Home Contact Us
Search :
   

Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#2702, 12 October 2008
 
Towards Comprehensive Economic Partnership in East Asia
Mohit Anand
Research Officer, IPCS
e-mail: mohit@ipcs.org
 

The Comprehensive Economic Partnership in East Asia (CEPEA) initiative, floated by Japan, has emerged as one of the most important steps being taken under the East Asia Summit (EAS). The idea for CEPEA was proposed by Japan at the 2nd EAS held in January 2007. The working group, constituted from among the member states, has already finalized a draft framework for the CEPEA, which will be tabled for discussion at the 4th EAS, to be held in Bangkok in December 2008. Focusing on a range of issues including trade in goods and services, investment and intellectual property rights among others, CEPEA hopes to contribute towards a free, fair and rule-based economic integration process in the region.

The CEPEA has been proposed with the aim of strengthening the East Asian Economic Partnership Agreement with the ultimate objective of developing a regional production network, and trade and investment liberalization along with system facilitation and institutional capacity-building. The CEPEA has been initiated along with the proposal to establish the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), which aims at conducting in-depth policy research and making policy recommendations to promote economic integration in East Asia. ERIA is meant to provide the basis of cooperation and to sustain attempts at narrowing the economic disparities in the region. It is envisioned as providing the intellectual support to CEPEA to ensure strong partnership between various stakeholders in order to bolster the potential gains associated with CEPEA. The dual framework is characteristic of the Japanese approach of inculcating a two-fold method of liberalization and cooperation. Together, both the initiatives are aimed at providing an all-encompassing framework for economic integration and regional cooperation in East Asia.

Japan's emphasis on such a framework rests on its attempt to ensure that prosperity accruing from effective economic integration of East Asia will connect Japan's economy with Asia's growth. Understandably, Japan's economy is in dire need of avenues to revitalize itself and check its decade-long economic slump. It is thus essential for Japan to ensure that its economy is a principle element of successful East Asian integration. In the light of China's established economic might in the region, it can also be inferred that a dwindling Japan wants to safeguard its position in East Asia. Evidently, Japan's insistence on the inclusion of India along with Australia and New Zealand as part of the larger integration process highlights its concerns regarding an economically and strategically balanced East Asia.

For India, being part of the CEPEA would mean enlargement of its export market from just Southeast Asia to all of East Asia. More importantly, it would open definite avenues for consolidating its participation in an East Asian Community. Benefits from such developments are obvious in terms of strengthened economic and political support from the regional bloc along with opportunities for increased influence on the region.
 

There is a sense that the CEPEA serves the same purpose as the East Asia-FTA (EA-FTA) that is currently being worked out. In this regard, it has been clarified that the CEPEA has an exclusive purpose of facilitating trade liberalization and economic cooperation. Trade liberalization has been perceived as the outcome towards which processes would be facilitated by the CEPEA which would not actually include liberalization measures per se. In the context of the EA-FTA, CEPEA stands to ensure the smooth and effective establishment of the FTA and does not include actual working out of the modalities of trade liberalization.

There are however, definite concerns regarding the perceived success of the CEPEA in the context of regional realities in East Asia. China's continued reluctance vis-a-vis the EAS still lingers over the future prospect of the body as an overarching framework for economic integration encompassing its member states. While the CEPEA suggests a wide-ranging and comprehensive economic initiative, it does not really represent the process of regional economic integration, but integration among select member states in the region. An economic partnership agreement looking to consolidate the region would fall short of its objectives if it does not effectively incorporate all players, such as North Korea and Taiwan in its focus.

It also remains to be seen if the CEPEA reinforces existing attempts at trade liberalization or acts as an impediment to them. Multiple initiatives towards trade liberalization in the region are exacerbating the existing risks pertaining to overlaps and the consequent 'noodle bowl effect.' The CEPEA needs to be able to reconcile the multiple trade agreements being pursued in the region and ensure that inherent overlaps do not complicate and jeopardize the integration process. A lot will depend on its ability to provide a framework for consolidation and mediation.

Finally, it is interesting to note that the CEPEA comes as a far-reaching extension of the underlying regional integration experiment of ASEAN. The CEPEA's attempt to provide the institutional impetus for an East Asian Community rests largely on the effective integration of ASEAN. Arguably, ASEAN itself has a long way ahead in realizing its objectives of a consolidated Southeast Asia. The CEPEA, with its foundations in ASEAN, needs to ensure that it does not merely end up trying to achieve too much too soon.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary

D Suba Chandran
Across the Durand Line: Who is in Control Now? Will That Change?
Taliban Talks and the Four Horsemen: Between Peace and Apocalypse
Pakistan: Talks about Talks with the Taliban, Again
Dateline Islamabad

Salma Malik
Pakistan and TTP: Dialogue or Military Action?
The Musharraf Trial & Beyond

Dateline Kabul

Mariam Safi
Afghanistan, US and the Peace Process: A Deal with the Taliban in 2014?
Dhaka Discourse

Prof Delwar Hossain
Bangladesh: Domestic Politics and External Actors
Bangladesh Post Elections 2014: Redefining Domestic Politics?

Eagle Eye

Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
US in Asia: A 'Non-Alignment' Strategy?
Indo-US Strategic Partnership Post Khobragade: The Long Shadow
East Asia Compass

Dr Sandip Mishra
North Korean Peace Gestures and Inter-Korea Relations
Japan: Implications of Indiscriminate Assertiveness
China, Japan, Korea and the US: Region at Crossroads

Himalayan Frontier

Pramod Jaiswal
Chinese Inroads to Nepal
Constituent Assembly-II: Rifts Emerging
Nepal: The Crisis over Proportional Representation and the RPP Divide
Maritime Matters

Vijay Sakhuja
Increasing Maritime Competition: IORA, IONS, Milan and the Indian Ocean Networks
China in the Indian Ocean: Deep Sea Forays
Iran Navy: Developing Long Sea Legs

Middle Kingdom

DS Rajan
China in the Indian Ocean: Competing Priorities
China-Japan Friction: How can India Respond?
Nuke Street

Amb Sheelkant Sharma
Nuclear Security Summit 2014 and the NTI Index
Nuclear Power: An Annual Report Card

Red Affairs

Bibhu Prasad
Maoists in the Northeast: Reality and Myth-Making
Surrender of Gudsa Usendi: Ominous beginning for the Naxals?
South Asian Dialectic

PR Chari
Federalism: Centre as Coordinator and Adjudicator
Limits of Federalism

Spotlight West Asia

Amb Ranjit Gupta
Saudi Arabia-US Estrangement: Implications for the Indian Subcontinent
Syria Today: Is Regime Change the Answer?
The Arab World: Trying Times Ahead
Strategic Space

Manpreet Sethi
US, China and the South Asian Nuclear Construct
Responding to Pakistan’s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: A Strategy for India

The Strategist

Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Strategic Non-Nuclear Weapons: An Essential Consort to a Doctrine of No First Use
 

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
India's Economic Competitiveness in ASEAN: A Comparison with China

India-ASEAN FTA: Implications for India

Trends in India-Indonesia Economic Relations

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2014
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July  August
 2013  2012  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006
 2005  2004  2003  2002  2001  2000  1999  1998
 1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map | IPCS Email
B 7/3 Lower Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, INDIA.
Tel: 91-11-4100 1900, 4165 2556, 4165 2557, 4165 2558, 4165 2559 Fax: (91-11) 41652560
Email:
© Copyright 2014, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
        Web Design by http://www.indiainternets.com