Beeson, Mark. "History and Identity in the Asia-Pacific". In Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC, and Beyond, by Mark Beeson, 4-16. London: Routledge, 2008.

Beeson, Mark. "History and Identity in the Asia-Pacific". In Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC, and Beyond, by Mark Beeson, 4-16. London: Routledge, 2008.

• The countries of the Asia-Pacific do not share a common history, culture, language, form of government, or economic conditions. This has made integration more difficult and raised questions about the viability of the Asian-Pacific identity and region to begin with (4-5).
• For most of the region's history, East Asia was relatively peaceful under the hegemony of China, which prevented regional conflicts from escalating. Most instability and conflict in modern East Asia was beget by European and American imperialism, which led to a 'century of humiliation' for China by these powers and Japan (6).
• East Asian politics are so deeply focused on 19th and 20th Century history and disagreements regarding that because the rise of Japan during that time both embarrassed other powers that failed to achieve its level of development and success and led to Japanese imperialism and colonialism of their countries (6-7).
• The Japanese defeat of European powers in WWII destroyed any legitimacy of the colonial governments, even if Japan's own ambition for a Japanese empire in Asia was crushed by the United States. Japan's victory over the European powers and subsequent defeat by the US restructured power relations in the Asia-Pacific to force out the Europeans and bring America in as a permanent and core member of the region (7).
• The US was instrumental in destroying the last vestiges of colonialism in the Asia-Pacific, replacing them with nationalist and capitalist governments loyal to America (8).
• The rise of East Asia during the post-war period, although part of American plans for the region, was so successful that it scared Americans with the possibility of being out-competed by the developmental economic model there (12).
• The common trait that defined regional identity in East Asia, despite disparate cultures and histories, was prolonged economic growth engineered by national governments (9).
• Japan and Japanese colonialism was important in creating this wider movement of state-led economic growth. Either as a direct result of Japanese colonialism, as in Taiwan and Korea, or because the national leaders had collaborated with the Japanese occupiers, governments throughout East Asia adopted similar styles of economic management (10).
• The 'economic miracle' of East Asia occurred during a period of postwar economic growth and was engineered by developmental states by mandating the reinvestment of revenues into selected highly-competitive industries and slashing social welfare (10-11).
• The Asia-Pacific has a reputation for authoritarianism and even democratic states feature little turnover of elites or, like Japan, are effectively democratic one-party states. Newly democratized countries have either severely illiberal governments, like Malaysia, or are troubled by corruption and violence, like the Philippines. Events like the 2014 military coup in Thailand demonstrate the continued fragility of democracy in the region (14).
• East Asia generally has a very weak civil society, often because of limits of the kind of activities that can be engaged in as a private citizen. Most Asian-Pacific elites have accepted a passive role in return for high rates of economic growth and stability. The lack of a robust civil society affects the kinds of international organizations that can be developed (15).