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.

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.

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.

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.

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.