Gulf states, China take centre stage at summit of Southeast Asian nations
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), China and the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) agreed to 'chart a unified and collective path towards a peaceful, prosperous, and just future', following their meeting in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur.
In a world roiled by United States President Donald Trump's threats of crippling tariffs and rising economic uncertainties, alternative centres of global power were on full display, with the GCC and China attending the ASEAN summit for the group's inaugural trilateral meeting on Tuesday.
In their joint statement released on Wednesday, the GCC – comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates – China, and ASEAN members Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar said they were committed to enhancing economic cooperation.
Chief among that cooperation will be the promotion of free trade, the signatories said, adding they looked 'forward to the early completion of the GCC-China Free Trade Agreement negotiations' and the upgrading of the ASEAN-China free trade area.
'We reaffirm our collective resolve to work hand in hand to unleash the full potential of our partnership, and ensure that our cooperation translates into tangible benefits for our peoples and societies,' they said.
Malaysia's Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim – whose country is currently chair of ASEAN and hosted the summits – told a news conference that the US remains an important market while also noting that ASEAN, the GCC, and China collectively represent a combined gross domestic product (GDP) of $24.87 trillion with a total population of about 2.15 billion.
'This collective scale offers vast opportunities to synergise our markets, deepen innovation, and promote cross-regional investment,' Anwar said.
The prime minister went on to dismiss suggestions that the ASEAN bloc of nations was leaning excessively towards China, stressing that the regional grouping remained committed to maintaining balanced engagement with all major powers, including the US.
James Chin, professor of Asian studies at the University of Tasmania in Australia, told Al Jazeera that the tripartite meeting was particularly important for China, which is being 'given a platform where the US is not around'.
ASEAN and the GCC 'already view China as a global power', Chin said.
China's Premier Li Qiang, who attended the summit, said Beijing was ready to work with the GCC and ASEAN 'on the basis of mutual respect and equality'.
China will work with 'ASEAN and the GCC to strengthen the alignment of development strategies, increase macro policy coordination, and deepen collaboration on industrial specialisation,' he said.
Former Malaysian ambassador to the US Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz said China was 'quickly filling up the vacuum' in global leadership felt in many countries in the aftermath of Trump's tariff threats.
The economic future looks bright, Nazri said, for ASEAN, China and the Gulf countries, where economies are experiencing high growth rates while the US and European Union face stagnation.
'The Gulf is very rich, ASEAN is a tiger, China… I cannot even imagine where the future lies,' Nazri said.
Jaideep Singh, an analyst with the Institute of Strategic & International Studies in Malaysia, said ASEAN's trade with GCC countries has been experiencing rapid growth.
Total trade between ASEAN and the Gulf countries stood at some $63bn as of 2024, making GCC the fifth-largest external trading partner of the regional bloc, while Malaysia's trade with the GCC grew by 60 percent from 2019 to 2024.
In terms of foreign direct investment, FDI from GCC countries in ASEAN totalled some $5bn as of 2023, of which $1.5bn went to Malaysia alone, Singh said.
However, the US, China, Singapore and the EU still make up the lion's share of FDI in Malaysian manufacturing and services.Even as China's trade with ASEAN grows, economist say, the US still remains a huge market for regional countries.
In early 2024, the US took over China as ASEAN's largest export market, with 15 percent of the bloc's exports destined for its markets, up nearly 4 percent since 2018, said Carmelo Ferlito, CEO of the Center for Market Education (CME), a think tank based in Malaysia and Indonesia.
'The US is also the largest source of cumulative foreign direct investment in ASEAN, with total stock reaching nearly $480bn in 2023 – almost double the combined US investments in China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan,' Ferlito said.
Israel's war on Gaza was also highlighted at the ASEAN-GCC-China meeting on Tuesday.
Delegates condemned attacks against civilians and called for a durable ceasefire and unhindered delivery of fuel, food, essential services, and medicine throughout the Palestinian territory.
Supporting a two-state solution to the conflict, the joint communique also called for the release of captives and arbitrarily-detained people, and an end to the 'illegal presence of the State of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory as soon as possible'.
The civil war in Myanmar was also a focus of the talks among ASEAN members at their summit on Tuesday, who called for an extension and expansion of a ceasefire among the warring sides, which was declared following the earthquake that struck the country in March. The ceasefire is due to run out by the end of May. However, human rights groups have documented repeated air attacks by the military regime on the country's civilian population despite the purported temporary cessation of fighting.
Zachary Abuza, professor of Southeast Asia politics and security issues at the Washington-based National War College, said that while Prime Minister Anwar may be 'more proactive' – in his role as ASEAN chair – in wanting to resolve the conflict, Myanmar's military rulers were 'not a good faith actor' in peace talks.
'The military has absolutely no interest in anything resembling a power-sharing agreement,' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Haste Begets Lawlessness
Last week, a federal court ruled that President Donald Trump had exceeded his statutory authority by imposing a raft of tariffs based on the "national emergency" supposedly caused by the longstanding U.S. trade deficit. Those tariffs are part of an alarming pattern: In his rush to enact his agenda, Trump frequently treats legal constraints as inconveniences that can be overridden by executive fiat. The U.S. Court of International Trade rejected Trump's reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify sweeping import taxes he announced in February and April. The three-judge panel said that 48-year-old law, which does not even mention tariffs and had never been used this way before, does not authorize the president to "impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world." That decision did not affect tariffs that Trump has imposed or proposed under different statutes, such as his taxes on cars, steel, and aluminum. But by invoking the IEEPA, Trump hoped to avoid the specific rationales and sometimes lengthy procedures those laws mandate. Trump's immigration crackdown features similar legal shortcuts. After he asserted the power to summarily deport alleged members of a Venezuelan gang as "alien enemies," for example, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that they had a due process right to contest that designation. That decision did not address Trump's dubious interpretation of the 227-year-old Alien Enemies Act. But several federal judges, including a Trump appointee, subsequently concluded that it made no sense to portray gang members as "natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects" of a "hostile nation or government" that had launched an "invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States." As with tariffs, Trump had a more legally defensible option: deportation of unauthorized residents under the Immigration and Nationality Act. But in both cases, he chose the course he thought would avoid pesky procedural requirements. Something similar happened when Immigration and Customs Enforcement suddenly terminated thousands of records in the database of foreign students with visas authorizing them to attend American universities. Although that move was described as part of a "Student Criminal Alien Initiative," it affected many people without disqualifying criminal records—in some cases, without any criminal records at all. Those terminations "reflect an instinct that has become prevalent in our society to effectuate change: move fast and break things," U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White wrote when he issued a preliminary injunction against the initiative on May 22. "That instinct must be checked when it conflicts with established principles of law." The same instinct is apparent in Trump's conflict with Harvard University. The administration froze more than $2 billion in federal research grants to Harvard, ostensibly because the university, by tolerating antisemitism on campus, had failed to meet its "responsibility to uphold civil rights laws." That decision ignored the legal process for rescinding federal funding based on such alleged violations. The process includes "a lot of steps, but they're important," the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression notes. "They protect students by making sure colleges live up to their obligations. And they protect colleges by making sure they have an opportunity to contest the allegations as well as a chance to make things right." Trump's disregard for the law is coupled with angry dismay at judicial review. As he sees it, any judge who dares to impede his will is a "Radical Left Lunatic," a "troublemaker" and "agitator" who "should be IMPEACHED!!!" After the tariff ruling, a White House spokesman argued that the court charged with interpreting and applying trade laws had no business doing that. "It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency," he insisted. Contrary to that take, "it is emphatically the province and duty" of the judicial branch to "say what the law is," as Chief Justice John Marshall put it 222 years ago. Especially when the executive branch is headed by someone who does not seem to care. © Copyright 2025 by Creators Syndicate Inc. The post Trump's Haste Begets Lawlessness appeared first on
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What is debanking? Why Citi said it won't debank for political reasons anymore?
Citigroup released a statement Tuesday saying that the bank will be changing its policies to make it clear that it does not debank or discriminate on political grounds. This statement comes after President Donald Trump and other Republican leaders accused the banking industry of discriminating against certain customers based on political affiliation, according to The Wall Street Journal. 'Citi has always been fully committed to treating all current and potential clients fairly and we have policies, procedures and controls in place for this express purpose. At the same time, we appreciate the concerns that are being raised regarding 'fair access' to banking services, and we are following regulatory developments, recent Executive Orders and federal legislation that impact this area,' said the bank's statement. In the statement, the bank also announced it will no longer have a specific policy regarding firearms following regulatory developments and 'fair access' concerns. 'These changes reinforce our commitment to serve all clients fairly, and we will continue to work with regulators and elected officials on ways to improve transparency and trust in the banking sector,' the bank's statement read. Citigroup's firearms policy was adopted in 2018 shortly after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, where 17 students and staff were fatally shot by a 19-year-old, per The Wall Street Journal. The policy restricted how the bank provided services to firearm manufacturers, sellers and resellers, according to NBC. 'Our U.S. Commercial Firearms Policy was implemented in 2018 and pertained to sale of firearms by our retail clients and partners. The policy was intended to promote the adoption of best sales practices as prudent risk management and didn't address the manufacturing of firearms. Many retailers have been following these best practices, and we hope communities and lawmakers will continue to seek out ways to prevent the tragic consequences of gun violence,' Citi's statement said. According to The Wall Street Journal, when the bank implemented the policy, it said it wasn't because of an ideological mission but that the company wanted to do its part to prevent guns from 'getting into the wrong hands.' The policy required clients to 'adhere to these best practices: (1) they don't sell firearms to someone who hasn't passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they don't sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines,' per NBC. Citi's firearms policy received backlash from right-wing news outlets and pro-gun groups. Debanking is the idea of banks closing the accounts of organizations or people that are perceived to pose a financial, legal, regulatory or reputational risk to the bank. For years, banks have faced criticism from groups and individuals saying they were unfairly dropped as customers, according to The Wall Street Journal. These claims have been partially fueled by the fact that banks most often don't give explanations when closing a client's account. Political pressure around debanking has increased recently as right-wing officials and tech leaders have alleged that certain people, including cryptocurrency proponents and conservatives, were being blocked by the Biden administration from banking services, per NBC. Since President Donald Trump's return to the White House, he has confronted the CEOs of Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase and he raised complaints at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland earlier this year. Both of the confronted banks said they would never close an account on political grounds, per NBC. As the debate of debanking has continued, banks have repeatedly said they don't discriminate against customers based on beliefs or background. 'They have said account closures are driven by anti-money-laundering rules or other regulatory reasons, which can cause them to drop risky customers who might be engaging in suspicious activity,' per The Wall Street Journal. Republicans in Congress have proposed legislation to address concerns around debanking. Concerns have also been raised by Democrats, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who claim that banks have unfairly shut down accounts linked to formerly incarcerated clients or on the basis of religion. Monday's statement from Citigroup follows the concerns raised on both sides of the political spectrum over the last few months. 'We will update our employee Code of Conduct and our customer-facing Global Financial Access Policy to clearly state that we do not discriminate on the basis of political affiliation in the same way we are clear that we do not discriminate on the basis of other traits such as race and religion,' per Citi's statement.


Bloomberg
44 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Miniso Is Said to Hire JPMorgan, UBS for Top Toy's Hong Kong IPO
Miniso Group Holding Ltd. has hired JPMorgan Chase & Co. and UBS Group AG for the planned initial public offering of unit Top Toy in Hong Kong, according to people familiar with the development. Miniso is also looking to bring fresh investment into Top Toy from potential backers such as sovereign wealth funds before the share sale, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing a private matter.