1. ASEM has, in regularly bringing together East Asian countries and a consolidated group of European partners, contributed to the emergence of a new voice on the global scene, the voice of East Asia. This has important geo-strategic implications as it will permit Asia's position to be strengthened through a partnership with Europe in accordance with a new model of equal partnership.

2. ASEM was not originally conceived as a bloc-to-bloc dialogue process, but it has taken on, more and more, an inter-regional character.

3. Hence, while ASEM should by nature be open to Asia as a whole, and Europe might in future be enlarged, there might be some value in consolidating ASEM first as a Western Europe-East Asia forum, at least for the time being. Nevertheless, ASEM could consider opening further dialogue avenues with countries which might become partners in the future.

4. ASEM should remain an informal process where no decisions have to be taken, nor treaties negotiated. It can be a useful forum to build consensus between East Asia and Western Europe on political dialogues and global issues such as the New Trade Round, international financial architecture, drug trafficking, money laundering, and the environment.

5. Non-institutionalisation in the form of a loose and informal process does not necessarily mean an absence of organisation. The function of a lean and effective secretariat along the lines suggested in the Asia-Europe Vision Group's report, in addition to existing political co-ordination mechanisms, might not be inconsistent with the principles of adding value and avoiding duplication of initiatives. Initiatives such as the ASEM Trust Fund or ASEM Educational Hubs should be given due recognition, and it can be seen that through this loose and informal process, Track I may give birth to various institutions and build infrastructure to promote exchanges between Europe and Asia.

6. A common agenda is not given, but must be built through a continuous effort. Issues such as the challenges of globalisation, the necessity of state and corporate reform, human rights, good governance, and the role of civil society should be discussed. An annual ASEM Roundtable on Globalisation was proposed as a useful vehicle to promote such discussion.

7. Parliamentarians, the media, and NGOs should be more actively associated with the ASEM process, whether through Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) or other initiatives. The role of the ASEF should generally be fully acknowledged at ASEM III, and its mandate should be renewed, backed by the necessary financial commitment.

8. In the economic sphere, ASEM does not yet have any binding obligations. However, it is evolving through peer pressure and discussions on trade and investment liberalization help to build an Asian-European consensus in support of free trade and open economies, as well as international cooperation and globalisation with a human face.

9. Political issues should not be conceptualised too narrowly. Despite initial difficulties and confrontations, it is hoped that ASEM III will forge a new equilibrium for political dialogue based upon mutual respect.

Preface

Executive Summary

Introductory Sessin
Asem: an overview
1. ASEM and the Evolving Global Order
2. ASEM: Tovards an Exciting Inter-Regional Journey

sessionxx I
The Reform Process in Asia and Europe
1. The Reform Process: Asia's Lessons
2. Schedule for Reform in Contemporary States

sessionxx II
ASEM and Trade Issues
1. ASEM and Trade Issues
2. Testing the Subsidiarity Question for ASEM

sessionxx III
ASEM and Political Dialogue
1. ASEM Political Dialogue - Now and in the Future
2. ASEM and Political Dialogue
3. ASEM: Deepening and Broadening the Politicla Dialogue
APPENDICES