Awkward states and regional organisations: the UK and Australia compared

Warleigh-Lack, Alex, He, Baogang and Murray, Philomena 2011, Awkward states and regional organisations: the UK and Australia compared, in UACES 2011 : Annual Conference : Exchanging Ideas on Europe 2011, UACES, Cambridge, England.


Title Awkward states and regional organisations: the UK and Australia compared
Author(s) Warleigh-Lack, Alex
He, Baogang
Murray, Philomena
Conference name The University Association for Contemporary European Studies. Conference (41st : 2011 : Cambridge, England)
Conference location Cambridge, England
Conference dates 5 - 7 Sep. 2011
Title of proceedings UACES 2011 : Annual Conference : Exchanging Ideas on Europe 2011
Editor(s) [unknown]
Publication date 2011
Conference series The University Association for Contemporary European Studies. Conference
Publisher UACES
Place of publication Cambridge, England
Summary  
Both the UK and Australia have experienced difficulties with engaging in regional integration. The UK has famously been labelled by Stephen George as an 'awkward partner' in the EU context, with other member states as well as the UK itself often questioning Britain's economic, political and cultural closeness to the rest of the EU in the face of its transatlantic ties and allegedly 'special relationship' with Washington. Australian policy towards regional organisations in South East Asia and the Asia-Pacific has also been equivocal about regional integration, championing the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) as a means of reorienting itself towards Asia but always with the danger of being considered a proxy for the US by other nations in the region. Yet more recently Australia has proposed a new regional architecture for Asia. This paper compares the UK and Australia as 'awkward' states in regional integration, tracing their respective positions on three key 'material' issues of regional integration - institutions, economic policy and security - as well as the more ideational issues of belongingness and identity. It debates which mix of material and ideational factors best accounts for this difference of the UK and Australia from the mainstream in their respective regions. These conclusions are then used to generate hypotheses for future comparative research.
Language eng
Field of Research 160699 Political Science not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 940299 Government and Politics not elsewhere classified
HERDC Research category E2 Full written paper - non-refereed / Abstract reviewed
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30049752

Document type: Conference Paper
Collection: School of Humanities and Social Sciences
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 54 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 06 Dec 2012, 10:35:38 EST by Grace Goh

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.