logo
Asean and East Asian Summit must stress fiscal prudence over firepower — Phar Kim Beng

Asean and East Asian Summit must stress fiscal prudence over firepower — Phar Kim Beng

Malay Mail3 days ago

JUNE 10 — As President Donald Trump, ostensibly, prepares for his appearances at the East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur this mid October 2025 — with no assurance of showing up unlike other Heads of States that are the Strategic Dialogue Partners of Asean — all signs point to him pushing a familiar and blunt message: America's allies and partners in Asia must spend more on US arms.
But if past and current trends are any indication, Trump's appeals are likely to fall on deaf ears. The region is not just weary of increased militarization—it is actively rejecting Washington's insistence that defense budgets be inflated at the expense of economic recovery and long-term stability.
There is an inherent contradiction in Trump's demands.
A president who places tariffs on allies—from Japan to South Korea to even Southeast Asian nations—cannot reasonably expect those same countries to increase military procurement from the United States. The message from Washington is one of transactional loyalty, not strategic partnership. And in Asia, where historical memory is long and national budgets are tight, such coercive diplomacy rarely works.
Strategic Mistrust Cloaked as Defense Diplomacy
The push for higher defense spending has long been a hallmark of US foreign policy, particularly under Republican administrations that view military preponderance as a symbol of leadership. Trump's doctrine—though lacking a coherent strategy—is clear in its intent: to boost American arms exports and reduce the US security burden by compelling others to foot the bill. However, the underlying tone of Washington's approach under Trump is steeped in mistrust.
By questioning the reliability of alliances and imposing punitive tariffs even on long-standing partners, Trump has eroded the very strategic trust necessary for such defense cooperation.
Asian states are acutely aware that accepting US weapons often comes with strings attached—operational constraints, technology limitations, political conditionality, and long-term maintenance dependencies. Moreover, many of these nations are engaged in delicate balancing acts between China and the United States. A sudden uptick in American arms purchases could be seen not as deterrence but as provocation.
The Regional Response: Prioritizing Growth and Stability
In Southeast Asia and beyond, national budgets are being reoriented toward post-pandemic recovery, climate resilience, digital infrastructure, and education reform. There is little appetite—public or political—for ballooning defense outlays.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks at the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue security summit in Singapore May 31, 2025. — Reuters pic
Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and even Thailand have publicly emphasized the need for economic investments, not military escalation. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and Domestic Direct Investment (DDI) are seen as stabilizing forces, offering job creation, technology transfer, and revenue generation. Arms deals, in contrast, represent capital outflows with limited downstream benefits.
Indeed, even where defense procurement is on the agenda, the priority is on affordability, multilateral interoperability, and reduced dependency on any single supplier.
This explains why Asian countries have diversified their sources—turning to Turkiye, South Korea, France, and even indigenous defense development—rather than doubling down on American options.
Moreover, there is growing recognition that security in Asia is not only military.
Non-traditional threats—such as cyberattacks, piracy, human trafficking, illegal fishing, and climate-related disasters—require a broader toolkit than fighter jets and missile systems.
In forums such as the Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus), the emphasis is on capacity building, joint training, and regional resilience. Arms races are anathema to these priorities.
The Trump Tariff Trap
The irony is that Trump's own economic policies undercut his strategic objectives. By erecting tariff walls against Asian exports—often under the pretext of 'national security'—Trump has undermined regional confidence in US economic leadership. Countries like South Korea and Japan have had to endure hostile tariff actions despite hosting major US bases. Asean member states, particularly those with growing manufacturing sectors, find themselves penalized even as they are asked to bolster America's geostrategic posture.
The result is a transactional model of diplomacy that few in Asia are willing to accept.
Nations across the Indo-Pacific see the US demand for greater defense spending not as a shared responsibility but as an imposition—one that prioritizes America's arms industry over regional economic needs. The message from Washington is clear: buy our weapons or risk being labeled unreliable. But the response from Asia is equally clear: we will spend where it matters most—for our people and our future.
The Myth of Free Riding
It is fashionable in Washington to accuse Asian partners of free riding—benefitting from American security guarantees without proportionate contributions.
Yet this narrative ignores the reality on the ground. South Korea contributes billions to the upkeep of US forces, Japan provides extensive basing support, and the Philippines, despite its domestic constraints, allows rotational US deployments. These are not passive beneficiaries but active participants in regional security architecture.
In Southeast Asia, countries have consistently engaged in multilateral peacekeeping, counterterrorism, and maritime cooperation. Their contributions may not be measured in F-35 purchases, but in the daily grind of maintaining regional peace and order.
The call for 5 per cent of GDP on defense—echoed by voices like US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—is simply out of step with the fiscal realities of the region. Asean alone is short of at least US$1.5 trillion in development expenditure with Indonesia needing at least a third of this figure.
Such a benchmark, if adopted, would severely hamper development goals and spark unnecessary regional tensions.
The Path Ahead: Economic Security First
As the region looks ahead to the next decade, it is clear that economic security will remain paramount.
The East Asia Summit in Kuala Lumpur and Asean Summits in Kuala Lumpur this year and Manila the next, must provide platforms for frank dialogue.
Trump may once again present a tough case for American arms purchases. But Asia's answer, if rooted in pragmatism and sovereignty, will be a firm 'No.'
The way forward lies in deeper economic integration, industrial upgrading, and human capital development.
Strategic autonomy does not require blind purchases of US weaponry. It requires building national capabilities in science, technology, and innovation.
It requires policy consistency—not shifting tariff threats. And it requires mutual respect—not coercive diplomacy dressed as alliance-building.
Washington must come to terms with a changing Asia—one that is no longer beholden to Cold War mentalities or dependent on unilateral guarantees. The region seeks cooperation, not compliance.
In the face of Trump's renewed pressure, Asian capitals are likely to stand their ground, not out of defiance, but out of necessity. After all, the most enduring security lies not in missiles and tanks, but in resilient economies and empowered societies.
* Phar Kim Beng is Professor of Asean Studies at the International Islamic University Malaysia and Senior Visiting Fellow at the University of Cambridge.
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

South Koreans flock to historic Blue House as new president prepares to move in
South Koreans flock to historic Blue House as new president prepares to move in

Malay Mail

time43 minutes ago

  • Malay Mail

South Koreans flock to historic Blue House as new president prepares to move in

SEOUL, June 13 — The queue stretches all the way down the road. Tens of thousands of people are flocking to South Korea's historic Blue House before the new president moves his office back in. Ex-president Yoon Suk Yeol spurned the elegant compound in leafy northern Seoul claiming it was too 'imperial'. He opened it to the public in 2022, and moved into a hastily converted ministry instead. But with Yoon impeached over a failed martial law bid, newly elected Lee Jae-myung plans to move the seat of power back, triggering a frenzy of last-minute visits. 'I figured if I missed this chance I would never get to come here,' said Jang Myung-hee, 65, who visited with her friends. People look at painted portraits of former South Korean presidents at the Blue House in Seoul on June 9, 2025. — AFP pic She said it was the 'right call' for South Korea's leaders to resettle in the Blue House as it 'befits the nation's prestige'. 'I can definitely feel this place is different.' The building is named for the approximately 150,000 hand-painted blue tiles that adorn its roof. Once occupied by former colonial power Japan, the site has housed South Korea's leaders for seven decades. On the campaign trail, Lee vowed to return. 'It is traditional, symbolic and optimal,' he told local media. People look at painted portraits of former South Korean presidents at the Blue House in Seoul June 9, 2025. — AFP pic Queues Official figures show visitors to the Blue House surged ahead of the June 3 snap election: around 427,000 in May — double the number from the same month last year. In all, more than 7.8 million people — including 800,000 foreigners — have visited since the site's May 2022 public opening. 'I have come here with my kids for educational purposes, as it might be difficult for us to visit again,' said Son Young-ah, 49. One woman, upon leaving the main gate muttered: 'With this exit, I may never be able to set foot here again.' In early 2018, during a period of warmer ties, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's sister visited the Blue House — the first by the isolated country's ruling Kim family. 'I look forward to seeing Pyongyang and Seoul come closer in the minds of Korean people,' Kim Yo Jong wrote in the visitors' book. People pose for photos as they visit the Blue House in Seoul on June 9, 2025. — AFP pic 'Bit of renovation' The Blue House has long been the subject of public fascination, fuelled in part by a series of misfortunes that have befallen past inhabitants, including assassinations, impeachments, corruption trials and imprisonments. Yoon's relocation may have been in part an effort to escape such a fate — which some believe is linked to the feng shui of the site. But the change in premises failed to spare his presidency: he was impeached in April after his brief martial law declaration and now faces a criminal trial. Yoon's replacement had little interest in continuing to occupy the former Defence Ministry in central Seoul. The ministry is plagued by 'security issues such as wiretapping' and lacks the privacy and seclusion of the Blue House, Lee has said. Not all sections of the storied compound — including its administrative offices and an underground bunker — have been opened to tourists. People queue as they visit the Blue House in Seoul on June 9, 2025, named for the approximately 150,000 hand-painted blue tiles that adorn its roof, that had been home to South Korea's leaders for seven decades until 2022. — AFP pic As such, the site 'would only require a bit of renovation to reopen,' Choi Gi-il, a former presidential security aid, told AFP. He added that the main blue-tiled building was primarily for ceremonial purposes and hosting foreign dignitaries, making it less vulnerable to security breaches. No date has been announced for the return to Blue House, but visitors to the site felt it was imminent. 'I held off coming here because I thought I could come here anytime,' Kim Jong-chun, 71, told AFP. But he realised it was now or never after Lee's election. 'I came here today for the first time to celebrate my birthday,' he said. 'For the symbolisms it caries, I deeply support and welcome Lee's decision to return here.' — AFP

Americans split on Trump's use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
Americans split on Trump's use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

The Star

timean hour ago

  • The Star

Americans split on Trump's use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

U.S. Marines stand with their packs and weapons, as protests against federal immigration sweeps continue, in greater Los Angeles, California, U.S., June 9, 2025, in this screen grab taken from a handout video. DVIDS/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Americans are divided over President Donald Trump's decision to activate the military to respond to protests against his crackdown on migrants, with about half supportive of the move, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday. Some 48% of respondents in the two-day poll agreed with a statement that the president should "deploy the military to bring order to the streets" when protests turn violent, while 41% disagreed. Views on the matter split sharply along partisan lines, with members of Trump's Republican Party overwhelmingly backing the idea of calling in troops while Democrats were firmly opposed. At the same time, just 35% of respondents said they approved of Trump's response to the protests in Los Angeles, which has included sending National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to the city and also threatening to arrest Democratic officials, including the governor of California. Some 50% of people in the poll said they disapproved of Trump's response. Trump has argued the military deployment in Los Angeles was needed due to protests there following a series of immigration raids in the city. Some of the demonstrations in Los Angeles have turned violent - leaving burned out cars on city streets - and 46% of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said protesters opposing Trump's immigration policies had gone too far, compared to 38% who disagreed with that view. The protests have spread to other U.S. cities including New York, Chicago, Washington and San Antonio, Texas - all of which have large immigrant populations and tend to vote for Democrats rather than Republicans. Trump campaigned and won last year's election on a promise to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants and Reuters/Ipsos polls have shown that his support on immigration policy has been consistently higher than on other matters, such as his stewardship of the U.S. economy. The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,136 Americans nationwide and has a margin of error of about 3 percentage points, showed wide support for increased deportations. Some 52% of respondents - including one in five Democrats and nine in 10 Republicans - backed ramping up deportations of people in the country illegally. Still, 49% of people in the poll said Trump had gone too far with his arrests of immigrants, compared to 40% who said he had not done so. The most heated protests have taken place in Los Angeles County, where one in three residents are immigrants and about half of people born abroad are naturalized U.S. citizens, according to U.S. Census estimates. Nationwide, Americans took a generally dim view of Trump's threats to arrest Democratic officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Just 35% of respondents said Trump should order arrests of state and local officials who try to stop federalimmigration enforcement. (Reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by Scott Malone and Diane Craft)

Trump says Israel should not strike Iran, as nuclear deal 'close'
Trump says Israel should not strike Iran, as nuclear deal 'close'

New Straits Times

timean hour ago

  • New Straits Times

Trump says Israel should not strike Iran, as nuclear deal 'close'

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump called on ally Israel not to strike Iran's nuclear sites, saying a deal remained close if Tehran compromises. Trump acknowledged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was considering a strike, which he said could spark a "massive conflict" -- leading to a US decision to draw down embassy staff in the region. "We are fairly close to a pretty good agreement," Trump told reporters. Asked about his discussions with Netanyahu, Trump said: "I don't want them going in, because I think it would blow it." Trump quickly added: "Might help it actually, but it also could blow it." Trump's Middle East pointman Steve Witkoff is set to hold a sixth round of talks on Sunday in Oman with Iran, which defiantly said it would raise levels of uranium enrichment -- the key sticking point in talks. Trump again described himself as a man of peace and said he would prefer a negotiated settlement with Iran.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store