Trump tariff tensions test Southeast Asian leaders at regional summit as bloc caught in midst of US-China trade war
By Jan Hennop in Kuala Lumpur and Martin Abbugao in Singapore
Southeast Asian leaders will express deep concern over US President Donald Trump's tariff blitz when they meet at a summit Monday, warning that the unilateral move poses huge challenges to economic growth and stability in the region, according to a draft statement seen by AFP.
Trump's tariffs have roiled global markets and upended international commerce, and left leaders from the 10-member ASEAN bloc scrambling for ways to limit the fallout on their trade-dependent economies.
The bloc is also caught between the trade battle between their biggest trading partners, the United States and China, on which Washington has heaped the highest tariffs.
According to a draft statement expected to be issued by ASEAN leaders after they meet on Monday, they express 'deep concern… over the imposition of unilateral tariff measures'.
Trump's measures 'pose complex and multidimensional challenges to ASEAN's economic growth, stability, and integration', according to the draft of the ASEAN chairman's statement seen by AFP.
The leaders also 'reaffirmed ASEAN's collective commitment' to the global free trading system, it said.
After the bloc's meeting on Monday, the leaders are to hold a one-day summit with China and Middle Eastern oil producers.
The diplomatic dance continues later in the week in neighbouring Singapore, where the Shangri-La Dialogue forum is expected to draw defence chiefs including US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, while French President Emmanuel Macron was due to give the keynote speech.
ASEAN, with Malaysia holding its rotating chair this year, has traditionally kept a neutral stance in global power contests but that policy is under strain because of Trump's protectionist moves, analysts say.
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has called for a joint ASEAN action plan to address the growing tariff threat.
Anwar said at a pre-summit briefing that, while bilateral talks between member states and the United States would continue, the bloc must present a united front.
'We also have one position as ASEAN in our talks,' he said.
The group, Anwar said, 'had very practical policies… and what to me is of critical importance is to build that cohesion within ASEAN'.
The pressure to shift ASEAN's 'friend to all' posture will likely intensify during the follow-up summit on Tuesday when Chinese Premier Li Qiang joins the bloc's leaders and officials from oil-rich Gulf states, observers said.
'Principled friend'
Beijing has been courting closer ties with Southeast Asia, positioning itself as a 'reliable trading partner' despite tensions with ASEAN members over rival claims in the South China Sea.
Li will attend the first-time summit between ASEAN, Beijing and oil-producing nations including Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
That follows Chinese President Xi Jinping urging greater cooperation between Beijing and Malaysia 'to safeguard the bright prospects of our Asian family' during a Southeast Asian diplomatic charm offensive in April.
Anwar said in return that Malaysia would 'remain an unwavering and principled friend to China'.
However, anger over US tariffs also meant that ASEAN countries 'won't automatically fall in China's arms', a diplomatic source, who asked not to be identified, told AFP.
'It's not a binary situation. ASEAN knows that China is just like the US in that it's a big power which will bully them when it wants to,' the source said.
And 'while the general consensus is that they are angry at the US… nobody wants to offend Washington either'.
James Chin, professor of Asian studies at the University of Tasmania, warned that playing to both the United States and China was a 'high-risk strategy'.
The danger of staying neutral is 'that every single foreign policy action that you take will then be scrutinised' by each opposing power, Chin said.
Others said ASEAN's policy of neutrality remained valid.
'The rest of the world should not have any problem with ASEAN's position to 'be friends with everyone',' said S. Munirah Alatas, a geopolitics specialist at the University of Malaya's Allianz Centre for Governance.
However, she said the bloc still faced tough unresolved challenges, including 'hostilities in Myanmar and recurring tensions in the South China Sea'.
'But successfully addressing these are not premised on ASEAN's neutral geopolitical position,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
‘Not mere pawns' in big power rivalry: Asean asserts agency at Shangri-La Dialogue
Asean defence chiefs emphasised individual agency at the Shangri-La Dialogue, after US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth called on Indo-Pacific allies to boost military spending and cooperation to counter what he called the 'real' threat posed by China. Among them was Philippine Secretary of National Defence Gilberto Teodoro Jnr, who asserted that his country, a US treaty ally, was not a mere pawn with 'no strategic agency'. Despite China's pursuit of being a superpower, 'we must not overemphasise this reality', Teodoro told a panel at Asia's premier annual security conference on Sunday. 'Doing so unfairly portrays [that] the legitimate actions taken by smaller states [are] being carried out at the behest of major powers, as if we were mere pawns with no strategic agency of our own,' he said, though he also highlighted a deficit of trust with Beijing. On Saturday, Hegseth had raised concerns over Taiwan and the South China Sea as he warned regional defence leaders of the possibly 'imminent' threat from Beijing. However, an observer said those views were unlikely to be fully endorsed by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, as they still faced economic uncertainties from steep US tariffs under President Donald Trump and sought to diversify trade ties away from the great powers.
Asia Times
2 hours ago
- Asia Times
Mismanaged early voting stirs voter distrust in S Korea election
Early voting for South Korea's 2025 presidential election took place on May 29 and 30 but, as in previous years, it was marred by troubling irregularities and signs of mismanagement. In past presidential and general elections, the National Election Commission (NEC) dismissed concerns as 'simple mistakes' or 'minor mistakes.' This time, however, public awareness and scrutiny were far greater. Korean citizens actively monitored polling stations and mainstream media outlets reported on the irregularities, backed by clear evidence of procedural misconduct. Over two days of early voting, a pattern of serious breaches emerged in polling sites across multiple regions, raising alarms about the credibility of the electoral process. In Sinchon-dong, Seoul, 30 to 40 ballots were removed from the polling station – an act strictly prohibited under NEC guidelines. In Gimpo and Bucheon, Gyeonggi Province, ballot boxes intended for the presidential election were found to contain ballots from the 22nd general election in 2024. In Gangnam, Seoul, a poll worker was arrested after using a spouse's ID to vote illegally. In Yongin, ballots pre-marked in favor of Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung were discovered inside return envelopes designated for out-of-district voters. This prompted a police investigation. At another polling station, due to overcrowding, unmarked ballots were distributed to voters waiting outside. Some reportedly left the area – ballot in hand – to visit nearby restaurants before returning to vote, also in violation of NEC procedural rules. Growing suspicion of foreign influence has added further complexity. Former Chinese nationals who had acquired South Korean citizenship shared images and posts about their participation in early voting on Chinese social media platforms. This fueled public anxiety about possible Chinese interference in the presidential election. Concerns over the integrity of South Korea's election have drawn international attention. US conservative commentator Gordon G. Chang – known for his hawkish stance on China and publicly praised by President Trump (Trump said to Chang at the 2023 Conservative Political Action Committee gathering, 'I agree with almost everything you said, almost everything') – spoke out Thursday against the NEC's handling of early voting, saying, 'Fraud is widespread in the South Korean election.' Indeed, as far back as January 7 this year, Chang was spreading to his followers on X the slogan 'Stop the Steal in South Korea!' The National Election Integrity Association (NEIA), a US-based organization, sent a delegation to South Korea to observe the process. On May 30, the group released a public statement citing numerous violations in the early voting system. Among the NEIA observers is Morse Tan, former US ambassador-at-large for global criminal justice, appointed in the first Trump administration. Other members of the group are retired US Marine Corps Colonels John R. Mills (a former Pentagon cybersecurity expert) and Grant Newsham (whose articles frequently appear in Asia Times) and scholar Bradley Thayer. Faced with evidence, the NEC issued a rare apology. On May 29, the commission acknowledged problems in the early voting process. As further incidents were exposed, a second apology followed. On May 31, NEC Chairperson Rho Tae-ak stated, 'I sincerely apologize for causing confusion among the voters. We will manage more thoroughly in the upcoming election-day voting to ensure voters can cast their ballots with confidence.' Still, public skepticism remains – especially since every known error has so far favored the same candidate, Lee Jae-myung. Calls for reform are intensifying. Some South Koreans argue that early voting should be abolished altogether, citing the frequency and severity of past controversies. Others propose narrowing the four-day time gap between early voting and official election day to allow for better oversight and reduce opportunities for manipulation. A more forward-looking solution is the adoption of blockchain-based voting systems. By timestamping every action and making records immutable, blockchain technology could offer a secure, transparent alternative. Brazil offers a real-world example. In 2020, the country implemented a cryptocurrency called Decred's blockchain through the Voto Legal platform to track campaign donations transparently. Then, in 2022, Brazil again used Decred's blockchain – this time to record the official campaign platforms of major candidates. The aim was to verify the authenticity of policy proposals and fight disinformation. The 2025 South Korean presidential early voting has exposed systemic vulnerabilities that can no longer be ignored. As citizens and international observers voice growing concern, the NEC's credibility continues to erode. If South Korea is to restore public trust and protect the foundation of its democracy, bold, transparent reforms – whether procedural or technological – must move from discussion to action. Hanjin Lew, a political commentator specializing in East Asian affairs, is a former international spokesman for South Korean conservative parties.
Asia Times
4 hours ago
- Asia Times
A US cavalier talks 'imminent' war in Singapore
In his recent speech in Singapore, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth pledged to defend the region against Chinese aggression and encroachment. This should have reassured the audience presumed to be concerned about China's assertiveness. Yet, possibly, the room listening to him wasn't quite ready to believe what they were hearing. The past few months have been full of surprises for Asia. Technically, Japan is still at war with Russia, just as South Korea is with North Korea. And yet, both Russia and North Korea are fighting in Ukraine— a country that has been left hanging by the US because Washington is (was?) seeking to turn Russia (and maybe also North Korea?) against China. This situation is spreading anxiety in Asia. China may suddenly look more straightforward, reliable and easier to talk to. Plus, Chinese jet fighters look more formidable than French fighters because the French aircraft (adopted by the Indian Air Force) performed poorly compared to the Chinese ones (adopted by Pakistan) in the recent bilateral clash. Furthermore, everyone in the region— starting with the US's closest allies— is scrambling to understand what kind of trade deal they can make with America. It is all creating huge uncertainty in the region. So far, no one feels they have a clear picture, and no one has a deal. Then, America doesn't address these issues, but comes and lambasts China. Maybe Japanese, or Thai or South Korean, could say: 'Sure, China is my biggest concern in the long term. But geography doesn't change, and what if America doesn't have my back in one or two years? It dropped me about Russia and North Korea, it bugs me about my trade surplus, but it wants me to push harder on China. Sure, I'll do it, but I'll need to hedge my bets— at the very least.' These contradictory statements and actions are causing massive unease in Asia. Many (maybe all) American regional allies are getting cold feet about the US. Their feet are getting even colder because, despite many warnings, America doesn't seem to realize the gravity of the situation and that Asia can't be separated from what is happening in Europe. In the 1950s and 1960s, the Korean and Vietnam Wars had a massive impact on Europe. To cap it all, the Chinese—and thus true believers in conspiracy theories—could see this erratic US behavior as evidence that the US administration is caught in a loop of irrationality or is penetrated by Russia. Moscow could likely fuel those suspicions. And still, the pragmatic Chinese would be puzzled: if the Russians are so good at plotting in Washington, why didn't they get a peace deal in Ukraine already? Thus, short of certainty, Beijing would not sensibly talk to Washington without a clear picture of what was happening. It would realistically wait to see the developments with the US and the world. This also impacts Europe, now closely following Asian developments, and Russia. Moscow has fewer incentives to seek peace in Ukraine when the whole American fabric seems to be unraveling. America can decide to be cavalier about all of this, and the problems will certainly fester and rot transpacific and transatlantic trust, weakening US clout in the regions and the world. Or it can decide to address these concerns, which need profound rethinking. This article first appeared on Appia Institute and is republished with kind permission. Read the original here.
