Aussies will all have to learn a foreign language, but I have always felt that that was in any case an obligation on us all.

The thinking that the world is getting smaller is overdone. Time zone differences will always exist and it will always be quicker to travel to South east Asia than to Europe or America. I know because I deal with both.

No one has suggested that an Asian trade grouping will have the same uniformity as the EU. It will be predominently a trading area. There are differences between individual Asian countries as there are between them and us. The Asian trading block will be unusual but we either accept it and benefit or stay out and suffer.

For those who are curious and flexible it will be a wonderful challenge, for the arrogant and the Anglo-insular it will be a problem.
Posted by logic, Monday, 31 July 2006 8:29:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If it just like a NAFTA or Mercosur agreement I don't see what the big deal is. There is no loss of sovereignty, certainly no free movement of people and labour. That would be more like a multiway free trade agreement.
Posted by gusi, Monday, 31 July 2006 11:22:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is not an Asian country: not geographically and not culturally.

Geographically we do not fall into any obvious category. From Sydney, you look out towards New Zealand; from Perth, towards southern Africa; from Brisbane, towards the Pacific nations and the Americas; from Melbourne, Hobart and Adelaide, you face nothing but Antarctica. Only from the sparsely-populated northern edge of our continent do you see the gradual transition from Melanesia to Asia’s outer rim. India is closer to London than it is to Canberra.

Culturally, we are a neo-European, and more specifically a neo-British country. Being “Anglo-insular”, as the poster puts it, would make no sense, but choosing “Anglo-denial” is probably even more foolish. Taking part in increasing trade with East Asia has obvious benefits, but the article is suggesting more than that. Joining a “a European Union-style East Asian community”, which is to say sharing our sovereignty with countries that do not share our basic values, is quite another matter and would be very foolish indeed.

If we are going to be in the business of sharing sovereignty, it should be along the same lines as our own Federation a century ago: with other British or neo-British polities. The six Australian colonies were far more remote from each other in the late 19th century than Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (CANZUK) are in the early 21st.
Posted by Ian, Tuesday, 1 August 2006 2:30:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What is "logical" - to make a pun - is to work towards what is in our national interests. We don’t share a common culture with "Asia" (a term so broad as to be almost meaningless) - especially East Asia.

It is also very clear from comments from a variety of government and opposition figures across South East and East Asia that we will never be considered an Asian nation. There was a concerted effort to keep Australia entirely out of the east-Asian summit. We should not try and be something that we are not - Asian.

By all means, integrate economically - but joining an EU-style east-Asian system would be a disaster for Australia's national interests. We should be pressing for a special partnership with the EU, developing closer ties with NAFTA, working to transform the Commonwealth into a free trade bloc, and engaging trade-wise with Asia - in that order of importance.

There is nothing wrong with being 'Anglo-insular'. Western culture is the only culture on the planet that (apparently) values 'multiculturalism'. The Japanese, for example, pride themselves on hegemony, as do the Chinese - their record of working towards a common Chinese language and singular culture (others would call it repression of minorities) speaks for it's self.

Indeed, having worked for as long as I have in Asia I find it laughable and "illogical" to use the "Anglo-insular' jibe as Asian cultures are amongst the most insular in the world.

For those who are curious, flexible, and sensitive to our European-derived culture, it is challenge to strengthen our ties with countries of our cultural background and not have it diluted for the sake of dollars alone.

For the arrogant and the ignorant who assume that it is a problem to be aware of our national cultural background, it appears obvious that we should jump at the opportunity if it is presented. The reality is that the opportunities for Australia are endless.

We can be a meeting place between Asian and Europe, after all, that's what Asia sees us as: a European outpost on the edge of Asia.
Posted by ExpatinSingapore, Tuesday, 1 August 2006 12:01:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ian & Expatsingapore are correct. The distance between Australia and Asia is much greater than the physical distance.

In anycase, if Australia should be a part of East Asia why shouldn't Europe be part of East Asia ?
What, what what ! I hear you say. Well North East Asia is closer to Europe than it is to Australia.
Pull up the Ionspheric Prediction Service web site and go to HF services and prediction tools and plug in the lat/long of Warsaw and Pyongyang.
Do the same for Alice Springs and get an education.
Singapore might be closer to Australia and it is East Asia but I suggest you throw out your Mercator's projection maps.
You will be surprised what the real world looks like.
Just because aircraft take longer to get to Europe than Asia does not mean we should hitch our wagon to somebody elses star.

In any case the global market is living on borrowed time and it will not be more than 10 years before all trade will be really local.
In five years I predict that the various free trade zones will close or start to fail because of transport costs and difficulties.
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 1 August 2006 6:09:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz, free trade zones won't close because of transport costs, they will close when the prosperity that is promised by western nations and multi-nationals is never delivered.

Greater co-operation between ASEAN is probably a desireable thing but comparing anything to the EU is very problematic. The EU is very unique and its unlikely its formula could be emulated anywhere.
Posted by Carl, Wednesday, 2 August 2006 10:20:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy