| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 公共行政暨政策學系 === 96 === On the contrary of the regional integration of Europe and America, the regional integration of East Asian fell behind obviously. By experiencing the turning point of Asian financial crisis in 1997, the regional integration was going faster and deeper. Asian financial crisis let East Asian countries recognize that one country can not withstand economic crisis along, in the meanwhile, those East Asian countries also realized the fact that they are interdependent. Thus, to respond this external impact, East Asian countries established ASEAN+3 to exclude the power of U.S. and increase the independence and recognition of East Asian countries. Mark Beeson supposed that East Asian regional development influenced by several factors including internal diversity and external interference of U.S. While East Asian countries faced external impact, they excluded the external power of U.S and reinforce the independence of East Asian region. This regional development path is different from Europe and America. Beeson labeled it as “Reactionary Regionalism.” It emphasized on the East Asian regional cooperation is designed as a method to ease the impact of those external crises. “Chiang Mai Initiative” in 2000 was the best practical example of Reactionary Regionalism.
This study attempt to use Reactionary Regionalism as the study purposes to analyze the East Asian regional cooperation development after Asian financial crisis in 1997. We used Reactionary Regionalism from Beeson as the core basis and used test method to deeply analyze East Asian regional development and address a case study to observe and analyze the following regional development of East Asian countries to extend and add interpretation of the difference of Reactionary Regionalism and address a more complete point of view. We expected to bring up more detailed point of view deeply and precisely to study East Asian regional integration development.
|
|---|
