Surface Ripples

ASEAN, China and the USA

The issue of ASEAN vis-a-vis the US and China is complex on a number of levels.  As many have pointed out, former US President Trump’s ‘blundering’ set relationships back with more countries than any US president to date.  

Personally, I feel it goes back to the ASEAN Summit in October 2013 at which Barak Obama was due to be the ’Star Attraction’.  Some will remember that he had to return post-haste to the US because congress couldn’t agree on the federal budget debt ceiling.  China made hay out of this situation, which was the first intimation ASEAN would have that perhaps the US might not be that reliable a partner.

Then came Trump and withdrawal from:

• The Open Skies Accord (US signed in 2002) w.e.f. November 2020 
• The Iran nuclear deal (US signed 2015, left 2018)
• The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, signed 1987
• The Paris Climate Accord (2015)
• NAFTA (but replaced with the USMC)
• The Kyoto Protocol (US signed in 1997)
• The Tokyo Accord
• TPP
• The WTO (effectively by refusing to ratify new judges)
• Not to mention trade wars with:
• China
• The EU (tariffs on 100 items, e.g. whisky, cheese)

Biden has yet to build/rebuild any bridges with ASEAN after well over 100 days in office.  The closest he’s got is a meeting with Japan and South Korea, but given ASEAN’s population and economic power, he really SHOULD be doing more.  

If the ‘Leader of the Free World’ is simply going to repudiate any agreement it likes (ignoring its trumpeting of the ‘rule of Law and Order’), one can hardly blame others for wondering whether it’s worth following them.  Iran, waited a full year before moving ahead with its uranium enrichment in order to give the US and its allies a chance to sort things out.  Australia seems to have recently repudiated an agreement with France (although I don’t have all the facts on this).  

Now we come to China.  The reality is, China’s HERE and the US is ‘over THERE’.  No one knows if the US could (or would) sustain a drawn-out campaign (say to defend Taiwan).  There are signals that this is the case, but talk is cheap.  China, Korea and Japan (two of which are the US’ allies) are at each other’s throats still (mainly for historical reasons).  Japan as well is now settling in under a new Prime Minister.  North Korea is clearly testing Biden with both missiles and rhetoric, which Biden is quite rightly ignoring for the time being.  

I suspect ASEAN would welcome more overt US intervention and leadership in the area, but the twofold risks are that China then puts the squeeze on anyone that does so and/or the next US president changes tack.

ASEAN is too fragmented and consensus-driven to be able to face China as one.  China is a major trading partner for all, with Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia in particular benefitting from its largesse to prop up ailing economies and dodgy regimes.  

On the IT/AI side, China is catching up with (or is streets ahead of) the US and again is on ASEAN’s doorstep. I suspect many who have Huawei tech in place will keep it (can’t antagonise them, after all).  Whether they get US expertise in to help secure their data etc is another issue and they may be open to this.  The US has a habit of asking awkward questions about human rights though; China doesn’t and none of ASEAN’s members are paragons of virtue in this respect.

There remains the question of whether a future US government would pull the proverbial plug on any support.

In short, a tricky diplomatic game is in play for ASEAN.  We’ve seen what China does to anyone who annoys them too much (e.g. Australia and the Philippines over their ICC ruling).  The US will have to work hard to convince ASEAN that it is serious and committed after the October 2013 debacle, the tantrums of 2016 – 2020 and (more recently) the Franco-Australian spat over subs.  The US remains a divided country after the 2019 election and the storming of the Capitol, which lost it much of its moral authority.  

In short, I feel that ASEAN is open to, but a lot more wary of, the US and will need a lot of convincing to back this horse again.  As was said about Afghanistan, ‘America may have the watches, but Afghanistan has the time’.

I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management.  I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services.  For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.

Labels: Leadership, Risk, Strategy

posted by William Martin @ 09:50