Japan and China: Bitter Rivals and Close Partners. Asia Policy Brief 2013/03, June 2013

Japan and China trade a lot between each other. Unfortunately, however, they also argue a lot with each other. Since Tokyo’s purchase of three uninhabited Japanese-controlled islets in the East China Sea from their private owner in September 2012, the main subject of dispute has been that of sovereignty over maritime territories. While bilateral trade amounted to an impressive $333 billion in 2012 (slightly less than in 2011, when bilateral trade reached $345 billion), a bilateral territorial dispute over control and sovereignty of what Tokyo calls Senkaku and Beijing calls the Diaoyu Islands will most probably continue to remain at the very top of the agenda of Sino-Japanese relations in the months ahead.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB): China’s new multilateralism and the erosion of the West. Security Policy Brief No. 63, April 2015

China will launch a new development bank for Asia later this year, called the AIIB. 58 countries worldwide have already applied to become founding members, including numerous Western nations. This policy brief argues that the AIIB constitutes an important international development, as it reflects a new geopolitical reality and marks a new turn in China’s practice of multilateralism. It also looks critically at the European uncoordinated response to the AIIB, and what it tells about Europe’s shrinking role in the world.

Towards a Dynamic Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM)? EU Centre Singapore Working Paper No. 14, May 2013

The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) launched in 1996 is into its 17th year, and has expanded from a membership of  26 to 51. ASEM membership is made up of 10 ASEAN countries, the ASEAN Secretariat, China, Japan, South Korea,  Mongolia,  Bangladesh,  India,  Pakistan, Australia, New  Zealand  and  Russia  on the Asian side,  and the  27  EU  member states,  the  European  Commission,  Norway  and  Switzerland  on  the  European side.  Yet,  with such  impressive and diverse membership accounting for around 60% of the world’s population, 50% of global GDP,  and up to 60% of world trade, it remains relatively unknown in the public domain. There is also a palpable sense  that not all is well as interest in ASEM (particularly among the leaders) may wane without adequate follow‐up  actions, concrete deliverables and improved visibility.    The  challenges faced by ASEM were discussed in a recent Symposium in Yangzhou organised by the Chinese  government and co‐sponsored by Laos, India, Poland and the Asia‐Europe Foundation (ASEF).    Into its 17th year, ASEM remains essentially a forum for dialogue. After an initial euphoria following the launch   of the inaugural summit in Bangkok in 1996, symbolising Asia’s and Europe’s commitment to step up engagement  with each other, ASEM has since been plagued by the perennial questions of its lack of effectiveness, efficacy and  visibility, and doubts about sustained interest by its political leaders in light of the lack of concrete deliverables.   This paper drawn in part from an earlier article on The Asia‐Europe Meeting (ASEM) in the Palgrave Handbook on  EU‐Asia Relations (2013), and from the discussions at the above ASEM Symposium, will begin with an examination  of the on‐going debates with regards to the challenges faced by ASEM and the various suggestions to address  some  of these  challenges.  The  paper will  conclude with some  observations  on the real  issues  behind these  debates and a prognosis on the future development of ASEM.   

Member State BITS after the Treaty of Lisbon: solid foundation or first victims of EU investment policy? Research Paper in Law, 02/2012

[Introduction.] This paper discusses the uncertain future of Member State BITs with third countries in the light of the developing EU investment policy. The question will be examined on the basis of the proposed Regulation establishing transitional arrangements for bilateral investment agreements between Member States and third countries presented by the Commission on 7 July 20101 and the European Parliament’s Position adopted at first reading on 10 May 2011.2 The proposed Regulation and the Commission Communication of the same day are meant to be the “first steps in the development of an EU international investment policy”.3 The first chapters present the legal framework relevant for this question and its evolution to better understand the particular challenges of this transition process. The second chapter examines the relationship of EU law and investment law, with a brief introduction of the notion of investment law and the scope of the EU’s new investment competence. The third chapter outlines the legal framework for the continuation and termination of treaties under international and EU law. The fourth chapter concerns BITs, first covering the particular nature of BITs and then the CJEU’s judgments in the BIT Cases of 2009. The fifth chapter consists of a step by step analysis of the different provisions of the proposed Regulation.

50 years of the ‘twin engine’. Franco-German reconciliation, European integration and reflections for Asia. EU Centre Singapore Background Brief No. 8, March 2013

On 22 January 2013, French President François Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel gathered in Berlin to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Élysée Treaty, the document that ended centuries of rivalry and warfare between their two countries. It is all too easy to forget the importance of Franco-German reconciliation. The 1950 Schuman Declaration, which led to the creation of the European Union’s (EU) predecessor, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), sought to render the prospect of war between France and Germany ‘not only unthinkable but materially impossible’. Over 60 years later, when the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee noted that indeed, ‘war between Germany and France is unthinkable’. Halfway around the world in Asia, the other theatre of World War II, tensions between China and Japan have arisen, with Taiwan and South Korea also in the fray. Nationalist movements in these countries have grown. This background brief lays out the issues for a timely reappraisal of the applicability, or otherwise, of the European integration and reconciliation processes to East Asia. The brief seeks to outline the contours of the historic act of Franco-German reconciliation, and its consequences ever since. Starting from a brief look at the history of rivalry and war between the two countries, the brief examines the events leading to the signing of the Élysée Treaty in 1963, and the development of Franco-German exchanges that have cemented the relationship. Difficulties between the countries are also raised. A timescale analysis of the opinion of the two publics is considered, as a measure of the success of Franco-German reconciliation.