Search

Begin New Search Topic Regional Cooperation Political Geography Australia Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 10 Years

1. Australia’s Interests in East Asia’s Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

Author:
Shiro Armstrong
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement was seen as important for Australia economically and politically from its inception. RCEP economies account for roughly two-thirds of Australia’s total trade and being part of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-led initiative that progressed broader East Asian economic integration was consistent with the structure of Australia’s trade interests and with Australia’s support for the multilateral trading system. Australia has a track record of pursuing regional cooperation that supports multilateral trade and for supporting regional integration that is outward oriented. RCEP became more important economically, politically, and strategically throughout its negotiations. It furthered East Asian economic integration that avoided fragmentation but also to entrench the ASEAN Economic Community project. Concluding RCEP took on greater importance and urgency as a ballast against the rising protectionism globally in the latter half of 2010. The ASEAN–Australia–New Zealand Free Trade Area (AANZFTA) included an economic cooperation agenda focused on capacity building that was seen as a success for its members and shaped Australia’s approach and support towards economic cooperation being a pillar of RCEP. Negotiations for RCEP were chaired and led by Indonesia and ASEAN. Australia played a proactive role in pushing for high standards – credible market access commitments and new rules – in negotiations. Australia was one of the RCEP member countries that was also negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in parallel. The interest in the TPP was to keep the United States productively engaged in the region and to further rule-making and liberalisation amongst the TPP members. Having overlapping membership between the TPP and RCEP would mean that there was less chance of significant divergence or inconsistencies between them, although the approach differed. The deterioration of Australia’s economic and political relationship with China makes the RCEP framework potentially more important for facilitating the rebuilding of trust and confidence.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Trade and Finance, Regional Cooperation, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
Asia, Australia, and ASEAN

2. Gendering the Indo-Pacific Dialogue: Opportunities for India and Australia

Author:
Priyanka Bhide
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Women's Development Agency (IWDA)
Abstract:
Viewing the confluence of the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean as a distinctive and interdependent strategic and economic space is fundamentally changing the way both India and Australia think about and examine their relationship with the broader region.i The Indo-Pacific as a strategic construct has grown in prominence in global geopolitical discourse, especially over the last five years. The EU, USA, and several countries in Europe have in place or are developing their own strategies for engagement in the Indo-Pacific region. The European Union collectively advocates for a ‘Free and Open Indo- Pacific’, designed to foster a ‘rules-based international order, a level playing field, as well as an open and fair environment for trade and investment, tackling climate change and supporting connectivity.’ii For France, the Indo-Pacific is at the heart of its vision for a stable multipolar order, and the Indo-Pacific is listed as a ‘priority and essential partner’.iii Germany too is making an active contribution to shaping the international order in the Indo-Pacific, so that it is ‘based on rules and international cooperation, not on the law of the strong.’iv The significance of the construct is varied for countries that are part of the region. The scope of the conversation in the Indo-Pacific is widening, with more diverse and varied perspectives being brought to the forefront. In this paper, against the backdrop of global Feminist Foreign Policy conversations, we focus on how Australia and India view the Indo-Pacific; marking the shifts in both countries’ approaches, along with bringing in important aspects of their bilateral relationship, highlighting how the Indo-Pacific has grown in significance to become a foreign policy priority, how both India and Australia have incorporated a gender lens in their actions, and what could be the avenues for Australia and India to apply such a lens in their collaborations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, Strategic Interests, and Gender
Political Geography:
India, Asia, and Australia

3. The “Indo-Pacific” Concept: Geographical Adjustments and their Implications

Author:
Wada Haruko
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
The United States, Australia, Japan, India, France, the United Kingdom, Indonesia and ASEAN have adopted the term “Indo-Pacific” as a policy symbol of regional engagement. However, less attention has been given to the change in the geographical definition of the “Indo-Pacific”. This study examines how these countries have adjusted the geographical scope of “Indo-Pacific” to understand how they conceptualise the region. It finds that the inherent core area of the “Indo-Pacific” is from India to the Southeast Asian countries and the seas from the eastern Indian Ocean to the South China Sea, and that the “Indo-Pacific” has converged eastwards and diverged westwards through the geographical adjustment process. It also found that some of the geographical definitions have an additional function of conveying diplomatic messages. These findings will help us understand how the concept of “Indo- Pacific” as conceptualised by various countries develops.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, and ASEAN
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Asia, France, Australia, and Indo-Pacific

4. New Zealand Picks up on the Indo-Pacific

Author:
David Scott
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Traditionally, New Zealand’s strategic focus has been on Australia and the South Pacific. As recently as 18 October, 2018, Ben King, New Zealand’s Deputy Secretary for Americas and Asia said that “the term Indo‑Pacific may not resonate in New Zealand yet.” And this despite a July 2018 Strategic Defence Policy Statement that already pinpointed New Zealand’s “Indo-Pacific partners reinforcing the rules based order” as being Australia, India, Japan and the United States. It is worth noting that the Strategic Defence Policy Statement gave lengthy details on the threat posed by China; in its Maritime Silk Road push into the Indian Ocean, its militarization of the South China Sea, and its push into the Pacific islands. Events from August 2019 to February 2020 reinforce that New Zealand is seeking out “Indo-Pacific” cooperation with these four particular “partners” (Japan, United States, India, Australia) over shared concerns about China.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, and Economy
Political Geography:
Japan, India, Australia, New Zealand, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

5. Pakistan’s Gwadar Port: A New Naval Base in China’s String of Pearls in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Gurmeet Kanwai
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The Issue The development of Gwadar Port is a key element of the greater China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). It speaks to both the strength of the China-Pakistan relationship and the reach of China’s grand strategy. With Pakistan’s two other major ports operating near capacity with no room for expansion, projects in Gwadar promise to eventually handle one million tons of cargo annually, while also providing significant industrial, oil, and transportation infrastructure. Though a “monument of Pakistan-China friendship,” there are misgivings on both sides about CPEC, including the safety of Chinese workers, the resentment of Baloch nationalists, and the growing debt trap created by the project. The prospect of the PLA Navy in Gwadar poses greater security questions, as it forms another link in China’s efforts to expand its maritime presence in the Indo-Pacific region. The members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or “Quad,” comprised of India, Japan, Australia, and the United States, should counter China’s strategic outreach by networking with other like-minded countries on cooperative security frameworks to ensure a free, open, prosperous, and inclusive Indo-Pacific region.
Topic:
Security, Oil, Regional Cooperation, Global Political Economy, and Trade
Political Geography:
Pakistan, United States, Japan, China, Middle East, India, Asia, and Australia

6. Australia and the United States An Alliance for the Twenty-first Century

Author:
Amy Searight and Michael J. Green
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
On August 21–22, 2017, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) organized a conference in Sydney, Australia—Australia and the United States: An Alliance for the 21st Century—in cooperation with the United States Studies Centre (USSC) at the University of Sydney and the Perth USAsia Centre at the University of Western Australia. The conference was generously supported by a grant from the U.S. Department of State. This conference gathered together key thinkers from both countries at an important time for the Australia-U.S. alliance. The scope of cooperation between Australia and the United States has never been greater—extending well beyond traditional defense, intelligence, and diplomatic engagement—and the alliance enjoys healthy support among policymakers and the wider public in both countries. Bilateral economic, social, and cultural ties are broad and deep. The two countries are working closely together to defeat the threat posed by ISIL and other terrorist networks in the Middle East and globally, and to ensure the Asia-Pacific region remains stable and prosperous. Yet the Australia-U.S. alliance faces growing external and internal challenges. The United States, Australia, and other allies confront rising threats in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, and globally from terrorism, financial instability, pandemic diseases, and other transnational challenges. Revisionist powers are seeking to reshape regional security dynamics and carve out spheres of influence, jeopardizing the liberal rules-based order that has supported American and Australian security and prosperity for more than half a century. The risks of miscalculation and conflict are growing, as is the prospect of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. At the same time, allied resources available to meet these problems are constrained by slow economic growth across the developed world and the cost of supporting aging populations. Now, economic dislocation and stagnant wages are generating a wave of populist and protectionist sentiment in many parts of the world that risks undermining governance and a return to zero-sum, mercantilist economic policies—while U.S. political divisions and some policy choices are exacerbating allies’ concerns about the future of American global leadership. Many of these issues are playing out in the contemporary Australian debate, with a range of senior political figures and commentators calling for Australia to distance itself from the United States and recent opinion polls suggesting doubts about U.S. staying power as well as growing affinity for China. This is broadly consistent with polling from the region that suggests that China’s growing economic clout and military capabilities are driving expectations that China will supplant the United States as the predominant power in the Asia Pacific. These trends raise new questions about the future of the alliance in domestic, bilateral, and international contexts that we must address. They also highlight: the increasingly complex challenges facing U.S. and Australian alliance managers; the importance of not taking the alliance for granted; a requirement for fresh ideas about the alliance; and the need to engage a broader range of stakeholders, including a new generation of strategic thinkers in Australia and the United States. The Sydney conference brought together a group of about 40 participants—including 10 young next-generation leaders from Australia—for a two-day discussion on the opportunities and challenges facing the Australia-U.S. alliance across geopolitical, security, and economic issues. It focused on identifying key takeaways and formulating practical recommendations to improve the Australia-U.S. alliance’s capacity to adapt to changing dynamics, both globally and in the Indo-Pacific region, and to ensure support for the alliance well into the twenty-first century. Participation was by invitation and the discussions were off the record.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, Counter-terrorism, and Global Political Economy
Political Geography:
United States, Australia, and Asia-Pacific

7. The South China Sea: Beijing’s Challenge to ASEAN and UNCLOS and the Necessity of a New Multi-tiered Approach

Author:
Christopher Roberts
Publication Date:
08-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
This Working Paper examines the South China Sea disputes and primarily focuses on developments since 2013 when the Philippines filed for international arbitration. The first part of the paper examines how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China reacted to the arbitral process and the potential for the Association to undertake an effective and unified position in the future. The second part of the article builds on the analysis by assessing the prospects for, and likely impact of, the long-sought Code of Conduct. In the process, it examines the continued viability of ASEAN’s consensus-based decision-making approach, whether and how it could be reformed, and the potential benefits and viability of a new institutional arrangement with membership based on shared values and interests (rather than geography). The paper also argues that to enhance the possibility of redress on the issue, other key stakeholder states (such as Japan, Australia, India, and the United States) will need to be more strongly engaged and support claimant countries through a diverse array of activities. Such activities range from investments in capacity building to the provision of coastguards (if invited) to police and protect resources within the Exclusive Economic Zones of claimant states, as clarified by the July 2016 Arbitral Ruling.
Topic:
Development, Regional Cooperation, Police, and ASEAN
Political Geography:
Japan, India, Asia, Australia, and South China Sea