- EURASIAREVIEW.COM - A la une - Hier 13:31

ASEAN Drifting Towards Ignorance And Oblivion – Analysis

ASEAN has been fixated with the decades old strategic hedging mantra, positioning itself as the growing power in regional economic and geopolitical dynamics under the self imposed strategic architecture of non-alignment, hoping to get both the security deterrence and economic support that it needs through external dependence, but remains predominantly reluctant to take sides in avoiding upsetting the apple cart. The region and ASEAN continue to be hypocritical in their stances, demanding American security umbrella while continuing to rip off Washington in tariff and market advantages, while being vague and refraining from standing up against Beijing for the fear of economic retaliation. The region views the US as the most needed and powerful security umbrella in standing up to China and in maintaining the rules-based order and upholding the sanctity of the maritime law and international law and in deterring Chinese aggression, a path that ASEAN itself is unable to overtake on its own because of its self-limiting approach and in avoiding retaliations from Beijing. Yet, the region is cozying up to China for the decades old economic and investment dependence for easy and cheap capital and investment inflow from China led mechanisms ranging from BRI to RCEP, all while relying on the US in fulfilling its security vulnerabilities and the fear of a more bellicose Beijing. While cognisant of the decades old trade imbalance with the US and in reaping the benefits of the trade surplus, regional players have been piggy riding on this systemic exploit, all while continuing to receive the security umbrella and incentives, enjoying enormous growth, all thanks to the open access to US market and a steady inflow of Chinese backed economic and infrastructure stimulus. The region also is lacking the appetite to spend more on defence and improving GDP defence spending percentage, instead focusing more on domestic needs and regime security, while continuously relying on the easy US security umbrella by using the Chinese fear factor and the need for US involvement in its containment as a pretext in passing the buck to Washington to do most of the heavy lifting, while the region is conveniently piggy riding on this. The buck stops with Trump, and the region is jolted into a reality check, trying to increase internal cohesion and synergy in forming a greater united regional voice in garnering higher bargaining chips in the tariff negotiations, all while backed by China and with the fear of a parallel economic retaliations from Beijing should the region kowtow to Washington in meeting the tariff demands. ASEAN is hence now further trapped in its own game of the decades long power balancing, and Trump is being used as a convenient scapegoat in shifting the blame to his punitive actions and framing his tariff reset as a violation of normative trade order, hoping to placate Beijing and avoiding sudden strong conforming measures that will strain Beijing further. Internal unity is fragile and worsening, with factions and mutual wariness, and a divided response to China, and other players having their individual strategic calculations in dealing with China. Each is unwilling to compromise on its own national interests and sovereignty in getting the best response and calculated dealings with China, and is unwilling to serve the region’s broader interests at the expense of its own. Manila is getting more isolated in its direct hardline approach to Beijing’s intimidation, while other players stubbornly stick to their hedging and backdoor diplomacy. The region will not lose patience with the US, as it is self aware that it is in serious security risk with deeper risk urgency under the shadow of Beijing, and the US is seen as the only power able to both provide a clear deterrence and an economic lifeline away from a Beijing centric power dependence. ASEAN does not have the privilege of a choice to shift its security dependence thorugh conventional hedging and expansion of its defence and economic friendshoring alone, although Malaysia as the current chair has been ramping up efforts to court the Gulf states, BRICS, the Middle East and BRICS and the Global South platforms in pivoting away from Washington’s periphery. This is due to its vulnerable security context and a weak intra-region economic and security ecosystem under the constant risks of flashpoints and conflicts in the region, without the US deterrence and due to the fragility of the grouping’s oversight and structural framework in keeping peace and stability, despite it trying to boost confidence and trust by courting with the alternative system. The US will remain to be seen as not only the most important security and economic provider, but, but as the only power capable to deter Chinese aggression and preserving a free and open Southeast Asia and the Indo Pacific, and the region sees this reality as inevitable, and hence does not look at the US as fading in relevance. Instead, it sees Trump as the unnecessary stumbling block bullying his way through, and tries to strengthen a multi-faceted network of resistance with China and BRICS, which remains a foolish move. The US remains the sole security provider with the biggest deterrence to the region. No other country but the US has the blue-water naval capacity to challenge China’s militarized outposts in the South China Sea. ASEAN claimant states rely heavily on US naval presence for strategic cover, and the US is still the only partner offering high-end missile defense, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) technology. China offers none of these. The region must instead stem the tide and address the looming risks of pushing Washington further away with its antagonistic approach against the Trump administration, without wanting to increase its own share of the burden in maintaining regional peace and stability. ASEAN’s Perpetual Self Defeating Trap ASEAN’s approach has been a strategic mistake and a serious flaw from the outset. Hoping to get the best from both sides, all while trying to project a unified image and using this self imposed stance of being a power balancer through its neutrality stance and a regional platform to bring warring powers to the dialogue table, through mechanisms such as the ARF, and deterrence measures including the SEANWFZ and the TAC have not only been futile, but further empowering and emboldening Beijing to increase its reach and grip in the region through leveraging on the region’s stance of non-alignment, where a retreating US power presence and deterrence through ASEAN’s wrong messaging will result in a freer hand for Beijing to heighten its power projections in the region. These traditional roles of ASEAN in hoping to deter conflicts clearly failed, as Beijing continues its assertive actions in South China Sea to muted response from ASEAN, barring individual efforts from Manila. Consistent hypocrisy has been shown, in condemning certain deterrence moves such as AUKUS, but privately and individually welcoming this as a need to bolster regional deterrence, and this is done to avoid upsetting Beijing. AUKUS has been called out for potentially destabilising the region and causing an arms race, but Chinese nuclear-powered submarines are still actively operating in the South China Sea, as part of the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) broader strategy to assert dominance, with little to no strong response from ASEAN. ASEAN has been seen as a lost cause by Washington in calling out China and standing up to it, and the onus is on ASEAN to realise there is no quick fix to its economic woes by hoping to create new alternative economic sources. The US market remains the most important for the region, and so does Washington’s technological and security package. The current Trump stance will not push ASEAN countries away, but this is being capitalised on by the regional players to play hard ball and to shift the blame to Trump, all while denying its own responsibilities to support and to fund its own security needs, and playing the victim card. For the past decade, ASEAN has flirted with a dangerous dependency, tilting closer to China in trade, infrastructure, and even strategic language, while failing to fully embrace the enduring value of the U.S. presence. This drift was encouraged by the continuous dependence on China’s BRI and ASEAN’s hedging diplomacy through the reluctance to offend China which has weakened internal unity. Should this go on too far, ASEAN will be left with the worst deal, and is shooting itself in the foot, and worst, being left on its own in funding its own security needs. On its own, the region is no match to China’s military build-up and capacities, and with no formal military support and alliances. The Middle East and Gulf states have no direct interests and intent to come to the region’s security rescue barring certain commercial military deals, owing to unwillingness to join in the region’s dilemma with China, and the geographical barrier. Europe’s renewed Indo Pacific push has been limited to periodical naval presence, with limited assurances for direct deterrence and support. Regional powers including Japan and South Korea are tied with their direct military support and empowerment to the region, and have been focusing more on securing supply chain and critical resources’ security. Japan’s OSA and South Korea’s defence exports are simply not being seen as the factor in building the region’s deterrence capacity. Hence, the region realises that the US is the only power that is both capable and willing...