论文部分内容阅读
Associate Researcher， National Institute of International Strategy，
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
Currently， the Asia-Pacific region is experiencing rapid economic growth and the military and security situation is intricate and complex. Major forces converge here in depth while holding different political， economic and security propositions. In the context of profound changes unseen in a century， the order in the Asia-Pacific region is undergoing profound changes as well. How to better push for cooperation in this region， safeguard the multilateral trading system， and prevent institutional divisions is a challenge confronting China at present and in a certain period of the future.
Changes in the Asia-Pacific
Regional Order in the Context of Profound Changes Unseen
in a Century
The Asia-Pacific region， as the world's most dynamic region for economic development， is displaying a multi-polar development trend， and the regional strength structure is undergoing profound changes. The international financial crisis in 2008 exerted a profound and far-reaching influence on the United States. In 1960， the US accounted for nearly 40% of the global GDP calculated at market exchange rates， but today this share has fallen below 25%. In contrast， with its accession to the WTO and the acceleration of its opening-up process， China’s economy has quickly risen to the second place in the world， and its relative strength gap with the United States has narrowed significantly. The rapid improvement of China's comprehensive national strength has broken the original strength structure in the Asia-Pacific region and changed the original order of this region. Against this background， important regional economies， including the United States， Japan， and ASEAN are making strategic adjustments and exerting profound impact on the construction of the Asia-Pacific regional order.
First， the United States’ Asia-Pacific strategy has shifted from “Returning to the Asia-Pacific” to the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”. Since the beginning of the 21st century， with the rapid development of China， the gap between China and the United States has narrowed sharply， and the United States gradually felt that its dominance in the Asia-Pacific region was under threat. In order to safeguard its interests in this region and its dominance in the regional affairs， the United States proposed to “Return to the Asia-Pacific.” In 2011， on top of the proposition of “Returning to the Asia-Pacific”， the Obama administration announced in high-profile the “Asia-Pacific Re-balancing Strategy” and launched a series of policies in the economic， political， and security fields to consolidate alliances and build partnerships so as to reinvigorate US leadership in the Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile， the US also strengthened its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region by diverting 69% of its naval forces from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific region and equipping the United States Pacific Command with the most advanced weaponry system. After the Trump administration came to power， it significantly adjusted US foreign strategy and released the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report in June 2019. This report marked the official launch of the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” of the US and had a significant impact on the Asia-Pacific regional order. The containment of China’s influence in the Asia-Pacific region by aligning Japan， India， and Australia is an important part of the strategy. However， in the context of the US relative decline， the Trump administration’s “America First” strategy is not friendly to its allies either. Given its strength advantage， the United States not only resorts to protectionist measures such as trade sanction to force its allies， such as Japan and South Korea， to further cede interests in trade negotiations， but also asks these countries to share defense costs， so as to reduce its military spending while maintaining dominance in the Asia-Pacific region.
Second， Japan intends to reorganize the Asia-Pacific regional order. Amid profound changes unseen in a century， the changes in the global strength structure have enhanced the importance of the Asia-Pacific region. This has brought more opportunities for cooperation in the region， but also has led to tension in the regional situation. Against this background， Japan has closely observed the changes in the Asia-Pacific region， and attempted to dominate the restructuring of the Asia-Pacific economic order. On the one hand， adhering to the strategy of prioritizing US-Japan alliance and keeping close pace with the United States in the political， economic， and security fields， Japan has not only actively joined the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”， but also significantly expanded regional political and security cooperation. All LDP governments of Japan often quote international norms to justify their security policy changes， and have adopted these norms throughout Japan’s discourse system， especially in legitimizing Japan’s security policy expansion. Abe Shinzo， during his two terms as prime minister， has also taken constitutional amendment as a major goal of his political career. On the other hand， Japan is not willing to be constrained by the United States in almost every aspect， and actively seeks opportunities by which it may play a bigger role in the construction of the Asia-Pacific regional order， particularly in Asia-Pacific economic cooperation. After the United States announced its withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership （TPP） in 2017， Japan actively contacted the remaining 10 TPP member countries， negotiated with them and eventually launched the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership （CPTPP）， and hoped to continue admitting other members in the Asia-Pacific region， and to advance economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region with CPTPP as a template. To a certain extent， Japan’s active participation in and hope of leading the construction of a new order in the Asia-Pacific region is an important step in achieving its political ambitions， and also a key step to inject Japanese factors into the Asia-Pacific and even the global economic governance system. Third， as its geo-strategic position has greatly improved， ASEAN continues to implement the strategy of balancing big powers. ASEAN has always advocated open regionalism， upheld the “ASEAN Way” of reaching consensus through negotiation and accounting for each other’s comfort， and adopted the strategy of balancing big powers. As the world’s economic center of gravity moves eastward and a multi-polar pattern emerges in the Asia-Pacific region， ASEAN’s role in the construction of Asia-Pacific regional order is even more significant. Although ASEAN still has a certain gap with China， the United States， and Japan in terms of overall strength， its position and role in the Asia-Pacific region cannot be underestimated. With the collective rise of emerging economies such as China and India， and as major changes have taken place in the Asia-Pacific region where regional cooperation is an important carrier， ASEAN is playing a more important role in balancing regional powers and arranging regional institutions. For example， some ASEAN countries have provided the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation （APEC） with an important idea of “reaching consensus through negotiation”. Considering the different levels of economic development among its members， ASEAN does not approve the United States’ proposal to institutionalize APEC， and insists on maintaining its flexible operation. When the US used TPP to “return to the Asia-Pacific”， which threatened the solidarity of ASEAN， ASEAN immediately worked with Japan and China， and collaboratively proposed the “Regional Comprehensive Economy Partnership” （RCEP） in response， providing a new path for Asia-Pacific regional integration. Cooperation frameworks such as “10+1”， “10+3”， “10+6”， and “10+8”， which were established under the leadership of ASEAN， have not only effectively promoted the integration of the Asia-Pacific region， but also established an important position for ASEAN in the construction of Asia-Pacific regional order.
China’s Role in Reconstructing
the Asia-Pacific Regional Order
Currently， the globalization model with a few developed countries as the core has led to uneven development of the global economy， causing a surge in anti-globalization and populist ideas. Coupled with the lack of coordination and compatibility between conventional regional cooperation mechanisms， a “fragmentation” trend has emerged in global and regional governance. In the process of reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， China takes the promotion of a new order and new relations as its due mission， supports “open regionalism” and a progressive approach based on independence and voluntariness， and promotes regional order construction in new ways and with new concepts. First， promoting pragmatic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region through the Belt and Road Initiative. Unlike conventional regional cooperation models， the Belt and Road Initiative that China has proposed has distinctive development-oriented characteristics and reflects the unique experience China has gained as a developing country. Based on the real development needs of developing countries， the Belt and Road Initiative upholds the principles of achieving shared growth through negotiation and collaboration， takes the Silk Road Spirit of peaceful cooperation， openness and inclusiveness， mutual learning， and mutual benefit as its guidance， focuses on promoting policy coordination， facilities connectivity， unimpeded trade， financial integration， and people-to-people bonds， and is committed to benefiting en-route countries and their people， and pushing for the building of a community with shared future for humanity. All these concepts and principles have shown that the Belt and Road Initiative is different from international cooperation models under the conventional Asia-Pacific regional order.
The past Asia-Pacific regional cooperation was obviously exclusive， discriminatory， and condition-based. International cooperation mechanisms， be it bilateral， regional or multilateral， all limited the scope of membership， and member states had to meet specific conditions. The countries and regions excluded not only couldn’t enjoy the due treatment for member states， but might even suffer from negative impact such as trade and investment transfer. In contrast， the Belt and Road Initiative upholds the principles of harmony， inclusiveness， and seeking common ground while shelving differences， and respects the political， economic， and cultural differences of all parties. It does not limit the specific geographic scope or set high thresholds and access conditions for participants and can be joined by any country with development cooperation needs in ways suitable to their specific conditions. This pragmatic way of cooperation has greatly changed the traditional model of order construction in the Asia-Pacific region. The open cooperation model helps the Belt and Road Initiative to carry out in-depth cooperation with the majority of developing countries and regions in the Asia-Pacific region to achieve the goal of common prosperity. The Belt and Road Initiative is an important driving force for the restructuring of the Asia-Pacific economic pattern. It is also an important platform for China to participate in the reform of the Asia-Pacific region’s governance system and to promote the building of a community with shared future for humanity. Second， integrating “fragmented” regional cooperation and exploring new models of the institutional structure in the Asia-Pacific region. With the deepening of Asia-Pacific regional cooperation， cooperation mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region， including APEC， “10+1”， “10+3”， and the East Asia Summit， as well as many bilateral and regional economic and trade cooperation agreements， have continued to emerge， and the phenomena of myriad “fragmentation” and overlapped mechanisms have taken place in regional cooperation， which is undoubtedly a challenge for the regional countries. On the one hand， because of “fragmented” cooperation mechanisms， the countries are faced with the risk of regional fragmentation; on the other hand， large numbers of micro players， such as enterprises in Asia-Pacific economies， are trapped in confusion caused by “fragmentation” when participating in the use of these mechanisms. The “Spaghetti Bowl” effect directly leads to insufficient utilization of regional cooperation mechanisms， whose help on promoting the development of the countries is limited.
In order to cope with the risk of fragmentation in regional cooperation， China has conducted explorations with multiple models on the Asia-Pacific regional structure. In the face of the new situation in reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， Chinese leaders have proposed “China Plans” including building new-type international relations and a community with shared future for humanity based on an accurate grasp of the global trend. China actively promotes the RCEP negotiation process， and integrates multiple “10+1” institutional frameworks in the region by promoting high-level regional economic and trade institutional arrangements to further build a convenient and free regional value chain network， and to help achieve high-quality development in the Asia-Pacific economy represented by East Asia. It also actively promotes the establishment of FTZs in the Asia-Pacific region， and builds inclusive regional institutional arrangements that covers the United States. Under China’s initiative， the APEC Beijing Summit approved the road map for the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Zone， kicked-off and completed the collective strategic research on the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area. Establishing the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area as the new development direction of APEC is conducive to preventing regional institutional divisions and providing effective solutions for achieving inclusive regional growth. Third， providing international public goods to the Asia-Pacific region through a new round of self-driven opening up. In the reconstruction of the Asia-Pacific regional order， the supply of international public goods represented by regional consumer markets is not to be ignored. Historically， both the rise of Japan and the take-off of the “Four Asian Tigers” depended on the “export-oriented” development strategy， which is inseparable from the import of capital from the international community represented by the US and the open US domestic market. Therefore， the reason why the recent US government’s trade protectionism and unilateralism has a huge impact is that it is difficult for US trading partners to completely get rid of its market. As the most important provider of export markets and end consumer markets for other economies， the US can use its domestic market as a power tool to change the domestic preference structure of its market expansion targets， obtain the support of domestic groups in these economies， circumvent opposition from inside these economies， and provide itself with a strategic leeway and a foundation to expand its overseas market.
It can thus be seen that in the process of constructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， opening up the domestic consumer market is of great significance to China. It not only helps to provide the majority of Asia-Pacific countries with the most important public goods for economic development -- regional consumer market， but more importantly， enables China to leverage and expand the global market by enhancing the level of openness， and to participate in a new round of restructuring the global trading system. According to the World Bank， China’s pro-business environment rank climbed to the 31st in the world in 2019， and China has been among the top ten economies with the most significant improvement in business environment for two consecutive years. Over the past five years， China has revised the Catalogue for the Guidance of Foreign-Invested Industries twice and reduced the restrictive measures for foreign investment by 65%. China has also consecutively set up 18 pilot free trade zones， piloted a new management model of Pre-investment National Treatment plus Negative List， and greatly improved the level of opening up.
The Choice of Path in
Reconstructing the Asia-Pacific
Regional Order
In the context of profound changes unseen in a century， China’s best strategy in constructing the Asia-Pacific regional order is to adopt a progressive approach in sorting out the priorities of strategic issues in the Asia-Pacific region. On the basis of the principle of achieving shared growth through negotiation and collaboration， it is necessary for China to explore new areas and ways of cooperation to create a more inclusive new order in the Asia-Pacific region. First， controlling differences between major powers to avoid intensification of conflicts. China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world. The widening of differences and serious conflicts between them will undoubtedly be a geopolitical disaster. Even if there is no direct confrontation between them， this tension will still greatly consume both sides’ strategic resources and bring severely negative impact on their respective economic development and security. China and the United States are fully capable of avoiding this. In terms of security， the two countries should correctly view each other’s strategic existence in the Asia-Pacific region. For the United States， the Asia-Pacific region is an important base to exercise its hegemony， and a strategic region to ensure its leadership in the global order. For China， the Asia-Pacific region is an important stage for its peaceful development， and many issues correlate with China’s national security and core national interests. Based on this analysis， as China has always emphasized and striven for， China and the United States must bridge differences as much as possible， achieve peaceful coexistence， start from single and specific issues （such as functional cooperation areas） and gradually expand the scope of cooperation， and work together to build a new order in the Asia-Pacific region.
Currently， Japan， “a nation built on trade”， has also been adversely affected by US trade protectionism. In fact， Japan and China together constitute an East Asian production network and play an important role in the global value chain. However， the US trade protectionist approach has “artificially” blocked normal international trade and world economic operation. As a result， trade and investment within the Asia-Pacific region fell sharply， and integration in this region was severely challenged. Against this background， China and Japan share common goals in many governance issues such as opposing trade protectionism， safeguarding global free trade， and guaranteeing sustainable economic development in the Asia-Pacific region. China and Japan can absolutely strengthen cooperation through multilateral mechanisms and platforms such as WTO and APEC to jointly oppose protectionist practices and maintain the multilateral trading system. In addition， China and Japan can also lay the economic foundation for building a new order in the Asia-Pacific region through third-party cooperation and new field cooperation. Second， conducting pragmatic cooperation with ASEAN to promote the building of a community with shared future for humanity. ASEAN is an important partner of China in reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order. Located in the land-sea convergence zone referred in the Belt and Road Initiative， ASEAN is a priority and an important partner for China in its promotion of the Belt and Road construction. The development of ASEAN is of utmost significance for China to achieve high-quality development and for building a more reasonable regional structure. In the process of promoting cooperation with ASEAN， China can probe into the major concerns of ASEAN countries， strengthen political guidance and strategy connection to achieve coordinated development. In 2015， ASEAN successively released ASEAN Community Vision 2025， ASEAN Political and Security Community Blueprint 2025， ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025， and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community Blueprint 2025. These blueprints uphold political-security community， economic community， and socio-cultural community as pillars， and have chartered the strategic development directions of ASEAN in the next few years. The Belt and Road Initiative and the ASEAN Community Blueprints both uphold political mutual trust， economic integration and cultural inclusiveness as important principles， which is a realistic basis for their strategy connection.
In terms of specific cooperation areas， infrastructure connectivity is a key one between China and ASEAN. The Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity 2025 released by ASEAN in September 2016 has included 15 goals in five prioritized strategic areas -- sustainable infrastructure construction， digital innovation， seamless logistics， regulatory excellence and people mobility. Among them， sustainable infrastructure is the foundation of the master plan and ASEAN countries need to invest more than 110 billion USD each year for infrastructure construction. Most of the infrastructure projects planned to be constructed in ASEAN are compatible with the key areas of the Belt and Road Initiative. In 2018， China and ASEAN released the China-ASEAN Strategic Partnership Vision 2030， and mapped out the future direction of their bilateral relations with the building of a community with shared interest as the bridge. China and ASEAN may strengthen pragmatic cooperation at different levels to promote the building of a China-ASEAN community with shared future.
Third， maintaining a multilateral platform and striving to build an inclusive new Asia-Pacific order. At present， multilateral cooperation mechanisms and platforms represented by the WTO are faced with unprecedented challenges and crises. Nonetheless， WTO is still an important cooperation mechanism， which is extremely important for China to achieve high-quality development. In the Asia-Pacific region， the APEC mechanism is one of the important multilateral platforms for regional affairs in the Asia-Pacific region. Although it is currently facing new challenges in the “post-Bogor” era and under threats from protectionism and unilateralism pursued by the United States， this mechanism still carries high hope from the other economies in the Asia-Pacific region. These economies hope to once again bridge the institutional rift in the Asia-Pacific region through APEC， promote inclusive regional cooperation， and prevent the “decoupling” across the Pacific Ocean. China can continue to play a leading and coordinating role in the APEC mechanism， and continuously improve cooperation levels in the Asia-Pacific region. To be specific， by pushing for coordination and cooperation under APEC and the Belt and Road Initiative， China may work with relevant countries to resolve bottlenecks in the Asia-Pacific region together， strengthen cooperation with major regional economies in areas of common interest， and co-advance and improve the level of open economy in the Asia-Pacific region.
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
Currently， the Asia-Pacific region is experiencing rapid economic growth and the military and security situation is intricate and complex. Major forces converge here in depth while holding different political， economic and security propositions. In the context of profound changes unseen in a century， the order in the Asia-Pacific region is undergoing profound changes as well. How to better push for cooperation in this region， safeguard the multilateral trading system， and prevent institutional divisions is a challenge confronting China at present and in a certain period of the future.
Changes in the Asia-Pacific
Regional Order in the Context of Profound Changes Unseen
in a Century
The Asia-Pacific region， as the world's most dynamic region for economic development， is displaying a multi-polar development trend， and the regional strength structure is undergoing profound changes. The international financial crisis in 2008 exerted a profound and far-reaching influence on the United States. In 1960， the US accounted for nearly 40% of the global GDP calculated at market exchange rates， but today this share has fallen below 25%. In contrast， with its accession to the WTO and the acceleration of its opening-up process， China’s economy has quickly risen to the second place in the world， and its relative strength gap with the United States has narrowed significantly. The rapid improvement of China's comprehensive national strength has broken the original strength structure in the Asia-Pacific region and changed the original order of this region. Against this background， important regional economies， including the United States， Japan， and ASEAN are making strategic adjustments and exerting profound impact on the construction of the Asia-Pacific regional order.
First， the United States’ Asia-Pacific strategy has shifted from “Returning to the Asia-Pacific” to the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”. Since the beginning of the 21st century， with the rapid development of China， the gap between China and the United States has narrowed sharply， and the United States gradually felt that its dominance in the Asia-Pacific region was under threat. In order to safeguard its interests in this region and its dominance in the regional affairs， the United States proposed to “Return to the Asia-Pacific.” In 2011， on top of the proposition of “Returning to the Asia-Pacific”， the Obama administration announced in high-profile the “Asia-Pacific Re-balancing Strategy” and launched a series of policies in the economic， political， and security fields to consolidate alliances and build partnerships so as to reinvigorate US leadership in the Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile， the US also strengthened its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region by diverting 69% of its naval forces from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific region and equipping the United States Pacific Command with the most advanced weaponry system. After the Trump administration came to power， it significantly adjusted US foreign strategy and released the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report in June 2019. This report marked the official launch of the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” of the US and had a significant impact on the Asia-Pacific regional order. The containment of China’s influence in the Asia-Pacific region by aligning Japan， India， and Australia is an important part of the strategy. However， in the context of the US relative decline， the Trump administration’s “America First” strategy is not friendly to its allies either. Given its strength advantage， the United States not only resorts to protectionist measures such as trade sanction to force its allies， such as Japan and South Korea， to further cede interests in trade negotiations， but also asks these countries to share defense costs， so as to reduce its military spending while maintaining dominance in the Asia-Pacific region.
Second， Japan intends to reorganize the Asia-Pacific regional order. Amid profound changes unseen in a century， the changes in the global strength structure have enhanced the importance of the Asia-Pacific region. This has brought more opportunities for cooperation in the region， but also has led to tension in the regional situation. Against this background， Japan has closely observed the changes in the Asia-Pacific region， and attempted to dominate the restructuring of the Asia-Pacific economic order. On the one hand， adhering to the strategy of prioritizing US-Japan alliance and keeping close pace with the United States in the political， economic， and security fields， Japan has not only actively joined the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”， but also significantly expanded regional political and security cooperation. All LDP governments of Japan often quote international norms to justify their security policy changes， and have adopted these norms throughout Japan’s discourse system， especially in legitimizing Japan’s security policy expansion. Abe Shinzo， during his two terms as prime minister， has also taken constitutional amendment as a major goal of his political career. On the other hand， Japan is not willing to be constrained by the United States in almost every aspect， and actively seeks opportunities by which it may play a bigger role in the construction of the Asia-Pacific regional order， particularly in Asia-Pacific economic cooperation. After the United States announced its withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership （TPP） in 2017， Japan actively contacted the remaining 10 TPP member countries， negotiated with them and eventually launched the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership （CPTPP）， and hoped to continue admitting other members in the Asia-Pacific region， and to advance economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region with CPTPP as a template. To a certain extent， Japan’s active participation in and hope of leading the construction of a new order in the Asia-Pacific region is an important step in achieving its political ambitions， and also a key step to inject Japanese factors into the Asia-Pacific and even the global economic governance system. Third， as its geo-strategic position has greatly improved， ASEAN continues to implement the strategy of balancing big powers. ASEAN has always advocated open regionalism， upheld the “ASEAN Way” of reaching consensus through negotiation and accounting for each other’s comfort， and adopted the strategy of balancing big powers. As the world’s economic center of gravity moves eastward and a multi-polar pattern emerges in the Asia-Pacific region， ASEAN’s role in the construction of Asia-Pacific regional order is even more significant. Although ASEAN still has a certain gap with China， the United States， and Japan in terms of overall strength， its position and role in the Asia-Pacific region cannot be underestimated. With the collective rise of emerging economies such as China and India， and as major changes have taken place in the Asia-Pacific region where regional cooperation is an important carrier， ASEAN is playing a more important role in balancing regional powers and arranging regional institutions. For example， some ASEAN countries have provided the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation （APEC） with an important idea of “reaching consensus through negotiation”. Considering the different levels of economic development among its members， ASEAN does not approve the United States’ proposal to institutionalize APEC， and insists on maintaining its flexible operation. When the US used TPP to “return to the Asia-Pacific”， which threatened the solidarity of ASEAN， ASEAN immediately worked with Japan and China， and collaboratively proposed the “Regional Comprehensive Economy Partnership” （RCEP） in response， providing a new path for Asia-Pacific regional integration. Cooperation frameworks such as “10+1”， “10+3”， “10+6”， and “10+8”， which were established under the leadership of ASEAN， have not only effectively promoted the integration of the Asia-Pacific region， but also established an important position for ASEAN in the construction of Asia-Pacific regional order.
China’s Role in Reconstructing
the Asia-Pacific Regional Order
Currently， the globalization model with a few developed countries as the core has led to uneven development of the global economy， causing a surge in anti-globalization and populist ideas. Coupled with the lack of coordination and compatibility between conventional regional cooperation mechanisms， a “fragmentation” trend has emerged in global and regional governance. In the process of reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， China takes the promotion of a new order and new relations as its due mission， supports “open regionalism” and a progressive approach based on independence and voluntariness， and promotes regional order construction in new ways and with new concepts. First， promoting pragmatic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region through the Belt and Road Initiative. Unlike conventional regional cooperation models， the Belt and Road Initiative that China has proposed has distinctive development-oriented characteristics and reflects the unique experience China has gained as a developing country. Based on the real development needs of developing countries， the Belt and Road Initiative upholds the principles of achieving shared growth through negotiation and collaboration， takes the Silk Road Spirit of peaceful cooperation， openness and inclusiveness， mutual learning， and mutual benefit as its guidance， focuses on promoting policy coordination， facilities connectivity， unimpeded trade， financial integration， and people-to-people bonds， and is committed to benefiting en-route countries and their people， and pushing for the building of a community with shared future for humanity. All these concepts and principles have shown that the Belt and Road Initiative is different from international cooperation models under the conventional Asia-Pacific regional order.
The past Asia-Pacific regional cooperation was obviously exclusive， discriminatory， and condition-based. International cooperation mechanisms， be it bilateral， regional or multilateral， all limited the scope of membership， and member states had to meet specific conditions. The countries and regions excluded not only couldn’t enjoy the due treatment for member states， but might even suffer from negative impact such as trade and investment transfer. In contrast， the Belt and Road Initiative upholds the principles of harmony， inclusiveness， and seeking common ground while shelving differences， and respects the political， economic， and cultural differences of all parties. It does not limit the specific geographic scope or set high thresholds and access conditions for participants and can be joined by any country with development cooperation needs in ways suitable to their specific conditions. This pragmatic way of cooperation has greatly changed the traditional model of order construction in the Asia-Pacific region. The open cooperation model helps the Belt and Road Initiative to carry out in-depth cooperation with the majority of developing countries and regions in the Asia-Pacific region to achieve the goal of common prosperity. The Belt and Road Initiative is an important driving force for the restructuring of the Asia-Pacific economic pattern. It is also an important platform for China to participate in the reform of the Asia-Pacific region’s governance system and to promote the building of a community with shared future for humanity. Second， integrating “fragmented” regional cooperation and exploring new models of the institutional structure in the Asia-Pacific region. With the deepening of Asia-Pacific regional cooperation， cooperation mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region， including APEC， “10+1”， “10+3”， and the East Asia Summit， as well as many bilateral and regional economic and trade cooperation agreements， have continued to emerge， and the phenomena of myriad “fragmentation” and overlapped mechanisms have taken place in regional cooperation， which is undoubtedly a challenge for the regional countries. On the one hand， because of “fragmented” cooperation mechanisms， the countries are faced with the risk of regional fragmentation; on the other hand， large numbers of micro players， such as enterprises in Asia-Pacific economies， are trapped in confusion caused by “fragmentation” when participating in the use of these mechanisms. The “Spaghetti Bowl” effect directly leads to insufficient utilization of regional cooperation mechanisms， whose help on promoting the development of the countries is limited.
In order to cope with the risk of fragmentation in regional cooperation， China has conducted explorations with multiple models on the Asia-Pacific regional structure. In the face of the new situation in reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， Chinese leaders have proposed “China Plans” including building new-type international relations and a community with shared future for humanity based on an accurate grasp of the global trend. China actively promotes the RCEP negotiation process， and integrates multiple “10+1” institutional frameworks in the region by promoting high-level regional economic and trade institutional arrangements to further build a convenient and free regional value chain network， and to help achieve high-quality development in the Asia-Pacific economy represented by East Asia. It also actively promotes the establishment of FTZs in the Asia-Pacific region， and builds inclusive regional institutional arrangements that covers the United States. Under China’s initiative， the APEC Beijing Summit approved the road map for the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Zone， kicked-off and completed the collective strategic research on the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area. Establishing the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area as the new development direction of APEC is conducive to preventing regional institutional divisions and providing effective solutions for achieving inclusive regional growth. Third， providing international public goods to the Asia-Pacific region through a new round of self-driven opening up. In the reconstruction of the Asia-Pacific regional order， the supply of international public goods represented by regional consumer markets is not to be ignored. Historically， both the rise of Japan and the take-off of the “Four Asian Tigers” depended on the “export-oriented” development strategy， which is inseparable from the import of capital from the international community represented by the US and the open US domestic market. Therefore， the reason why the recent US government’s trade protectionism and unilateralism has a huge impact is that it is difficult for US trading partners to completely get rid of its market. As the most important provider of export markets and end consumer markets for other economies， the US can use its domestic market as a power tool to change the domestic preference structure of its market expansion targets， obtain the support of domestic groups in these economies， circumvent opposition from inside these economies， and provide itself with a strategic leeway and a foundation to expand its overseas market.
It can thus be seen that in the process of constructing the Asia-Pacific regional order， opening up the domestic consumer market is of great significance to China. It not only helps to provide the majority of Asia-Pacific countries with the most important public goods for economic development -- regional consumer market， but more importantly， enables China to leverage and expand the global market by enhancing the level of openness， and to participate in a new round of restructuring the global trading system. According to the World Bank， China’s pro-business environment rank climbed to the 31st in the world in 2019， and China has been among the top ten economies with the most significant improvement in business environment for two consecutive years. Over the past five years， China has revised the Catalogue for the Guidance of Foreign-Invested Industries twice and reduced the restrictive measures for foreign investment by 65%. China has also consecutively set up 18 pilot free trade zones， piloted a new management model of Pre-investment National Treatment plus Negative List， and greatly improved the level of opening up.
The Choice of Path in
Reconstructing the Asia-Pacific
Regional Order
In the context of profound changes unseen in a century， China’s best strategy in constructing the Asia-Pacific regional order is to adopt a progressive approach in sorting out the priorities of strategic issues in the Asia-Pacific region. On the basis of the principle of achieving shared growth through negotiation and collaboration， it is necessary for China to explore new areas and ways of cooperation to create a more inclusive new order in the Asia-Pacific region. First， controlling differences between major powers to avoid intensification of conflicts. China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world. The widening of differences and serious conflicts between them will undoubtedly be a geopolitical disaster. Even if there is no direct confrontation between them， this tension will still greatly consume both sides’ strategic resources and bring severely negative impact on their respective economic development and security. China and the United States are fully capable of avoiding this. In terms of security， the two countries should correctly view each other’s strategic existence in the Asia-Pacific region. For the United States， the Asia-Pacific region is an important base to exercise its hegemony， and a strategic region to ensure its leadership in the global order. For China， the Asia-Pacific region is an important stage for its peaceful development， and many issues correlate with China’s national security and core national interests. Based on this analysis， as China has always emphasized and striven for， China and the United States must bridge differences as much as possible， achieve peaceful coexistence， start from single and specific issues （such as functional cooperation areas） and gradually expand the scope of cooperation， and work together to build a new order in the Asia-Pacific region.
Currently， Japan， “a nation built on trade”， has also been adversely affected by US trade protectionism. In fact， Japan and China together constitute an East Asian production network and play an important role in the global value chain. However， the US trade protectionist approach has “artificially” blocked normal international trade and world economic operation. As a result， trade and investment within the Asia-Pacific region fell sharply， and integration in this region was severely challenged. Against this background， China and Japan share common goals in many governance issues such as opposing trade protectionism， safeguarding global free trade， and guaranteeing sustainable economic development in the Asia-Pacific region. China and Japan can absolutely strengthen cooperation through multilateral mechanisms and platforms such as WTO and APEC to jointly oppose protectionist practices and maintain the multilateral trading system. In addition， China and Japan can also lay the economic foundation for building a new order in the Asia-Pacific region through third-party cooperation and new field cooperation. Second， conducting pragmatic cooperation with ASEAN to promote the building of a community with shared future for humanity. ASEAN is an important partner of China in reconstructing the Asia-Pacific regional order. Located in the land-sea convergence zone referred in the Belt and Road Initiative， ASEAN is a priority and an important partner for China in its promotion of the Belt and Road construction. The development of ASEAN is of utmost significance for China to achieve high-quality development and for building a more reasonable regional structure. In the process of promoting cooperation with ASEAN， China can probe into the major concerns of ASEAN countries， strengthen political guidance and strategy connection to achieve coordinated development. In 2015， ASEAN successively released ASEAN Community Vision 2025， ASEAN Political and Security Community Blueprint 2025， ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025， and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community Blueprint 2025. These blueprints uphold political-security community， economic community， and socio-cultural community as pillars， and have chartered the strategic development directions of ASEAN in the next few years. The Belt and Road Initiative and the ASEAN Community Blueprints both uphold political mutual trust， economic integration and cultural inclusiveness as important principles， which is a realistic basis for their strategy connection.
In terms of specific cooperation areas， infrastructure connectivity is a key one between China and ASEAN. The Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity 2025 released by ASEAN in September 2016 has included 15 goals in five prioritized strategic areas -- sustainable infrastructure construction， digital innovation， seamless logistics， regulatory excellence and people mobility. Among them， sustainable infrastructure is the foundation of the master plan and ASEAN countries need to invest more than 110 billion USD each year for infrastructure construction. Most of the infrastructure projects planned to be constructed in ASEAN are compatible with the key areas of the Belt and Road Initiative. In 2018， China and ASEAN released the China-ASEAN Strategic Partnership Vision 2030， and mapped out the future direction of their bilateral relations with the building of a community with shared interest as the bridge. China and ASEAN may strengthen pragmatic cooperation at different levels to promote the building of a China-ASEAN community with shared future.
Third， maintaining a multilateral platform and striving to build an inclusive new Asia-Pacific order. At present， multilateral cooperation mechanisms and platforms represented by the WTO are faced with unprecedented challenges and crises. Nonetheless， WTO is still an important cooperation mechanism， which is extremely important for China to achieve high-quality development. In the Asia-Pacific region， the APEC mechanism is one of the important multilateral platforms for regional affairs in the Asia-Pacific region. Although it is currently facing new challenges in the “post-Bogor” era and under threats from protectionism and unilateralism pursued by the United States， this mechanism still carries high hope from the other economies in the Asia-Pacific region. These economies hope to once again bridge the institutional rift in the Asia-Pacific region through APEC， promote inclusive regional cooperation， and prevent the “decoupling” across the Pacific Ocean. China can continue to play a leading and coordinating role in the APEC mechanism， and continuously improve cooperation levels in the Asia-Pacific region. To be specific， by pushing for coordination and cooperation under APEC and the Belt and Road Initiative， China may work with relevant countries to resolve bottlenecks in the Asia-Pacific region together， strengthen cooperation with major regional economies in areas of common interest， and co-advance and improve the level of open economy in the Asia-Pacific region.