When it comes to China, Asean is so much smarter than Australia
- Canberra may want to rope in China’s neighbours to join its US-led coalition against Beijing, but Asian countries understand they need a far more nuanced strategy and diplomacy to survive and prosper
Australia is putting its shirt on the United States, but Asean countries cannot afford to do that. It’s not clear whether it’s presumption, arrogance or just foolhardiness, but Canberra seems to think it has a thing or two to teach those countries in Asia how to conduct themselves with China. However, given Asean’s growing diplomatic sophistication, it really should be the other way around.
Australia’s intention was pretty transparent from the Asean-Australia Special Summit held in Melbourne last week. It was interesting to observe how one after another, Asean leaders spoke loud and clear, saying that they serve their own national interests, not those imposed from down under or North America.
Speaking at the Australian National University, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said: “I believe that Malaysia and Australia have a duty to try the utmost to encourage the United States, China, and other major players in the Asia-Pacific to conduct themselves in a manner that is conducive to the enhancement of regional cooperation and economic integration”, adding foreign hostilities towards China’s rise is an “attempt to deny its legitimate place in history”.
And in a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Anwar said his country was “fiercely independent” and did not want to “be dictated to by any force”.
“Right now China seems to be the leading investor and trader into Malaysia,” he said.
Meanwhile, in an ABC News interview, a journalist kept pressuring Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jnr to commit openly to an anti-China stance on the South China Sea.
But he said in reply: “We don’t see it in those terms. We don’t see it as countering the military power of any country whatsoever. It’s merely the defence of our territories. We have territorial conflicts with other countries, Malaysia, for example, and Vietnam.”
Of course, China’s neighbours have conflicts with it and each other. But they also want Chinese trade and business, not just US security, which many have learned can simply overwhelm and undercut their own sovereignty and prosperity.
Unlike Australia or Taiwan under the Democratic Progressive Party, Asean statesmen know they need to perform a balancing act, not one-sided confrontation.
Will stronger Manila-Canberra ties lead to Western support in South China Sea?
Consider some trade figures. In 2000, Asean’s trade with China totalled US$29 billion. By 2021, it had jumped to US$669 billion, compared to their US trade which amounted to a lesser US$364 billion.
In fact, ever since the global financial crisis of 2007-08, Asean countries have been trading more with China at the expense of the US.
Asean’s 10 countries had a combined GDP of US$3 trillion in 2020, compared with Japan’s US$5 trillion and the European Union’s US$15 trillion.
But Asean’s total GDP is projected to exceed Japan’s by the end of this decade. This rapid economic growth is what drove rising living standards in Southeast Asia, which greatly contrasts with stagnant living standards and wages in many Western countries. To a large extent, Asean’s growing wealth is tied directly with the China trade.
Clearly, China’s 1.4 billion people and Asean’s total of 680 million people understand they need each other, and that the greatest threat to their future livelihood and prosperity is a regional, if not world, war in their midst.
It is, therefore, a ridiculous proposition, once you know the basic facts of life in the Asia-Pacific, to ask those countries to join the West to “contain” China, or God forbid, to fight it jointly if asked.
The three biggest geopolitical players in Asia are India, China and the US, and they all play to their own tunes. Asean understands that better than anyone, and that creates the diplomatic space necessary for them to manage a balance of power and pull their collective weight as a grouping of smaller nations. It is increasingly clear that much of the Global South, from Latin America to Africa, are all playing the same geopolitical game to try to stay on the great powers’ good side, while benefiting from security and economic advantages those powers can offer separately.
As a member of the so-called Five Eyes or the “Anglo-American sphere”, Australia will always exist in the shadow of Washington. Australia, that is your choice, or perhaps destiny. But don’t expect the rest of the world to be so foolish as to follow you.
