Asia needs ASEAN-ization not Pakistanization of its continent

Why is (the Korean peninsula and East) Asia unable to capitalize (on) its success

Fachartikel 631

Fachbereich
Volkswirtschaftslehre
Fachrichtung
Volkswirtschaftspolitik
Arbeitsbericht
2014
Sprache
deutsch

Beschreibung

Speculations over the alleged bipolar world of tomorrow (the so-called G-2, China vs. the US), should not be an Asian dilemma. It is primarily a concern of the West that, after all, overheated China in the first place with its (outsourced business) investments. Hence, despite a distortive noise about the possible future G-2 world, the central security problem of Asia remains the same: an absence of any pan-continental multilateral setting on the world’s largest continent. The Korean peninsula like no other Asian theater pays a huge prize because of it.
Why is it so?
How to draw the line between the recent and still unsettled EU/EURO crisis and Asia’s success story? Well, it might be easier than it seems: Neither Europe nor Asia has any alternative. The difference is that Europe well knows there is no alternative – and therefore is multilateral. Asia thinks it has an alternative – and therefore is strikingly bilateral, while stubbornly residing enveloped in economic egoisms. No wonder that Europe is/will be able to manage its decline, while Asia is (still) unable to capitalize its successes. Asia – and particularly its economically most (but not yet politico-militarily) advanced region, East Asia – clearly does not accept any more the lead of the post-industrial and post-Christian Europe, but is not ready for the post-West world.

Bitte sende mir diesen Fachartikel als PDF-Datei an meine E-Mail Adresse.

Stichworte

Teile diesen Fachartikel