What's new

North East Asian Union? Exploring the potential of an NEA integration

I believe other members here already told you what the answers are, but if you insist.
This generation will not back down on their territorial claims, ergo its useless to talk to them about what you want. Hence the Greater East Asia project needs to move to the next generation. If they are not ready too, then move it again until the time is ripe and they realize its for their own benefit and survival. I believe the future generations can pull this off, this generation? not so much.

Yea I agree with that. Just that the nationalism that the current generation possess, is a problem between CN-JP and wasn’t caused by any third party. So take the US out of the Asia theater, and there will still be this obstacle called nationalism...and members here possess that nationalism, even while they talk about the NEAU.


The framework that both sides would like to remain in is through the historical pathway that Deng Xiaopeng and Takeo Fukuda both agreed upon in, "setting aside disputes and pursue joint cooperation and joint development of the whole." Both Japan and China have national concerns, but the point that you're focusing on, which inclines towards a nation-specific focus of development rather than a region-wide specific. What we NEA members have been discussing about in this thread is focusing not on nation-specific concerns, but more so on a greater region-specific framework. You see in the myopic sense of national maritime issues such as the Senkakus / Diaoyutais --- by focusing on national claims , proves to be a barrier to the wider paradigm. What I have tried to assuage with other patriots here is that both Japan and China should consider the Senkakus / Diaoyutais as a 'shared' maritime region of Greater East Asia Union. In doing so we can re-establish the consensus of the East China Sea that both Japan and China had agreed to joint-develop. In fact there is actually a legalist framework that Beijing and Tokyo can refer to , which is actually in operation: the 2013 Tokyo-Taipei Maritime Fisheries Agreement. This agreement establishes a fisheries zone of operation where both Chinese Taiwanese fishing boats can fish with Japanese fishing boats and have both maritime surveillance ships from Japan and Taiwan collaborate in security interdiction and joint rescue operations. It has been a success, actually.

Ultimately,@William Hung , the barrier to creative dialogue has been on the onus on secluded nation specific arguments of territoriality. This closed ended dialogue style of the past actually is used by strategic threats to Japan and China as a means to sow division onto the 2nd and 3rd largest economies in the world; and the two most prolific East Asian societies. Ultimately I would like to see , through bilateral security communication systems, that Japan and China learn to synergize each other's ADIZ's, and to re-create a wider Regional ADIZ that can further reach into the Western and Central Pacific. Focus should be on complementing each other's strategic potential energy, instead of resisting.


I hope that can help clarify our position.

Let Great East Asia Rise ... like a Golden Phoenix as the cherry blossom falls unto the wet earth.





Examining Intergovernmentalism in Northeast Asia: Shaping Distrust to Cooperation




By: @Nihonjin1051, PH.D.



I also wanted to note that Japan, South Korea and China have been exhibiting a growing interest in political and economic cooperation since the 1990s. Japan , South Korea and China were able to develop economic and political cooperation through the use of the concept of multilayered Intergovernmentalism.

I want to make it known that political and economic cooperation within the framework of Northeast Asia is absolutely possible if we refer to the literature regarding European integration. I would like to cite the two dominate schools that theories the European integration process which include: 1) Neofunctionalism and 2) Intergovernmentalism. There are existing dichotomies between Intergovernmentalism and Neofunctionalism.

Neofunctional processes emphasize that the high and rising levels of economic and technological interdependence, the spillover effects created by them, and the growing role of supranational institutions in the process of integration. Neofunctional approach espouse that any integrative action in one sector steps down actions in related sectors, and this integration process would create new problems that could only be solved by further cooperation. Therefore, the beginning of cooperation in high politics areas and eventually general integration would be achieved by a whole new entry of supranational entities. We saw this in Europe in the form of the six European states founded the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 and also the European Economic Community (EEC).

The second theory, the Intergovernmentalism Theory, identifies the heads of state and government as key central players. The theory states that regional integration can best be understood through series of bargains between the heads of government , which would then be supported by small ministerial and advisory board. The beauty of this Theory is that the heads are not enforced to accept any policies that would be considered unacceptable. This theory is based on the fact that decision making amongst the partners would be done by unanimous consent. The outcomes will converge on what political scientists would deem as “the lowest common denominator”. The reason why I think that China , Japan and South Korea can solve core interest issues through Intergovernmentalism is because it allows consensus agreement and direct communication with heads of state. Right now, Intergovernmentalism is perfect for Japan, South Korea and China because Northeast Asia has not yet reached the stage of integration as seen in the European context.

Reference:

Aminian, N., & Calderon, C. (2010). Prospects for Closer Economic Cooperation in Northeast Asia. Review Of Development Economics, 14(3), 417-432. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9361.2010.00562.x

Yoshimatsu, H. (2005). From Distrust to Mutual Interests?: Emerging Cooperation in Northeast Asia. East Asia: An International Quarterly, 22(4), 18-38.

Yoshimatsu, H. (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. doi:10.1080/02185377.2010.527209

Thanks for posting that long write up...but oh man, I think you have missed my point, and now I feel bad for making you posting that long write up. But I have said that the Diaoyu-Senkaku dispute in itself is not an obstacle, I have even said they are just rocks. Viva_viet said China will have no prob if they don’t possess those few rocks.

What I was pointing out was the nationalism in the CN and JP population. During this period, the Diaoyu dispute is just a small outlet for people to express their nationalism. I truly don’t think the average joe really care about a few rocks, it is just an avenue for people to unleash their anger and nationalism. This nationalism is the obstacle and problem that I wanted to talk about. And this nationalism is not the product of the US or from any other third party. It is a problem between CN-JP. And some members here who talks about the NEAU, possess this same nationalism. I can easily perceivei this, seeing how no one had raised their hands in agreeing to rename a thread. Some other Chinese members who were skeptical about the NEAU here, at least they are straightforward about their views and are not being hypocritcal in refusing to change the thread title.
 
Yea I agree with that. Just that the nationalism that the current generation possess, is a problem between CN-JP and wasn’t caused by any third party. So take the US out of the Asia theater, and there will still be this obstacle called nationalism...and members here possess that nationalism, even while they talk about the NEAU.




Thanks for posting that long write up...but oh man, I think you have missed my point, and now I feel bad for making you posting that long write up. But I have said that the Diaoyu-Senkaku dispute in itself is not an obstacle, I have even said they are just rocks. Viva_viet said China will have no prob if they don’t possess those few rocks.

What I was pointing out was the nationalism in the CN and JP population. During this period, the Diaoyu dispute is just a small outlet for people to express their nationalism. I truly don’t think the average joe really care about a few rocks, it is just an avenue for people to unleash their anger and nationalism. This nationalism is the obstacle and problem that I wanted to talk about. And this nationalism is not the product of the US or from any other third party. It is a problem between CN-JP. And some members here who talks about the NEAU, possess this same nationalism. I can easily perceivei this, seeing how no one had raised their hands in agreeing to rename a thread. Some other Chinese members who were skeptical about the NEAU here, at least they are straightforward about their views and are not being hypocritcal in refusing to change the thread title.

Yea I agree with that. Just that the nationalism that the current generation possess, is a problem between CN-JP and wasn’t caused by any third party. So take the US out of the Asia theater, and there will still be this obstacle called nationalism...and members here possess that nationalism, even while they talk about the NEAU.




Thanks for posting that long write up...but oh man, I think you have missed my point, and now I feel bad for making you posting that long write up. But I have said that the Diaoyu-Senkaku dispute in itself is not an obstacle, I have even said they are just rocks. Viva_viet said China will have no prob if they don’t possess those few rocks.

What I was pointing out was the nationalism in the CN and JP population. During this period, the Diaoyu dispute is just a small outlet for people to express their nationalism. I truly don’t think the average joe really care about a few rocks, it is just an avenue for people to unleash their anger and nationalism. This nationalism is the obstacle and problem that I wanted to talk about. And this nationalism is not the product of the US or from any other third party. It is a problem between CN-JP. And some members here who talks about the NEAU, possess this same nationalism. I can easily perceivei this, seeing how no one had raised their hands in agreeing to rename a thread. Some other Chinese members who were skeptical about the NEAU here, at least they are straightforward about their views and are not being hypocritcal in refusing to change the thread title.



Nationalism and patriotic sentiments is an innate aspect and characteristic in social psychology of nation states, even in larger organizations such as NATO, EU, ASEAN, Arab League, African Union, et al. Youre trying to state that both the nationalism of Japan and China is a barrier to integration since , as you are alluding to, that compromise in regards to the Senkakus / Diaoyutais is apprehended. Well let me try to think out of the box here , my friend, but the Chinese do have every right to be angry in that prior to the 2012 nationalization of Senkakus , there was no issue with Japan and China. In fact both Beijing and Tokyo had an honor code system to let future generations to find a way to solve this impasse. Shintaro's purchasing of the islands was actually a move that forced the Government to assume a role. What Japanese legislators and lawmakers failed to understand or failed to perceive (at the time) was the reaction from the Chinese side; and that was significant, actually.

In fact I am actually happy to see that Chinese patriots react in such a way since it was a protest by the young generation in China in regards to the PRINCIPLES that both Fukuda and Deng had agreed to. The Chinese had felt betrayed by Japanese Government's decision to nationalize the islands. So in a transformational analysis -- i suppose the recent uproar by China -- revitalized Japanese academics to better understand Chinese social psychology and Chinese state politic as it pertains to Japan. I suppose a greater awareness of China and the necessity to consider the Chinese sentiment has all the more recently transformed Japan's political structure.

I view this realization as a positive and a necessary process. And I will have to say that both China and Japan will learn to work beyond this minor transient issue.

Lastly --- the Senkakus/ Diayotais is more than just about 'Nationalism', it is about principles. What this shows is that both Japan and China are proud and principle-based nation states with a government system that is highly sensitive to popular sentiment. It is organic. And being that it is organic, they must explore ways to learn from past mistakes, and find a working solution.



Regards.
 
Asia is a continent of conflict and age old differences have still not been put aside. We will have to learn a lot from Europe particularly how Germany vs west and France vs Britain have ended to work in conjunction with each other. This will mean putting old differences aside and forging a union between our countries. Since we hate each other this becomes much harder.

But the biggest example in Europe is France and England. Always fighting but putting aside their differences finally to have healthy relations. I don't know why we can't do this if countries with so many rivalries have done so in the past and formed the EU. Asia is home to massive growth. We can develop and strengthen ourselves to put these differences aside.
 
Nationalism and patriotic sentiments is an innate aspect and characteristic in social psychology of nation states, even in larger organizations such as NATO, EU, ASEAN, Arab League, African Union, et al.

I think the nationalistic sentiments in CN and JP is a bit more intense than those found in the average joe. I mean, intense to the point that you start destroying people’s properties, smashing cars, beating up innocent people just because they use a certain brand from a certain country, and I don’t think Japanese nationalists are benign either.


I view this realization as a positive and a necessary process. And I will have to say that both China and Japan will learn to work beyond this minor transient issue.

I also truly think the Diaoyu dispute is a minor transient issue, but the fact that both China and Japan still cannot solve this minor transient issue says it all really.

In fact, I find it amusing that no NEAU advocates here were willing to change the title of the thread on that minor transient issue.

And this ain’t the fault of the US or any other third party.
 
I think the nationalistic sentiments in CN and JP is a bit more intense than those found in the average joe. I mean, intense to the point that you start destroying people’s properties, smashing cars, beating up innocent people just because they use a certain brand from a certain country, and I don’t think Japanese nationalists are benign either.




I also truly think the Diaoyu dispute is a minor transient issue, but the fact that both China and Japan still cannot solve this minor transient issue says it all really.

In fact, I find it amusing that no NEAU advocates here were willing to change the title of the thread on that minor transient issue.

And this ain’t the fault of the US or any other third party.
Why can't you create a new thread under the title you nominated? I personally will not see any problem in conducting discussions under both threads simultaneously.
 
Why can't you create a new thread under the title you nominated? I personally will not see any problem in conducting discussions under both threads simultaneously.

He does not want to change the title, nor discuss in the senkaku/diaoyutai thread, he make that quite clear in his first post, he is pointing out the irony, because unionism destroy nationalism, and if people discussing the issue of NE Asian Union cannot drop their own nationalism or set them aside, then all they talked about regarding NEAU is merely hypocrisy.

IE. Why talk about something you don't actually believe in, for the sake of a hypothetical situation.
 
Yea I agree with that. Just that the nationalism that the current generation possess, is a problem between CN-JP and wasn’t caused by any third party. So take the US out of the Asia theater, and there will still be this obstacle called nationalism...and members here possess that nationalism, even while they talk about the NEAU.




Thanks for posting that long write up...but oh man, I think you have missed my point, and now I feel bad for making you posting that long write up. But I have said that the Diaoyu-Senkaku dispute in itself is not an obstacle, I have even said they are just rocks. Viva_viet said China will have no prob if they don’t possess those few rocks.

What I was pointing out was the nationalism in the CN and JP population. During this period, the Diaoyu dispute is just a small outlet for people to express their nationalism. I truly don’t think the average joe really care about a few rocks, it is just an avenue for people to unleash their anger and nationalism. This nationalism is the obstacle and problem that I wanted to talk about. And this nationalism is not the product of the US or from any other third party. It is a problem between CN-JP. And some members here who talks about the NEAU, possess this same nationalism. I can easily perceivei this, seeing how no one had raised their hands in agreeing to rename a thread. Some other Chinese members who were skeptical about the NEAU here, at least they are straightforward about their views and are not being hypocritcal in refusing to change the thread title.

You want the nationalistic feelings between east easian gone? How about start the process by kicking USA out of (east)asia, then the healing process and real cooperation between the east asian states can start without USA meddling in east asian affairs. I dont see other way to achieve Greater East Asia dream as long USA is pulling the string in Japan, Taiwan and South-Korea.
USA presence in asia only strengthen the nationalism between the east asian states, so your claim that nationalism is the culprit and not the USA is not entirely true.
How could average chinese in China completely trust Japan or South-Korea if every chinese see USA shadow looming over Japan and South-Korea?
If/when the USA truely gone from east asia, then you will see that China,Japan and South-Korea really have no choice than to cooperate in all fields to strengthen their nation. Gradually, old suspicions and nationalism between these states will be just an old memory.
 
I also truly think the Diaoyu dispute is a minor transient issue, but the fact that both China and Japan still cannot solve this minor transient issue says it all really.

In fact, I find it amusing that no NEAU advocates here were willing to change the title of the thread on that minor transient issue.

And this ain’t the fault of the US or any other third party.


Nationalism is actually considered a rather basilar or primitive ideology and one that has its beginnings in antiquity. Nationalism’s implications , practice and its application was testament to the survival of the collectivity. The value of Nationalism is actually rooted in what we refer to as “Inter Alia” and that it was associated with the survivalism of the collectivity in the context of the sociological theory of in-group and out-group contemplation. I actually like the definition of nationalism by Hans Kohn who defined nationalism as “ a state of mind, in which supreme loyalty of the individual is felt to be due to the nation – state.” But if we are to engage in the sociological in-group contemplation theory we should also consider one aspect of the in-group / out-group dialectic and that is the creationism of supra-group contemplation. What I am referring to my friend is the notion of supranational characteristics , which tend to dilute and mitigate nationalist tendencies and shift citizen’s focus on supra-nationalism. This is in context to the NEAU framework since it will put focus on the need for continental economic and political integration or cohesion.

And this ain’t the fault of the US or any other third party.

On the contrary, the United States actually functions by propagating the out-group contemplation. In fact it is to their (American) prerogative to undermine supranationalism in East Asia since a unified East Asia would be the singular greatest threat to American , Western global order. Bar none. :)

We are the 'Great Yellow Peril', afterall.
 
Nationalism is actually considered a rather basilar or primitive ideology and one that has its beginnings in antiquity. Nationalism’s implications , practice and its application was testament to the survival of the collectivity. The value of Nationalism is actually rooted in what we refer to as “Inter Alia” and that it was associated with the survivalism of the collectivity in the context of the sociological theory of in-group and out-group contemplation. I actually like the definition of nationalism by Hans Kohn who defined nationalism as “ a state of mind, in which supreme loyalty of the individual is felt to be due to the nation – state.” But if we are to engage in the sociological in-group contemplation theory we should also consider one aspect of the in-group / out-group dialectic and that is the creationism of supra-group contemplation. What I am referring to my friend is the notion of supranational characteristics , which tend to dilute and mitigate nationalist tendencies and shift citizen’s focus on supra-nationalism. This is in context to the NEAU framework since it will put focus on the need for continental economic and political integration or cohesion.

I am a Nationalist through and through; are you saying that I'm a relic from a bygone era ? :o:
 
I am a Nationalist through and through; are you saying that I'm a relic from a bygone era ? :o:

Nationalism is a nation-specific ideation, my sweet friend. It is innate in social psychology and in explaining human developmental psychology, actually. However, what i was trying to infer with Mr. Hung is that the onus is on the direction towards supra-nationalism. In fact Supra-Nationalism is seen now through:
  • The European Union
  • The African Union
  • The Arab League
  • Association for Southeast Asian Nations
  • The Latin League
  • The Commonwealth of Nations

are you saying that I'm a relic from a bygone era ? :o:

1641193_1307640418921.58res_400_300.jpg
 
Nationalism is actually considered a rather basilar or primitive ideology and one that has its beginnings in antiquity. Nationalism’s implications , practice and its application was testament to the survival of the collectivity. The value of Nationalism is actually rooted in what we refer to as “Inter Alia” and that it was associated with the survivalism of the collectivity in the context of the sociological theory of in-group and out-group contemplation. I actually like the definition of nationalism by Hans Kohn who defined nationalism as “ a state of mind, in which supreme loyalty of the individual is felt to be due to the nation – state.” But if we are to engage in the sociological in-group contemplation theory we should also consider one aspect of the in-group / out-group dialectic and that is the creationism of supra-group contemplation. What I am referring to my friend is the notion of supranational characteristics , which tend to dilute and mitigate nationalist tendencies and shift citizen’s focus on supra-nationalism. This is in context to the NEAU framework since it will put focus on the need for continental economic and political integration or cohesion.



On the contrary, the United States actually functions by propagating the out-group contemplation. In fact it is to their (American) prerogative to undermine supranationalism in East Asia since a unified East Asia would be the singular greatest threat to American , Western global order. Bar none. :)

We are the 'Great Yellow Peril', afterall.
Nationalism also has good effects, particularly Muslim countries with strong Nationalist base dont have a significant spread of religious extremism.
And to be honest, i prefer Nationalism over religious extremism, espacially since Nationalism in its purest form isnt harming anyone but strenghtens the solidarity in the particular society.

If Nationalism was spread in ME you wouldnt have all those religious nutjobs killing their own people and espacially no young men running away from war and leaving their country in the hands of lunatics.
 
Nationalism is a nation-specific ideation, my sweet friend. It is innate in social psychology and in explaining human developmental psychology, actually. However, what i was trying to infer with Mr. Hung is that the onus is on the direction towards supra-nationalism. In fact Supra-Nationalism is seen now through:
  • The European Union
  • The African Union
  • The Arab League
  • Association for Southeast Asian Nations
  • The Latin League
  • The Commonwealth of Nations



1641193_1307640418921.58res_400_300.jpg

Isn't that Pan-Nationalism that focuses on economic and to a certain extent political integration when a common social base is provided. In terms of the EU - the common European culture, in terms of the Arab League - the common Arab Culture and so on and so forth.....

But I aim for a higher ideal; to subjugate the world, declare myself the Emperor and eliminate all Jedi....wait too much Star Wars....! :oops:

Nationalism also has good effects, particularly Muslim countries with strong Nationalist base dont have a significant spread of religious extremism.
And to be honest, i prefer Nationalism over religious extremism, espacially since Nationalism in its purest form isnt harming anyone but strenghtens the solidarity in the particular society.

Nationalism is an illogical concept purely from a social or more so anthropological point of view because it postulates that XYZ is a nation and that nation is not only different but better (yes...its there...the one without this is Patriotism) when anthropology tells us that Culture, Ethnicities and even Nations are human constructs...just as its illogical to say 'This picture that I painted is the best picture in the world'...I think its illogical to say 'My nation is the best nation in the world' !

Though mine is ! :D
 
Nationalism also has good effects, particularly Muslim countries with strong Nationalist base dont have a significant spread of religious extremism.
And to be honest, i prefer Nationalism over religious extremism, espacially since Nationalism in its purest form isnt harming anyone but strenghtens the solidarity in the particular society.

If Nationalism was spread in ME you wouldnt have all those religious nutjobs killing their own people and espacially no young men running away from war and leaving their country in the hands of lunatics.

Yes, actually , that's true. Strong national governments in the Middle East such as :
  • Syria under the Alawite Regime
  • Iraq under Saddam Regime
  • Egypt under Mubarak Regime
  • Libya under Gaddafi
All of which were able to crush Takfiri religious ideology exported by Saudi Arabia, which was meant to destabilize Arab Nationalism. In fact you should know that the KSA has been the greatest opponent of Arab Nationalism since inception. Arab Nationalism is antithetical to the LONGEVITY of the HOUSE OF SA'UD.

Anyways, i agree with you that Nationalism works for certain countries especially with challenging environments.
 
Nationalism is an illogical concept purely from a social or more so anthropological point of view because it postulates that XYZ is a nation and that nation is not only different but better (yes...its there...the one without this is Patriotism) when anthropology tells us that Culture, Ethnicities and even Nations are human constructs...just as its illogical to say 'This picture that I painted is the best picture in the world'...I think its illogical to say 'My nation is the best nation in the world' !

Though mine is ! :D
Turks are the best period! :pissed:

Jokes a side, i dont see Nationalism as feeling better than others but to have a strong tie to your Nation.
What you describe comes closer to Racism/Fascism imo.

Yes, actually , that's true. Strong national governments in the Middle East such as :
  • Syria under the Alawite Regime
  • Iraq under Saddam Regime
  • Egypt under Mubarak Regime
  • Libya under Gaddafi
All of which were able to crush Takfiri religious ideology exported by Saudi Arabia, which was meant to destabilize Arab Nationalism. In fact you should know that the KSA has been the greatest opponent of Arab Nationalism since inception. Arab Nationalism is antithetical to the LONGEVITY of the HOUSE OF SA'UD.

Anyways, i agree with you that Nationalism works for certain countries especially with challenging environments.
Agree but those countries still dont have a stong Nationalist ideology among the masses, otherwise no Syrian would kill his compatriot over stupid reasons such as sects.
 
Agree but those countries still dont have a stong Nationalist ideology among the masses, otherwise no Syrian would kill his compatriot over stupid reasons such as sects.

You cannot and must not underestimate takfiri ideology that has been exported abroad and funded by Saudi Arabia, my friend. Look at every major sectarian filled region in the Muslim World and you will have the finger print of Saudi Arabia preaching their radical Wahhabi ideology. Taliban, ISIL, ISIS, Boko Haram, Al-Shabaab et cetera, et cetera...
 
Back
Top Bottom