By: M. Munib Zia Khan
☕ The writer is an analyst from Pakistan’s largest city and its commercial capital – Karachi – and is an International Relations candidate based in China.
🔔 Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author, and not necessarily to the owner, management or affiliates of ‘Pecunia et Bellum.’ The author has the freedom of expression and they are solely responsible for any views or opinions expressed in their writings.
States are unable to select their neighbours; instead, they are constrained by their geography. They do, however, have an option when it comes to how they choose to coexist with those neighbours. A theme for the region can be established if one or more governments take the initiative to respond in a creative way to their regional and international challenges. This can change the collective outlook of numerous states. The way the states interact with one another in the region, as well as the areas they collaborate and compete over, can be determined by the regional construct they inhabit. Regional norms influence the state behaviour and states have the capacity to shape the narrative for their region as well.
Within the realm of international relations, regionalism refers to the expression of a common identity and set of objectives, as well as the creation and operation of institutions that define a particular identity and promote cooperation amongst individuals within a given geographic area. States can’t function in a vacuum and never will. Instead, they are highly permeable and sensitive to their regional dynamics. Much like individuals, states too are influenced by their environment. For this reason, states, just like individuals, also have to deal with living in a “bad” versus “good” neighbourhood.
The formation of the European Union (EU) is a prime example of regionalism. Yet the regional dynamics of Europe in the 20th century were considerably different from those of today. Europe saw the two world wars in the past century that impacted virtually the whole continent. Because of this, the shared dynamic of the entire continent at the time shaped the conduct of the states in the region. At that time, the continent saw a significant military build-up and the ensuing confrontations over various political philosophies, territories, racial or ethnic identities, and so forth. Open borders and shared institutions were not the talk of the town.
Following two major wars, the continent saw a significant shift in its regional dynamics, and finally, with the founding and development of what we call today EU; it became a model for regional integration that the rest of the world observed with great interest. The Europe of those days is certainly very different from the Europe of today. Notwithstanding the glaring disparities among member states even today, the EU, which emerged from the ashes of those conflicts, was to become a symbol of wealth and harmony; meant to encourage member nations to work together. Clearly, such a change in the regional outlook also changed each state’s behaviour within the region. Each member state decided to act, under the new regional dynamic, in a completely different way than it had throughout the conflicts. Needless to say, a change in the mindset led to a change in the regional outlook. This also changed the destiny of millions of people on the continent, with benefits of greater mobility and more social as well as professional opportunities to name a few. The focus of this new EU regional framework was on shared institutions, a single currency, unrestricted movement of people, capital, goods, and services, as well as regional economic cooperation. This had not only created a new set of opportunities, but also modified the issues that the member states have to face due to the newly altered regional dynamic: from the terror of advancing armies that had seen great cities destroyed in the course of battles to the difficulties of today: internal and social matters, immigration and refugee crises. The new regional framework significantly changed Europe as a region, and it is now a powerful force on the world stage.
Southeast Asia provides a comparable illustration. Particularly in the past decades, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has gained widespread recognition as a potential economic superpower. Southeast Asia’s history—tainted by ongoing battles since the 1950s—offers pertinent lessons for conflict-ridden regions attempting to find peace. Many people had doubts in the beginning about ASEAN’s ability to endure. But the concept of a regional organization brought forth a new dynamic that changed how each state behaved toward the others. The Southeast Asian governments now have a venue provided by ASEAN to prioritize economic development and nation-building. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the economies of Vietnam and Indonesia, to name a few, are currently among the fastest expanding economies in the region, as they begin to sync their behaviour with the theme of economic growth witnessed both in their immediate and the wider region, such as East Asia. Historically, ASEAN has been in a unique position to establish the groundwork for the formation of a consciousness towards economic development due to the influence of the Asian Tigers. Southeast Asia’s close proximity to China also exposed the region to the spillover effects of a strong economic momentum seen in East Asia and that the ASEAN member nations were inspired by the economic momentum and cooperation as pursued by their regional peers.
While there are many differences between EU and ASEAN, both exhibit an understanding that a shift was necessary if collective economic growth and peace was to be achieved. In contrast, other parts of the world remain mired in a web of post-colonial strife, and the nations in these areas have been unable or perhaps unwilling to change with time. This has noticeably hindered their economic potential.
Asia being the most populous continent has South Asia as its most populous sub-region with a population of over 2 billion people. Since the end of colonialism in the region, India and Pakistan have maintained a bitter rivalry, resulting in a nuclear arms race that has set the tone for this region. Trade has no scope in such a hostile environment. Travel restrictions, a high level of mistrust among the masses, and the stoking of proxy conflicts, religious and ethnic tensions are commonplace. Because of the enduring conflict in Afghanistan, the extreme animosity has had repercussions throughout the whole region, reinforcing the regional theme based on a heightened feeling of national security. An attempt to foster solidarity came in the form of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Mainly because of the antagonistic relationship between India and Pakistan, SAARC has not been able to establish itself as a regional economic power like the EU and ASEAN. Despite sharing a rich and common cultural history, there is fierce rivalry and a lack of political cooperation among the nations in the region. No wonder then that South Asia performs appallingly poorly in intraregional commerce, when compared to Southeast Asia, despite having abundant resources and promising demographics. Economic growth in South Asia has largely been driven by India. This growth has been more pronounced in recent years, primarily driven by expansion of its domestic markets. Whether India’s economic momentum will inspire other South Asian states to aspire for the same remains to be seen in the coming decades. As witnessed in the examples of EU and ASEAN, one thing will be certain, it will require a great deal of consciousness by member states to alter South Asia’s regional outlook.
While there is a flip side of some critics claiming a loss of autonomy through regionalism, regional organizations tend to ease hostility among member states that could trigger a potential conflict. There are studies that support the argument that active political cooperation leads to increased economic cooperation. One such study revealed significant assessments on this subject (Pollins 1989). He examined a sample of 25 nations between 1960 and 1975 for his research. Pollins began with a gravity model and included variables to represent the state of trade partner ties diplomatically and whether or not they were members of the same Preferential Trading Arrangements (PTAs). For each of the 16 years in his dataset, he estimated this model using least-squares regression. Every year, there was statistically significant proof that trade is facilitated by collaboration.
Regional norms rarely stay static over time; instead, they evolve and change with time. These regional constructs also greatly influence and determine the behaviour that states can display. A state is not able to select its neighbours, but it retains the ability to decide how it wants to act towards other states and, in turn, determine how others perceive it. The degree of flexibility and rigidity that the states together exhibit can determine the success and pace at which the new regional architecture takes shape and how each member state can contribute towards establishing a newfound cooperative framework.
References:
- Moon, C. (2016, May 16). economic regionalism. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/economic-regionalism
- History of the European Union 1945-59, Peace in Europe and the beginnings of cooperation, https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/194559_en#:~:text=With%20the%20aim%20of%20ending,in%20securing%20a%20lasting%20peace , Accessed 12th July 2024.
- Teekah, E. (2024, July 12). ASEAN. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ASEAN
- Subregions in Asia by population (2024) https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-asia-subregion/, Accessed 7th July 2024.
- REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN EUROPE AND SOUTHEAST ASIA: LESSONS FOR ECONOMIC INTEGRATION IN SOUTH ASIA, Asian Development Bank Institute, Falendra Kumar Sudan, No. 1090, March 2020
- Conflict, Cooperation, and Commerce: The Effect of International Political Interactions on Bilateral Trade Flows
- Brian M. Pollins, Ohio State University American Journal of Political Science Vol. 33, No. 3 (Aug., 1989), pp. 737-761 (25 pages)
