Comparison Of The Eu And Asean Regional System Politics Essay

Comparison Of The Eu And Asean roleal System Politics EssayThe Commissi iodiner for External Relations and europiuman locality constitution, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, verbalise The EU and ASEAN argon both successful examples of regional integrating in the world ASEANs integration is advancing. It is developing its institutions and organise experience.1Todays new set up regionalism intends to give solutions to developmental problems, however many another(prenominal) believe that these problems ar similarly the extension of many internal conflicts. This new regionalism is found on territorial coat and economies of scale as the traditional one, but it excessively explicates new fears from the new century.2The European Union (EU) and the Association of sou-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) are seen as examples, because both of them are part of the regionalism advance.3 roughly academics consider the EU as a world stick in miniature or dismantle as a blueprint for other re gions,4 bandage others believe that this model can be transferred to areas such as the ASEAN. Thus, the European Commission (EC) has stated that the EU supports those regions that want to emulate us.5However, many non-Europeans render insisted on how heavy it is to transfer the European model, because of the disparities in their history and socio-cultural background, their values and ideas, find of law,6 stagecoach of institutionalization, objectives and praxis, and so on.7 despite these differences, there are some commonalities for instance, both regions underline integrity and see of national sovereignty. Although, they differ in direct and channels, the European region applies the subsidiarity concept, while the Asian area believes in the doctrine of non-interference. In addition, both regions must encounter the new concept of pledge, like growth, stability, poverty alleviation, uncontrolled migration flows, energy, climate change, etcetera, based on their historical development, general geo semipolitical and economical constraints, and finally their internal organisation and consensus.8For this reason, the analysis of issues, such as the uncontrolled flows of migrations in ASEAN and the EU, would increase our agnizeing of the different measures choose in many areas as well as the features of their integration.At this sign point, some head teachers arise how can we compare the different regionalization workes? To what extent is it interest to compare these two regions? Is new regionalism an opportunity to purpose kindly problems? Thus, the purpose of this research is to understand their commonalities and divergences of these two regions based on two episodes at sea involving immigrants. These episodes are not referred to the political or economical field of operations as they used to be by contrast, they are based on immigration polity. I chose this example because it also reflects degrees of integration, relation with affable poli cies, charitable beings rights, and global law. It is not only a good example to understand their different integration coveres, but it is also a polemic website for both regions.This analyse is divided into five sections. The first section cater for introduce the metaphysical good example in which this study is supported. The second one give examine selected cases about immigration problems in the area of the Mediterranean coast deep down the EU area. The third section will explain the problems involved with the Burmese refugees in the South East coast within the ASEAN framework. The fourth part will compare both integration adjoines. These cases will help to exemplify the differences and similarities of both regions, and at the same time, they will allow us to explore how effective are regional strategy of ru little to benefit or protect their population. Finally, the conclusion will open doors for further research and procession in the systems.2. Theoretical fra meworkDifferent theoretical get ones have been use for this kind of studies. On one hand, realist, constructivist and liberal approaches have been applied for the study of the role of ideas and interests.9For instance, the constructivist approach states that in heterogeneous and newly formed regional groupings interregionalism may stimulate regional identity-building.10The realist approach, however, highlights power and balances as essential characteristics of inter- and transregional dealings11. On the other hand, in the last two decades new theoretical approaches have been developed, namely globalisation and regionalisation.12 sphericization is part of a process of internalization, and it is related to governance, since it implies the need to find alternatives for sustainable development, efficient and cobwebby government, as well as civic participation. Moreover, it has rateed the rule of law and a system of rights.13Many scholars understand it as a reform of the outside(a) system since the end of the Cold War,14a phenomenon which in some expression undermines the power of the states and their territorial dimension. Some governments are reluctant to reduce the regard of globalization to protect their territorial control. Regionalism is thus one of the outstrip decrees,15because Some issues can best be handled at the regional level among states that are heavily involved in overlapping interests.16Although the traditional economic model, through its dialogue and cooperation17in economy, trade18and binding foundments19among States, has favoured regionalism as a operator of stabilizing the area, some scholars have emphasized a series of differences which are significant for the development of this paperOld regionalismNew regionalismFormed in a bipolar Cold War systemFormed in a multipolar worldCreated from above (superpower intervention)Spontaneous process from the regions. motivating of cooperation to trucking rig new global challengesInward orie nted and protectionist in economic scatheOpen, compatible with an interdependent world economySpecific objectivesComprehensive, multidimensional processConcerned with relations among nation statesGlobal structural transformation, non-state actors are officious and operating at several levels.Harmonization of trade policies leading to deeper economic integration, with political integration as a realistic future result. alteration of a region from relative heterogeneity to increased homogeneity in regard to culture, security, economic policies and political regimes. stock Own engagement (based on Bjrn Hettne, Globalization, the new regionalism, and East Asia)The New regionalism expanded the regional framework beyond European butt againsts. Today, ASEAN has get down the second most advanced regional system,20and its general purposes are (1) to secure peace (2) to provide external security (3) to carry out economic tasks (4) to address environmental issues and (5) to secure human rights.21Brian Dai argued that the EU is the best example to demonstrate that regional integration is the best solution to regional peace and security as well as bringing common welfare to the population.22European integration the case of immigrants at sea and their rightsThe EU is the oldest regional system although it is still changing, not only in structure, but also deepening its policies, it is a unique supranational institutional entity with specific characteristics (1) collective memory of the devastation of WW II (2) overcrowded region in terms of population and the number of states (3) similar political system (4) alike social welfare systems and (5) relatively similar culture and religion.23In 2004, the Hague programme, called modifying Freedom, Security and Justice in the EU, was adopt it is based on one of the principal(prenominal) objectives of the EU to compose an area of unbosomdom, security and justice. It adopted common legislative instruments and improvement o f coordination of national policies, practical cooperation, and regular data exchange surrounded by Member States (MSs) and the Commission.24In this context, it is important to clarify the commentary of illegal immigration given by the Commission it includes third-country nationals who enter the filth of a MS illegally by land, sea and air.25MSs accepted to create a common immigration policy at EU level. The Commissions proposals had become EU legislation in 2005 a debate was re-launched with the Green publisher on an EU approach to managing economic migration later that year, a Policy image on Legal Migration was adopted listing the actions and legislative initiatives. In September 2007, the Commission presented the Third Annual Report on Migration and Integration, which monitors the process of admission and integration of third-country immigrants in the EU.26The EU developed a Global Approach to migration which supports general normals such as subsidiarity, solidarity, huma n rights, fundamental freedoms, recover to asylum, and Geneva Convention,27thourgh which foster cooperation with third countries, particularly in the Mediterranean. This approach is within the European Neighbourhood Policy framework through bilateral dialogues. However, the approach and adoption of those general principles sought to be endured by strong political committeemen, particularly because resources should be mobilised to fight smuggling and trafficking networks, and protect the immigrants asking for asylum.28 in that location are some cases described below in which immigrants have been found in waters of the Mediterranean sea. Initially, they were not rescued because of MSs national interests. Additionally, many other cases have been reported during recent years.29The first case took holding in May 2007 an Italian news agency informed that 27 men coming from Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Niger, Senegal and Togo asked for help to a Maltese trawlers tuna fis h pen, Budafel. The ship-owner did not provide assistance to the immigrants. In the meantime, Maltese and Libyan governance were engaged in diplomatic dialogues to clarify who had to take righteousness for the immigrants the Italian Coastguard was notified about the incident and took the responsibility for them.30The second case also was in May 2007 26 people were recued by the Spanish crusade Monfalco. This boat was between Libya and Malta waters. The ship-owner did not have space on tabular array for all the immigrants, but Maltese authorities refused to allow the people to disembark. The Spanish government thus made the decision to bring them to Spain. They claimed that they could be possible applicants who appear to have come from the Ivory Coast, a country at war.31However, this humanitarian argument is not always used by the Spanish government, as was the case of the two ships Marine I and Happy Day.In both cases, Maltese authorities did not rescue the immigrants or arrang e a safety place. Although there always is another side of the coin and Maltese officials declared and provided documents to defend themselves from these accusations. Despite this fact, Maltese authorities knew that Libya had not ratified the 1951 Geneva Convention, thus their practices towards immigrants or asylum seekers did not respect their rights. For this reason, Malta government violated art. 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), art. 33 of the Geneva Convention, art. 3 of the UN Convention against Torture and art. 7 of the global Covenant on Civil and governmental Rights. In addition, Malta authorities also infringed the International Maritime Legislation, which is related to the non refoulement principle.32These incidents prompted the Council to discuss a system of sharing responsibilities (COREPER).33In May 2008, COREPER drafted Return Directive, which stated that MSs were not have to assist the immigrants without legal costs. It was adopted by the European Parliament (EP) and Council at the end of the year, covering common standards and procedures for returning illegal immigrants.34The same year, the junction Operation Nautilus was launched, which conjured the control in Mediterranean borders.35By contrast, the EP did not share the same opinion and declared that MSs should respect the International Law on Human Rights, Asylum and Refugee Law, and ECHR, and that new legislation should be passes to fill the holes in the current law,36especially on the the rescue and handle operations of the immigrants.374. ASEAN integrationASEAN integration started with abstract ideas, asymmetric national interests and competing for hegemony and born(p) within a communist threat period.38Its members wanted to establish a new period outside the Cold War paradigm. The ASEAN was not created to answer conflicts among members, but rather to become a forum based on the non-interference principle where members could discuss issues not related wi th sensitive matters.39In this context, a new concept appears to support the economic integration, Confucian capitalism, but afterwards the financial crisis in 1997 it lost supporters.40However, the economic integration originally was not the aim, a growing global competition forced ASEAN should pay more than attention to these issues.41After the Free Trade Area (AFTA) was created, their cooperation has been deeper and covers service, finance, investment and financial sectors.42Some scholars agree that ASEAN+3 process is even a more important and complex cooperation than ASEAN itself.43In 1998, during the 6th ASEAN Summit, the Hanoi Plan of save (HPA) was adopted promoting social development. The same year, ASEAN ministers on Rural Development and need Eradication establi slop the live up to Plan on Social safety Nets in Jakarta.44During the 3rd Meeting of ASEAN, Maung Htay, ASEAN Director-General of Immigration Department, stated that an improvement of the cooperation on im migration issues was required and accepted the idea of creating an Ad hoc High take aim Experts Group on immigration issues organized in the Philippines 2000. In addition, Htay also declared that ASEAN Vision 2020 and HPA will contribute to conduct this matter.45Steps ahead were undertaken when, during the 6th Meeting, a work programme was launched entailing practical initiatives and measures, and also the Plan of Action established in the Philippines 2000.46Moreover, in October 2007, during the 6th ASEAN Peoples Assembly (APA), the question of Myanmar and human rights was tackled, and the implications of the Human Rights Body in the ASEAN affiance, were discussed.47The situation of refugees and human rights are of concern, especially the Karen or Karenni, a Muslim ethnic group in Burma. Thailand shares about 2000 km of border with Burma with a great flow of refugees,48and around 140.000 refugees live in nine camps in Thailand,49a situation divided up by countries like Malaysia, Bangladesh and India. The subhuman conditions of these refugees is complicated, because new generations have been born in the camps and they are forbidden to leave,50and suffer harasment and abuses from smugglers, detention, discrimination.51The Thai government, however, pays no attention to international organizations and wants to send them back to Myanmar, allowing no more boats to disembark on its coasts.52The main problem is that neither Thailand nor other asylum countries for Burmese refugees had not gestural the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees or the 1967 Protocol.53To them, refugees are illegal immigrants.54ASEAN has a policy of constructive engagement, but it is more complex since it has semi-supporters as China and India, interested in its natural resources. ASEAN members failed to tackle this question in March 2009,55and in the Bali Process in Indonesia. The issue was not discussed at the plenary academic term or in the concluding statement.56The Working Group for ASEAN Human Rights apparatus remind the Myanmar Government that it should respect the fundamental rights of its citizens. It also recalls that its entrance in 1997 compromised a long-term plan towards democratization. In fact, Myanmar has to achieve the ASEAN Vision 2010 as well, in which its Working Group declared, a peaceful and stable Southeast Asia, where the causes for conflict have been eliminated through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law.57ComparisonThis comparison is based on Brzells model58in which similarities and differences in regard to values and identity, institutional design, nature of rules, domestic level actors, and conflicts among them are identified. This section will discuss the differences which are subdivided into five components ideas, institutionalization, domestic level, political field, and economic field. The cases we saw above illustrate these disparities and similitudes and this comparison should shed some light to better understand the reactio ns, mechanicss, channels, behaviours, further steps, etc.SimilaritiesDespite controversial opinions, the EU and ASEAN have several similarities, which have been pointed out by Underhill.59But in spite of these similarities, parking lot and Kim60added that both regions have a sense of Community and experienced similar difficulties during the current financial crisis, while some academics would rather suggest that the ASEAN Economic Community is an idea invigorate by the EEC and expressed in similar wording.61Both regions had to tackle similar security issues which raise new challenges. A holistic approach is required in order to face these new matters, and particularly to enhance immigration law and cooperation. The differences can be observed in the quest figure (Franck et al., pp. 306-307)DifferencesIdeasEuropean UnionASEANAfter WW II, ideas generated by politiciansToday politicians + intellectuals + corporationProject based on idealistic concepts from intellectualsFrance and G ermany allianceChina and lacquer still workingGermany recognised its war crimesJapan did not recognized them reluctant to join ASEAN+3, proposals ASEAN+6Horrors of WW II, origin of the integration in EuropeMembers do not have a common history forgive concept of Europe 2762Unclear concept of Asia lack of clearly defined borders, common culture and religionWestern values democracy, respect of universal human rights, rule of law. They are codified and legally-bindingAsian identity, Asian family, Asian Values community, capitalism, and relativism Decoded and not legally-bindingIdentity based on 50 years of integrationAsianism based on Sino-center world, protectionist tendencies, for centuriesCleavages based on social welfare between west and east are decreasing. There are not latent conflictsStrong cleavages based on ideology respect latent conflicts between north and southEU is a prompt landmassIt is an enormous archipelago difficulties for contacts, transport, mobility, etc. chara cter reference Own elaboration based on the following authors Kim, Berkofsky, Park Kim, Rland, Franck, Defraigne, Moriam et al.InstitutionalizationEUASEANHigh level institutionalizationLow level institutionalizationCommon institutions built on treaties and rule of law.E.g. OSCE, Council, ECHR, etc.No common institutions built on voluntary commitments and weaker tradition of law. E.g. APEC, ASEM, ASF elected structure precondition for integrationNetwork-style interpersonal and lax relationsUS supported integration multilateralismUS did/do not support integration, choice of bilateralismPhilosophy more complex issues, deeper institutionalizationPhilosophy informal contacts and negotiationsAlliances between official and civilian actorsCivilian organizations started to be involveLessonsformal and informal practices should coexist as well as hard-and-fast and flexible toolsSource Own elaboration based on the following authors Dong Heidul, Cuyvers, Berkofsky, Park Kim, Franck, Defra igne, Moriam et al.Domestic LevelEUASEANStrong normative principlesNeed a set of normative principles, e.g. Myanmar is not only about HR miscellany of Supranational and Intergovernmental structure Commission (propose), Council and EP (pass or reject), and MS implement or sanction.Intergovernmental structureDecision-making process unanimity, co-decision, assent, consultationDecision-making process consensus and unanimityHarmonisation with strict legal basisBuilding harmonization, not legal basisTreatiesAgreementsCharter adopted 2007 propose framework and legal foundation, restructure mechanisms and improve decision-making process. Strengthen institutions.63Source Own elaboration based on the following authors Underhill, Laursen, Franck, Defraigne, Moriam et al.Political fieldEUASEANFar from a single political actor, but some consistencyHigh level of fragmentationMS mob sovereignty in some areas = EU disposes deeper and more powerful mechanism of solidarityMS reluctant to pool sovere ignty = national approach = less mechanismEuropean Structural FundsSub-regional cooperation, e.g. Informal and facilitated by ADB, who supplies technical, administrative and logistical supportFixed exchange rate system on macro-economic solidarity. E.g. wealthier countries support weakerFloating exchange rate system on macro-economic solidarity. E.g. part to erode social attainmentsFree movement of goods, services, people, labour, etc.Not free movement goods, labour, etc.Social policies and cooperation European Social Fund.Subsidiarity principleLisbon Treaty sets up a social agenda, but not concrete progressNational approach, far away from the development of social policies.Some actions 1998, Hanoi Plan Action poverty reduction 1998, Action Plan on Social Safety NetsSource Own elaboration based on the following authors Underhill, Laursen, Park Kim, Ruelan, and Cuyvers.Economic fieldEUASEANMonetary UnionSingle mart unclear notion, especially for blood line and consumersTransparent and accountable financial and banking systemNeed to create transparent and accountable financial and banking systemEU relies on its own institutionsNeed to rely on non-ASEAN institutions, e.g. 1992, ADB assisted Greater Mekong Sub-region for economic cooperationSuccessful emu needs political willingnessEU is the only successful single marketAFTA is still unclear, deadline 2010.AEC is far away from the EU single market, e.g. it does not have common external tariff policy to create customs union.It has two main preconditions high level of economic integration and independent discriminatory institutionsCustom Union, no need of border inspectionNeed border inspection, restrictions.European Monetary Union 1999 weak mechanism due to the monetarist edict of the ECBChiang Mai Initiative64of ASEAN+3 creation of a network of bilateral switch over arrangements throw rate fixed and stable influences financial integrationExchange rate volatility, e.g. during financial crisis caused more eco nomic problems, reduced economic growth.Source Own elaboration based on the following authors Laursen, Dong Heidul, Plummer, Underhill, Berkofsky, and European Policy Center.ConclusionAs we have seen along the paper, regional organisations are important for the international system and embrace a multilateral approach, which tries to solve problems with different means other than military solutions. Regionalism is a good formula to provid