APEC's founding and subsequent development has been seen as primarily driven by the ‘middle’ and smaller powers of Asia, such as Australia and the ASEAN countries, with Japan as a secondary, if supportive, and the US as a passive and reluctant, player. This article, while acknowledging Australia's essential leadership in the founding process, uses new evidence about it to revise views of Japan and the US's roles in APEC. I argue that the former played a more major role in APEC's founding and that the latter was more positive in its thinking about that forum than has been acknowledged. This should force us to rethink the politics of APEC, paying more attention to how the political economy and relationship of the two major powers in the region influence the patterns of cooperation and conflict in it. It should also lead us to reconsider the efficacy of the major theories of international relations that might be used to explain APEC's politics and development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ellis S. Krauss (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from The Pacific Review