Read the book: «Problems facing the world economic zone»

In the 21st century, regional economic integration continues to be rapidly promoted around the world, especially in Asia, mainly because of the difficulties of multilateral trade negotiations, slow progress, and compared with its economic globalization, regional economic integration has the following benefits: (1) Regional economic integration is achieved by the governments of the participating countries through negotiations and consultations, its "benefits outweigh costs", that is, the process of integration can be controlled, integration of cost expenditure is relatively fair; Although the market space opened up by regional economic integration is smaller than the market space created by economic globalization, its market risk is small; Regional economic integration can increase the ability of individual members and groups to withstand the impact of external markets. (2) Regional economic integration can gradually eliminate trade barriers among members of the region, simplify trade-level procedures, and lead to the cross-border flow of resources and the efficient allocation of resources. (3) Regional economic integration can expand the market size, enable members to exert comparative advantages and economies of scale, and promote the improvement of labor productivity.

(4) Regional economic integration can accelerate scientific and technological exchanges and cooperation among members, develop and utilize new scientific and technological achievements and advanced management means, increase the added value of products and the technical content of products, reduce and save production costs, and improve the international competitiveness and market share of products.(5) Regional economic integration can encourage members to take concerted action to increase regional and sense of destination, thus forming a joint effort to jointly safeguard the principle of priority for regional development and priority for regional security.

However, from international experience, in order to make substantial progress in trade negotiations and the operation of mechanisms, the following theoretical and practical issues must be properly addressed and resolved, regardless of the level of regional economic integration.

1. Exclusivity and openness

The so-called exclusivity of regional economic integration focuses on two issues: first, the qualification of its member States, which must be within the scope of their respective regions. For example, members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations can only be 10 countries in Southeast Asia, while countries in other regions cannot join. India had asked to become a member of ASEAN, but ASEAN rejected it on the grounds that India was a member of the South Asian subcontinent rather than a Southeast Asian country. Second, the limitation of its preferential policies, member states to give preferential treatment to each other is limited to the region, countries outside the region cannot enjoy. The essential meaning of a free trade area is for member countries to reduce trade barriers to each otherand gradually eliminate non- tariff restrictions, but still retain their own protection policies for non-member states. Even when the free trade area develops to the stage of customs union, it is to eliminate each other's import tariffs andrealize free trade, while the external trade barriers are still adopted and the unified external tariff rate is applied. The above-mentioned so-called exclusivity reasonable exclusivity must adhere to exclusivity. In fact, the sameistrueof the European Union and NAFTA. From the theoretical level, regional economic integration has the dual effect of trade transfer and trade creation. But in general the transfer effect is greater than the creative effect. From the practical point of view, regional economic integration is based on the principle of "regional development first”. Therefore, regional economic integration in East Asia, including the establishment of a mechanism for economic cooperation of "10+ 3" and "10+ 1", should still adhere to the principle of different regions and outside the region. However, this does not prevent regional cooperation as a whole and individual from implementing "regional openness", actively developing comprehensive economic cooperation with other regions and countries, and even signing free trade agreements and establishing free trade zones with other countries outside them. In particular, today's regional economic cooperation mechanisms have shown a tendency to expand their organization and integration. ASEAN has expanded from the original 5 to 10 countries, the EU has also experienced a small to large development process, and after the upheavals in Eastern Europe, and the EU has continued to expand eastwards and southwards, with more and more followers. The United States is promoting the establishment of a "free trade area in the Western Hemisphere". In the long run, the United States has also tried to link the Americas with Asia through NAFTA, to form the Pacific Rim and to promote the establishment of an "Atlantic Community" between NAFTA and the European Union. In the long run, regional economic cooperation in Asia, especially in East Asia, cannot fail to pay attention to the new trend of strengthening mutual ties and cooperation among major regional economic cooperation organizations and take corresponding measures.

2. Dominance and non-dominance

Regional economic integration has always been a dispute over the need for regional "leadership cores" or "dominant countries", but there is no definitive conclusion yet. Some people think that the reason for the remarkable progress of regional economic integration in Europe and the Americas is that NAFTA is dominated by the United States, and as a strong leader, the United States spares no effort to promote regionalization. The EU is to "Franco-German axis" to promote regionalization from the economic field to political, military and social integration and other fields. Asia's economic regionalization is "irresponsible", like a string of scattered pearls, lacking an effective main line to string them together. It is precisely because of the lack of strong drivers of regional economic integration that little progress has been made in regional economic integration in Asia. If so, who should lead regional economic cooperation in Asia, especially in East Asia? Nothing but Japan, two is China, three is China and Japan are the joint leader, and the fourth is led by ASEAN. However, Japan considers its economic influence in Asia to be far stronger than China’s , and is a " natural leader" in regional economic cooperation in Asia, and is increasingly worried that China will strengthen its regional advantages and expand its regional influence, which in turn will lead to the status of Asia's first economic power being overtaken and replaced by China. On the contrary, China does not want to see Japan "sitting big" in Regional Economic Cooperation in Asia, preferring to support ASEAN's important role in regional cooperation. In addition, Japan has never had a correct understanding of historical issues, and China and Japan have not yet been able to establish a real mechanism of mutual trust, so it is difficult for China and Japan to jointly lead regional economic cooperation in East Asia. The key element in determining the leader and the dominant is the integration of national strength. Considering this element, China does not yet have the leading power in Asia, and from the perspective of ASEAN foreign policy, it has been adopting a policy of "balance of power among major powers", the essence of which is that it does not want to see any great power over-expanding in East Asia, especially in Southeast Asia, and trying to use ASEAN collective strength as the core of the Asian regional economic and security dialogue.

The United States has important strategic and economic interests in Asia, especially in East Asia, and countries rely on and expect more from the United States than on Japan, so the important agendas and steps of regional cooperation require all countries to consider the intentions of the United States as an important member of the "absence". Mahathir's "Core Forum on East Asian Economy" and Japan's "Asian Monetary Fund" initiative were "dead pool" because they did not include the United States and were opposed by the United States. From the strategic point of view of the United States, any regional economic cooperation entity in Asia or East Asia, excluding the United States, will not receive real support from the United States. The United States will neither support China nor ASEAN in leading regional economic cooperation in East Asia. Developed countries such as the United States have long been dissatisfied with ASEAN's "monopoly" of the ASEAN Regional Forum and have repeatedly called for the establishment of a "double chair". Especially since the East Asian financial crisis, the cohesion within ASEAN has been weakened, economic and political contradictions between them have increased, economic development has fluctuated, and it has not been able to recover to its pre-financial crisis strength. Diplomatically, China's support for ASEAN and the ASEAN Regional Forum to play a leading role in regional economic cooperation and security dialogue is undoubtedly the right choice. But with increasing external pressure and growing internal differences, whether ASEAN countries can unite and withstand external pressure is a diplomatic issue that China should consider as soon as possible.

It is the correct strategic policy to promote the coordinated development of cooperation between China, Japan and South Korea, and China should continue to emphasize that "10 + 3" is the main channel of East Asian cooperation in the future. However, according to the current actual situation in East Asia, the establishment of a "10-3" cooperation mechanism will be quite difficult, and China's focus for this purpose should seem to be on the decision-making of China and ASEAN to establish a free trade area, but this does not affect the "10-3" mutual consensus on certain sectors or cooperation, and make substantial progress. For example, the cooperation of East Asian countries in the financial field has already made greater moves. Japan has concluded currency swap agreements with South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia. China has also concluded currency swap agreements and agreements with countries such as Thailand and Japan. Since the establishment of a free trade area between China and ASEAN will not have the problem of who will lead and control, and there will be no sensitive agricultural subsidies, and the establishment of a free trade area between China and ASEAN is neither the expansion of the ASEAN Free Trade Area nor the replacement of the ASEAN Free Trade Area, the result will be a win-win situation. However, in the process of establishing the "10-3" cooperation mechanism, the issue of its dominance will emerge.