Victor Horatiu Cioban,

Review International Development

Kent Calder, Min Ye, The Making of Northeast Asia,
Stanford University Press, 2010

Kent Calder, Min Ye, The Making of Northeast Asia, Stanford

University Press, 2010
This book, written by Kent Calder, the Director of Edwin Reischauer Center for East Asian
Studies, and Min Ye, Assistant Professor of International Relations at Boston University,
depicts the economic and political evolution of North-Eastern Asian region from 1945
towards 2008, by analyzing its potential threat aspect to the Euro-American hegemony
and the role of the China-Japan- Korea triangle in the international order. It was
elaborated as a consequence of the 2008s GDP analysis1, which presents areas economy
as being 17, 7 % of the world total.

The research is structured on four parts , which centres upon the main task, Preface, notes,
explanatory abbreviations, conclusion, bibliography and index. Each part is organized in two
chapters, with the exception of the last one, that contains four chapters.2 In the
conclusion, the authors sum up the major issues discussed in the study, with references
to the political dimension of the Asian regional development and its impact in the global
context. It is rendered a liberal approach combined with a Realist taste upon the evolution
of the process, taken from a Western-oriented point of view, in accordance to the official
policy of Obama administration. This can be seen in the authors attempt to illustrate the
North-Eastern part of Asia as a serious competitor for EU and US, not only from an
economic point of view, but also from a social and political one. The discourse starts
from the analysis of the specific elements of what is called by them the Shanghai
Circle, which encompasses Japanese metropolis, Korea, Mainland China, Taiwan, Macao
and Hong Kong, placed at three hours flying time from the Chinese city of Shanghai.
Shanghai is viewed as the core of the region, owing to its geographical proximity,
3
organizational proximity and resource complementarity. The area is characterized as

1
GDP= Gross Domestic Product; an aggregate measure of production equal to the sum of the gross values added of all resident
institutional units engaged in production
2 Part 1. Introduction and Theory- Northeast Asia in Global Perspective; Theories of Asian Institutional Development: Changing Context

and Critical Junctures; Part 2. Historical Context: Critical Junctures-The Organization Gap in Historical Perspective: War in Korea and
the First Critical Juncture; Overcoming the Organization Gap : Crises and Critical Junctures; Part 3. Regional Development- Visions of
a More Cohesive Regional Future; A Deepening Web of Regional Connectedness; Part 4-National Transformation-The Transformation of
Chinas Regional Policies; Catalysts: Korea and ASEAN in the Making of Northeast Asia; Japans Dilemma and the Making of
Northeast Asia; The United States and Northeast Asian Regionalism
3 Calder, Kent; Ye, Min, The Making of Northeast Asia, Stanford University Press, 2010, p.10
Victor Horatiu Cioban,
Review International Development
Kent Calder, Min Ye, The Making of Northeast Asia,
Stanford University Press, 2010

having a high economic standard, compared by the authors with the US zone of Eastern
Mississippi. Initially, North-Eastern Asia was marked by rivalry and uncertainty, but after
the Asian financial crisis of 1997, there has begun an integration process between the
three economic, financial and military powers , consisted by mutual assistance policy in
domains such as investment, transport, energy, tourism and free-trade agreements. In the
last decade, they shift their focus from inter-regional to intra-regional association, fact
illustrated by the creation of an institutional building during the trilateral dialogue China-
Japan- Korea. According to Calder and Ye, a significant role was played by social
networks and the spread of multinational corporations inside the Shanghai circle (like the
Japanese and South-Korean companies, Canon, Huawei, Matsushita, Samsung, LG ,
Hyundai etc. which oriented their business interest towards the Chinese market).

The authors are impressed by their short-time progress in the world system, but , at the
same time, they signal a serious hegemonic attempt against US influence in the region.
The danger is perceived as a clear concern, considering that China, Japan and South-
Koreas growth is accompanied by a gradual decline of USA. In fact, their economies are
stronger than ASEAN, EU and NAFTA. While analyzing the global US Dollar reserve as
a main economic aspect, it is noticed that China, Japan, South-Korea and Hong-Kong
concentrate the largest part of it.4 What is more, the authors warn their audience that the
North-East Asian powers tend to form a single geopolitical entity, as a response to the
exclusivist attitude of USA and its allied states, focused on requirements of liberalization
and appliance of human rights. They remark their strong support for Middle-East countries
and other rogue states. However, the process seems to be blocked by the aggressive
policy of North-Korean regime, whose reconciliation with its Cold War rivals is difficult
to predict. The Pyongyangs leaders attitude is marked by contradiction, as the weaponry
tests are frequently followed by intergovernmental meetings and trade exchanges.

The authors anticipate the strengthening of cooperation between the Shanghai circle (
Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong-Kong, Macao) and Mainland China. The intensification of
the areas connections appears as a direct consequence of facing the same challenges,

4
China= 2,4 trillion dollars; Japan=1,02 trillion dollars; South-Korea = 270,9 billion; Hong Kong=240 billion ( ibidem, p.15)
Victor Horatiu Cioban,
Review International Development
Kent Calder, Min Ye, The Making of Northeast Asia,
Stanford University Press, 2010

including energy insecurity, financial vulnerabilities, infrastructural development and

environmental degradation. The founding of institutions and regional bodies represent
another proof of North-East Asian cohesion. In this context, it prevails a Western-
oriented academic pessimism regarding the future relation of North-East countries with
USA and EU organisms. Their predictions seem to be valid, as the recent events follow
the same path. Thus, Min Yes recent article about Chinas Silk Road Strategy (proposed
by Chinese President Xi Jingping) , which appeared in Foreign Policy (November 10, 2014
edition) indicates a state interventionist FTAAP5 of North-East Asian fusion directed
against the Asian-Pacific interest of the US- coordinated TPP.6

5
FTAAP=Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific; a space of Asian -Pacific free trade area proposed by Chinese officials
6
TPP=Trans-Pacific Partnership; trade agreement signed at Wellington (July 18, 2005) between USA and 12 Asian- Pacific nations
(New Zealand, Australia, Brunei, China, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam);