4 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 Online ISSN 2412-0731 Original Paper doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 A comparative study of regional strategies of northeast Asian countries Sichen Zhang Institute of Northeast Asian Studies, Heilongjiang Provincial Academy of Social Sciences, Harbin, China; e-mail: sichenzhang@163.com ABSTRACT After the global financial crisis in 2008, the US and Europe have experienced anemic economic growth, whereas Northeast Asia has become the most eco- nomically dynamic region worldwide. The region faced such challenges as rapid economic globalization and regional economic integration, in-depth adjustment of global economic and trade patterns, the Obama administra- tion’s Asian Pivot strategy, and domestic economic transformations. To ad- dress these challenges, Northeast Asian countries put forward development plans and regional strategies: Japan’s Abenomics since 2012; China’s Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road since 2013; South Korea’s Eurasian Initiative proposed by President Park Geun-hye in 2013; Mongolia’s Prairie Road Plan since 2014; Eurasian Economic Union led by Russia since 2015; the TPP revived by Japan as CPTPP after the US withdrawal; and the New North policy proposed by South Korea’s newly-elected president Moon Jae-in in 2017. These projects reflect the countries’ determination to play a more active role in the bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the region. The regional strategies are shaped by each country’s specific economic condi- tions, geopolitical and diplomatic needs. Although these strategies are some- what competitive in such aspects as resources and influence, they also offer more prospects for cooperation and integration of regional economies. KEYWORDS Northeast Asia; regional strategy; comparative study; Belt and Road Initiative; Trans-Pacific Partnership; TPP FOR CITATION Zhang, S. (2018) A comparative study of regional strategies of northeast Asian countries. R-economy, 4(1), 4–9. doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 Сравнительное исследование региональных стратегий североазиатских стран С. Чжан Институт североазиатских исследований, Академия социальных наук провинции Хэйлунцзян, Харбин, Китай; e-mail: sichenzhang@163.com РЕЗЮМЕ После глобального финансового кризиса в 2008 г. США и Европа стол- кнулись со снижением темпов экономического роста, в то время как Се- веро-Восточная Азия стала самым регионом с наилучшей динамикой экономики в мире. Регион столкнулся с такими проблемами, как стреми- тельная экономическая глобализация и региональная экономическая ин- теграция, углубленная адаптация глобальных экономических и торговых моделей, стратегия администрации Обамы «Азиатская ось» и внутрен- ние экономические преобразования. Для решения этих проблем страны Северо-Восточной Азии выдвинули ряд планов развития и региональ- ных стратегий, среди которых: японская «Абеномика» 2012 г., китайские проекты «Новый шелковый путь» и «Морской шелковый путь XXI века» 2013 г.; южнокорейская «Евразийская инициатива»; монгольский план «Прейри-роуд» 2014 г.; «Евразийский экономический союз» 2015 г., воз- главляемый Россией; обновленное после выхода США Транстихоокеан- ское партнерство; и, наконец, политика «нового Севера», предложенная недавно избранным президентом Южной Кореи Мун Чжэ Ином в 2017 г. Эти проекты отражают решимость стран играть более активную роль в двустороннем и многостороннем сотрудничестве в регионе. Региональ- ные стратегии определяются конкретными экономическими условиями каждой страны, геополитическими и дипломатическими потребностями. Хотя эти стратегии несколько конкурируют в таких аспектах, как ресур- сы и влияние, они также предлагают больше возможностей для сотруд- ничества и интеграции региональных экономик. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА Северо-Восточная Азия; региональная стратегия; сравнительные исследования; Инициатива «Один пояс, один путь»; Транс-тихоокеанское партнерство (ТТП) FOR CITATION Чжан, С. (2018) Сравнительное исследование региональных стратегий североазиатских стран. R-economy, 4(1), 4–9. doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 5 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 Introduction Throughout its history, Northeast Asia has been dynamically developing and has been an arena for complex relationships and geopolitical tensions. On the one hand, problems like North Korean nuclear weapons, island disputes, and superpower games create uncertainty of deve- lopment; on the other hand, the centre of glob- al economic growth is moving eastwards, which turns Northeast Asia into the locomotive of the world economic development. Countries in the region devised their plans of national develop- ment and regional strategies, which brought about a complex pattern of regional economic cooperation. Regional strategies and the recent progress of Northeast Asian countries In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping first proposed The Belt and Road Initiative, which focuses on the idea of peace and cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learn- ing and mutual benefit as the incarnation of the Silk Road spirit. The platform of the Ini- tiative is provided by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Silk Road Fund. The central concept for the Initiative is the commu- nity of common destiny [1]. Over the past four years, the positive role of the Initiative has be- come obvious as it gained the support of over a hundred countries. The Initiative differs from the existing rule-oriented regional coopera- tion mechanisms because it offers a new deve- lopment-oriented mode, which provides Eu- rasian countries with an open platform for coop- eration and integration of resources. The Belt and Road Initiative comprises six economic corridors with China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor as the cornerstone. In June 2016, the heads of the three countries – China, Russia, and Mongolia – signed the Draft Plan of the Construction of China-Mongolia-Russia Eco- nomic Corridor. Since then, the common concern of the three partner countries has become the question of how to integrate the Belt and Road Initiative, Russia’s Trans-Eurasia Railway and Mongolia’s Prairie Road. The Economic Corridor is expected to strengthen their trade relationships, facilitate the exchange of human resources and promote common prosperity; it serves as a model for strategic integration and cooperation between countries in Northeast Asia [2]. As a major economy, Japan is closely connect- ed with the United States in the political sphere and in terms of security, which makes it diffi- cult for Japan to find its proper place and identi- ty and makes Japan sway between East Asia and Asia Pacific. From the East Asian Community to ASEAN +6 (Comprehensive Economic Partner- ship for East Asia – CEPEA), from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the constant goal of Japan’s economic strategy is to fight for dominance in the trade of the Asia Pacific region. In March 2013, Shinzo Abe’s administration, de- spite the protests of the domestic opposition, for- mally declared Japan’s entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the US-led twenty-first century trade agreement as its twelfth participant. Japan is interested in the TPP not only be- cause it seeks to dominate in the sphere of trade and investment but also because its government wants to counter the growing influence of China in Asia-Pacific, which coincides with America’s Asia-Pacific Rebalancing strategy [3]. U.S. Presi- dent Donald Trump quit the TPP soon after he took office in 2017. After that, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in vain tried to persuade America to return. Failing to do so, he decided to revive the TPP. In November, the eleven remaining mem- bers decided that they would continue to move ahead without the US. A new free trade agreement Comprehensive Progressive Trans-Pacific Partner- ship (CPTTP) will be signed after the conclusion of negotiations. Although the scale of CPTPP has reduced significantly, Japan’s intention to take the lead in this new Asia-Pacific economic coopera- tion system remains unchanged. South Korea’s Eurasian Initiative is an im- portant international cooperation initiative and national development strategy, which was pro- posed by former President Park Geun-hye in Oc- tober 2013. It aims to expand South Korea’s for- eign trade and promote the country’s economic and trade cooperation with European and Asian countries for sustainable development of Eurasia [4]. As a neighbor and strategic partner of Chi- na, South Korea has been actively participating in China’s Belt and Road Initiative. In March 2015, South Korea decided to join the Asian Infrastruc- ture Investment Bank. South Korea is also actively involved in promoting the free trade agreement (FTA) between China, Japan, and South Korea. In December 2015, China-South Korea FTA came into effect, which had a positive impact on Chi- https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 6 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 Online ISSN 2412-0731 na-Japan-South Korea FTA negotiations and was beneficial for South Korea’s economic integra- tion in Northeast Asia. However, the influence of the situation on the Peninsula and the US-South Korean alliance have soured the close economic and trade relations between China and South Ko- rea. In September 2016, South Korea, despite the strong opposition from China, Russia and other neighboring countries, allowed the US to deploy its THAAD missile system on its territory. Since then, the relationship between China and South Korea have deteriorated. In March 2017, the im- peachment of President Park made the Eurasian Initiative face an uncertain future. In September 2017, the incumbent president Moon Jae-in intro- duced the New North policy, which aims to con- nect the Korean Peninsula, the Russian Far East, Northeast Asia and Eurasia continent. This policy is expected to enhance economic cooperation in the region, eventually resulting in an integrated regional organization similar to the EU, which would allow the countries to ease the geopolitical tensions and achieve common prosperity [5]. Russia is a big Eurasian country, whose eco- nomic interests are largely oriented towards the EU. Since 2014, the economic sanctions imposed by Western countries and the following eco- nomic downturn forced Russia to start seeking new strategic support and opportunities for eco- nomic cooperation in Asia-Pacific. In January 1, 2015, the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union was established. It is expected that this treaty will lay the foundation for multilateral integration within the CIS region, compared to that of the European Union [6]. It is also planned that the Eurasian Economic Alliance will provide a free flow of goods, services, personnel and funds by 2025. The ultimate goal is to create a suprana- tional alliance and to form a single market. Russia has launched a series of projects to accelerate the development of the Far East, to stimulate the transition of the Russian economy and create a more advantageous environment for attracting investment from the Asia Pacific countries. In addition, Russia is also promoting economic and trade exchanges with China and other Asian Pacific countries, actively partici- pates in the construction of China-Russia-Mon- golian Economic Corridor, in the strategic inte- gration of the Belt and Road Initiative and the Eurasian Economic Union. In June 2016, in his speech at St Petersburg International Economic Forum, President Putin called for the establish- ment of the Eurasian Partnership, which should include the Eurasian Economic Union, India, Iran, South Korea, China and CIS countries. The Eurasian Partnership is a logical continuation of the Look East strategy, expansion of the Eurasian Economic Union, and the companion volume of the Belt and Road Initiative [7]. Located between the two great powers of China and Russia, Mongolia occupies an import- ant geographical position. In order to revitalize its economy, promote industrial innovation and develop its energy and mining industry, Mongo- lia proposed the Prairie Road plan in September 2014. The plan comprises five projects of build- ing an expressway connecting Russia and China, electric circuit, natural gas and oil pipelines, and an electrified railway across Mongolia [8]. The idea behind the plan is to strengthen partner- ship with Eurasian countries in logistics, energy and trade and to integrate into the Asia Pacific economic through the construction of modern infrastructure. In May 2017, Mongolian Prime Minister Jargaltulga Erdenebat expressed will- ingness to participate in mutually beneficial co- operation within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative. The two governments signed the memorandum of understanding Integration of Mongolia’s Development Road and China’s Belt and Road. Development Road is the new name for Prairie Road project, with the basic connota- tion unchanged [9]. A comparison of regional strategies and development trends of Northeast Asian countries After the global financial crisis in 2008, the US and Europe experienced anemic economic growth, whereas Northeast Asia has become the most economically dynamic region worldwide. The region faced such challenges as rapid eco- nomic globalization and regional economic inte- gration, in-depth adjustment of global economic and trade patterns, the Obama administration’s Asian Pivot strategy, and domestic economic transformations. To address these challenges, Northeast Asian countries put forward develop- ment plans and regional strategies: Japan’s Abe- nomics since 2012; China’s Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road since 2013; South Korea’s Eurasian Initiative proposed by President Park Geun-hye in 2013; Mongolia’s Prairie Road Plan since 2014; Eurasian Economic Union led by Russia since 2015; the TPP revived by https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 7 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 Japan as CPTPP after the US withdrawal; and the New North policy proposed by South Korea’s new- ly-elected president Moon Jae-in in 2017. These strategies reflect the countries’ determination to play a more active role in the process of bilateral and multilateral cooperation in this region [10]. The similarities and differences of these strategies are largely determined by each country’s different economic, geopolitical and diplomatic needs. The Belt and Road Initiative, covering more than 64% of the world’s population, is the larg- est in scale since it is open not only for countries located along the Belt and Road but also for any other countries willing to participate. After the US quit the TPP, the new, Japan-led CPTPP now in- cludes eleven members in Northeast Asia, South- east Asia, Oceania, North America and South America. This organization follows the diplomat- ic concept of global diplomacy proposed by Abe’s administration. The Eurasian Partnership led by Russia has expanded the geographical range of the Eurasian Economic Union from the six for- mer Soviet Union countries in central Eurasia to all Asian and European countries and regional economic organizations. South Korea’s Eurasian Initiative is focused on the Korean Peninsula, Russia and China, while the New North policy is designed to create an economic community ex- tended to the Northeast Asia and even to Eurasia. Mongolia wants to play a more active role as the Eurasian land bridge which connects Northeast Asian countries with those in Central Asia, West Asia and Europe through the Prairie Road [11]. Unlike other FTAs in Asia Pacific region, the TPP has high standards on labour, the en- vironment, rules of origin, intellectual property, and government procurement. Compared with the TPP, the Belt and Road Initiative is more development-oriented as it seeks to integrate the resources of regional countries and achieve common development and prosperity [12]. It is a global public product created by China and jointly built by the participating countries. Rus- sia’s Eurasian Economic Union is an institution- al regional integrated cooperation organization system of high geopolitical significance. The Eurasian Partnership is an economic develop- ment initiative aimed at promoting integration in Eurasia. Both South Korea and Mongolia’s development in Northeast Asia region is closely related to big power politics, which means that both of their policies seek strategic integration with China and Russia. As for strategic goals, the TPP aims for big- ger external markets, and more importantly, it seeks to establish new global trade and invest- ment rules, play the leading role in Asia Pacific regional economic cooperation and counter Chi- na’s growing regional influence in East Asia. The Initiative connects the development of China with countries along the Belt and Road through con- nectivity policies, infrastructure, trade, finance and people. By fostering interconnections and creation of a new open, inclusive, and balanced regional economic cooperation mechanism, the Initiative aims to form a mutually-beneficial com- munity of interests or a community of common destiny. Russia’s Eurasian Partnership puts the Eurasian Economic Union within a wider frame- work of Eurasian integration, treating it as an up- dated version of Look East strategy and as a part of Russia’s long-term strategy for revitalization of the Far East [13]. The new President of South Korea Moon Jae-in’s policy was designed to address the problem of policy is the escalating North Korean nuclear crisis. Thus, the aim of this policy is to al- leviate the geopolitical tension in Northeast Asia, create favorable conditions for long-term peace and regional cooperation, and ultimately achieve common prosperity. The Belt and Road Initiative has been imple- mented for four years now and comprises over a hundred countries and international organi- zations. More than 30 countries are involved into institutional cooperation and more than 40  countries and international organizations have signed cooperation agreements with China. Chinese enterprises invest more than 50 billion US dollars in the countries along the Belt and Road; they are building 56 economic and trade cooperation zones in more than 20 countries, thus creating a large number of jobs. The con- cept of building a community of common destiny through the construction of the Belt and Road is gaining more and more recognition and support in the global community. In February 2016, the TPP agreement was signed by twelve countries representing about 40% of the world’s economic output, which made the TPP the largest FTA in the world. Af- ter the withdrawal of the US, despite some pes- simistic forecasts, the impact of the CPTPP on the Asia Pacific regional integration process is still tremendous. This effect is likely to persist even if the US never returns. In East Asia, Japan is also involved in RCEP negotiations and Chi- https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 8 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 Online ISSN 2412-0731 na-Japan-South Korea FTA negotiations. If the CPTPP is successfully signed and comes into force, together EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), Japan will further enhance its economic influence in the world. This means that other East Asian countries should contem- plate some countermeasures [14]. Compared with the Belt and Road Initiative and the TPP, other regional strategies attracted less attention from the outside world. For example, although the Eurasian Economic Union came into force three years ago, it was weakened by Russia’s declining economy and Western sanctions, which made member states seek help from Europe and the United States. South Korea upgraded the Eur- asian Initiative to the New North strategy, Mongo- lia changed the Prairie Road to Development Road in order to respond to the changing domestic and international situation better. Although the regional strategies of North- east Asian countries are competitive in terms of resources and influence, they also complement and support each other, so the collaboration space is far greater than that of competition [15]. China’s Belt and Road has provided a new type of regional economic cooperation mode in North- east Asia. Unlike the previous regional coopera- tion mechanisms, the Belt and Road is an open platform for cooperation, which enables coun- tries with different development strategies to complement each other. The Belt and Road Ini- tiative is connected with other regional projects seeking to enhance the countries’ competitive advantages and help them build common inter- ests: China’s Belt and Road and Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union; Belt and Road and Mongolia’s Prairie Road; Belt and Road and South Korea’s Eurasian Initiative, and China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor. The coordinated develop- ment of each country should stimulate integra- tion of regional economies and promote the Asia Pacific regional integration. Conclusion Although the US is not a traditional North- east Asian country, its presence in the region must not be underestimated. Barack Obama’s Asia-Pa- cific Rebalance strategy and the TPP agreements have profoundly affected the pattern of economic cooperation in Northeast Asia. At the beginning of 2017, when President Donald Trump took of- fice, he announced his withdrawal from the TPP to fulfill the commitments of putting America first and making America great again that he had taken during his presidential campaign. In November, during his first trip to Asia, President Trump pro- posed the Free and Open Indo-Pacific strategy  – an important symbol of his Asia-Pacific strategic readjustment. The strategy focused on India as an important strategic partner together with Ja- pan and Australia, and was, therefore, welcomed in Japan. With the introduction of the concept of Indo-Pacific to replace Asia-Pacific, the focus of Asia-Pacific strategy has been extended to the Indian Ocean. India, which is enjoying a gradual rise in its economic and geopolitical importance, is used to reintegrated the geostrategic layout of the Asia-Pacific region. The change of the name from Asia-Pacific Rebalance to Indo-Pacific, how- ever, does not mean that the US government have abandoned their goal to contain China’s growth. At this stage, although the Indo-Pacific Strategy cannot yet be regarded as a mature regional strat- egy, we should not underestimate its impact on the process of the Northeast Asian integration. The main driving force behind the reform of the future order in Northeast Asia will be provided by the growing regional influence of China and the strategic choice of the United States. Against the current slowdown in world eco- nomic growth and the rising anti-globalization sentiments, the economy of Northeast Asia, un- like the rest of the world, still maintains its vitali- ty and growth. The year of 2017 saw many events that were important for economic and trade cooperation in Northeast Asia: for example, in May, China hosted the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing, involv- ing delegations from Japan and South Korea. At the Forum, it was announced that 76 major agreements had been signed and 270 deliverable results had been achieved. It was the first such official occasion when Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed his willingness to cooper- ate. Moreover, Japan sent the largest delegation of over 250 businesspeople from three major economic groups to China in November. In No- vember 2017, the APEC Summit in Vietnam re- affirmed the commitment of its participants to supporting sustainable economic growth and cooperation. At the meeting of the RCEP par- ticipating countries, a joint statement was issued that the RCEP would conclude the negotiations in 2018, thus marking an important step towards signing a multilateral free trade agreement in the Asia Pacific region. https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(1), 4–9 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001 9 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 References 1. Zhao Kejin. (2017). Northeast Asia’s Future and China’s Role. Contemporary World, 3, 8–11. 2. Xi Rentana. (2016). Construction of China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor: A Perspec- tive of Sub-Regional Cooperation. Russian, Central Asian & East European Studies, 2, 83–95. 3. Chen Youjun. (2017). A Study on Japan’s Economic Partnership Strategy in Asia-Pacific Re- gion. Japanese Studies, 2, 83–101. 4. Piao Ying-ai & Zhang Linguo. (2016). Studies on the Strategic Docking of China’s Belt and Road Initiative with Republic of Korea’s Eurasian Initiative. Northeast Asia Forum, 1, 104–114. 5. Yu Mei. (2017). Regional Economic Integration in East Asia and the Strategy of FTA in China. Reformation & Strategy, 33, 38–41. 6. Wang Shuchun & Zhu Yan. (2017). Eurasian Partnership: Depth Analysis under a Multidi- mensional Perspective. Russian Studies, 2, 17–43. 7. Pang Dapeng. (2017). Russian “Great Eurasian Partnership”. Russian Studies, 7, 5–17. 8. Hua Qian. (2015). On Strategic Connectivity between the OBOR Initiative and Mongolian Pasture Road Strategy. Global Review, 6, 51–65. 9. Zhang Xiujie. (2017). Coordinating “Belt and Road” Initiative and “Development Road” Proj- ect. Inner Mongolia Social Sciences (Chinese), 38(5), 200–205. 10. Zhang Yunling. (2017). The Regional Relationship of Northeast Asia: Pattern, Order & Pros- pect. Journal of Northeast Asia Studies, 2, 3–8. 11. Yu Hongyang, Bekhbaatar Odgerel & Ba Dianjun. (2015). On the Basis and Obstacle of Chi- na-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor. Northeast Asia Forum, 1, 96–106. 12. Ren Xiaofei & Da Zhigang. (2016). Northeast Asia Regional Connectivity Cooperation Pros- pects. The Border Economy and Culture, 12, 12–14. 13. Gao Qi. (2016). The Historical Contexture and Prospect of Russian Regional Strategy. Rus- sian Central Asian & East European Market, 3, 65–73. 14. Zhang Yunling. (2017). Japan’s Regional Economic Strategy in Asia-Pacific and East Asia. Japanese Studies, 3, 1–11. 15. Wang Hao & Xu Jia. (2016). The Cooperation of China-Japan-Korea FTA Construction in Northeast Asia. Asia-pacific Economic Review, 4, 3–8. Information about the author Sichen Zhang – Research assistant of Institute of Northeast Asian Studies, Heilongjiang Pro- vincial Academy of Social Sciences (No. 501 Youyi Road Daoli District, Harbin, China); e-mail: sichenzhang@163.com. U.S. President Donald Trump took the first Asian trip to Japan, South Korea, China, Viet- nam and the Philippines. He signed cooperation agreements worth a total of 253.5 billion U.S. dollars during his visit to China, setting a new record of world trade and economic coopera- tion. Although economic and trade cooperation in Northeast Asia will still suffer from such neg- ative factors such as the US-Japan-ROK military alliance, North Korean nuclear crisis, island dis- putes and so on, the overall trend is still favo- rable. Although the CPTPP led by Japan and the Indo-Pacific Strategy of the U.S. will add uncer- tainty to the process of regional economic inte- gration in Northeast Asia, in the long run, the high-standard terms of trade advocated by the TPP will promote other FTAs in Asia-Pacific re- gion. Looking ahead, it is highly likely that coun- tries in Northeast Asia should continue to build common interests, promote modernization and coordinate their development strategies to en- sure regional economic integration. https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.1.001