Search

Since the late 1990s, many developed states and customs territories have been seeking out preferential trade deals. This article examines this trend, which has been especially evident in the Asia-Pacific, and focuses specifically on Australia as a leading exponent of preferentialism in the region. The article has two distinct aims. First, to shed light on the thinking behind Australia's foreign economic policy and, specifically, to examine the motivations for moving away from multilateral and non-discriminatory means of advancing its free trade agenda in the region. Second, it aims to examine the developing dynamics of regional economic co-operation in the Asia-Pacific given the stasis of existing institutional efforts. This paper begins with a brief examination of the regional context and Australia's approach to trade policy. It then considers the nature of Australia's preferential bilateralism and its aims and motivations. The article shows that Australian policy-makers believe that preferential agreements can provide trade creation through market access, as well as broader benefits which derive from market expansion. Australia is motivated to pursue preferentialism by concern about existing institutions, by the technical appeal of bilateral agreements, and by the broader trend toward preferentialism in the international system, as well as shifts in its own domestic politics. The paper concludes with a short examination of the character of regionalism in the Asia-Pacific in the light of burgeoning regional bilateralism. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In a rapidly changing geopolitical and strategic environment in which the current US administration is willing to demonstrate to the world that the pursuit of its national interest will not be encumbered by multilateral forums, what role will US bilateral alliance partners such as Japan and Australia play in redefining the international order, especially in their area of primary interest – East Asia? This paper examines an Australian proposal for establishing an informal security dialogue at the ministerial level comprising the United States and two of its bilateral allies in the Asia-Pacific. While the dialogue process has begun, the success of any such structure, however, will be largely coloured by accommodating the very different histories and strategic cultures that have developed within these countries, and the very different expectations other regional states have of them. Through the examples of the war on terror and the war against Iraq, this paper argues that there is little evidence of structured co-operation at the ministerial level in place. Further, any exclusive high-level security dialogue which forms around this troika will incur the suspicion of many East Asian nations, as it may be seen as a platform for unrestrained US unilateralism and exceptionalism, which may in turn have negative implications for Japan and Australia's continuing role in Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]