Singapore must engage U.S. and China while keeping neighbors onside
Rahman Yaacob is a research fellow in the Southeast Asia Program at the Lowy Institute.
Lawrence Wong has inherited a nation at a crossroads. As Singapore's new prime minister, his government must be careful and deliberate in navigating a complex series of strategic issues. One key challenge will be balancing Singapore's relationship with superpowers China and the U.S., while keeping Malay-Muslim majority neighbors Malaysia and Indonesia onside -- not an easy task given the demographic differences between the countries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Nikkei Asia
35 minutes ago
- Nikkei Asia
Trump tells Zelenskyy US would help with Ukraine's security in a peace deal
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Donald Trump said on Monday that the United States would help Europe in providing security for Ukraine as part of any deal to end Russia's war in Ukraine, as he and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy began a hastily arranged White House meeting to discuss a path to peace. But he also suggested to reporters that he no longer believed reaching a ceasefire was a necessary prerequisite for striking a peace agreement, backing a position staked out by Russian President Vladimir Putin and opposed by Zelenskyy and most European leaders. The two leaders took questions from the media in the Oval Office before meeting in private, six months after their last appearance there descended into disaster when Trump and Vice President JD Vance upbraided Zelenskyy in an extraordinary public dressing-down. This time, Trump and Zelenskyy struck a far more convivial tone, despite the U.S. president's movement toward Russia in recent days following his summit in Alaska with Putin. And Zelenskiy was backed by the leaders of Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Finland, the European Union and NATO, who traveled to Washington to demonstrate solidarity with Ukraine and push for strong security guarantees for the country in any post-war settlement. "When it comes to security, there's going to be a lot of help," Trump told reporters, adding that European countries would be involved. "They are a first line of defense because they're there, but we'll help them out." Trump greeted Zelenskyy outside the White House, shaking his hand and expressing delight at Zelenskyy's black suit, a departure from his typical military clothes. When a reporter asked Trump what his message was to the people of Ukraine, he said twice, "We love them." Zelenskiy thanked him, and Trump put his hand on Zelenskyy 's back in a show of affection before the two men went inside to the Oval Office. Trump is pressing for a quick end to Europe's deadliest war in 80 years, and Kyiv and its allies worry he could seek to force an agreement on Russia's terms after the president on Friday in Alaska rolled out the red carpet -- literally -- for Putin, who faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court for war crimes. Trump said he liked the concept of a ceasefire, but they could work on a peace deal while the fighting continued. "I wish they could stop, I'd like them to stop," he said. "But strategically that could be a disadvantage for one side or the other." He also said he believes Putin wants to end the war and that he hopes the three leaders can soon organize a trilateral meeting. Putin has not committed to such a meeting, though Zelenskyy said he is ready to sit down. "We need to stop this war, to stop Russia and we need support -- American and European partners," Zelenskyy told reporters. The European leaders were to meet with Trump later on Monday, according to the White House. Such a high-level gathering at the White House on such short notice appears to be unprecedented in recent times. Russian attacks overnight on Ukrainian cities killed at least 10 people, in what Zelenskyy called a "cynical" effort to undermine talks. Trump has rejected accusations that the Alaska summit had been a win for Putin, who has faced diplomatic isolation since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. "I know exactly what I'm doing, and I don't need the advice of people who have been working on all of these conflicts for years, and were never able to do a thing to stop them," Trump wrote on social media. Trump's team has said there will have to be compromises on both sides to end the conflict. But the president himself has put the burden on Zelenskyy to end the war, saying Ukraine should give up hopes of getting back Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014, or of joining the NATO military alliance. Zelenskyy has already all but rejected the outline of Putin's proposals from the Alaska meeting. Those include handing over the remaining quarter of its eastern Donetsk region, which is largely controlled by Russia. Ukrainian forces are deeply dug into the region, whose towns and hills serve as a crucial defensive zone to stymie Russian attacks. Any concession of Ukrainian territory would have to be approved by a referendum. Ukraine and its allies have taken heart from some developments, including Trump's apparent willingness to provide post-settlement security guarantees for Ukraine. A German government spokesperson said on Monday that European leaders would seek more details on that in the talks in Washington. The war, which began with a full-scale invasion by Russia in February 2022, has killed or wounded more than a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts, and destroyed wide swaths of the country. Putin himself faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court over the abduction and deportation of Ukrainian children, adding controversy to Trump's decision to invite him to Alaska. Russia has been slowly grinding forward on the battlefield, pressing its advantages in men and firepower. Putin says he is ready to continue fighting until his military objectives are achieved. Officials in Ukraine said a drone attack on a residential complex in the northern city of Kharkiv killed at least seven people, including a toddler and her 16-year-old brother. Strikes in the southeastern city of Zaporizhzhia killed three people, they said. Russia says it does not deliberately target civilians, and the Defense Ministry's daily report did not refer to any strike on Kharkiv. Local resident Olena Yakusheva said the attack hit an apartment block that was home to many families. "There are no offices here or anything else, we lived here peacefully in our homes," she said. Ukraine's military said on Monday that its drones had struck an oil pumping station in Russia's Tambov region, leading to the suspension of supplies via the Druzhba pipeline.
Nikkei Asia
10 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
After Trump quotes Xi on Taiwan, China calls for 'peaceful reunification'
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One before his meeting with Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Aug. 15. During the flight, he told Fox News that China's Xi Jinping had promised no invasion of Taiwan during the Trump administration. © Reuters JAMES HAND-CUKIERMAN August 18, 2025 18:28 JST TOKYO -- China on Monday said it is prepared to pursue "peaceful reunification" with Taiwan, days after U.S. President Donald Trump said that Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping had promised no invasion of the island democracy while Trump is in office.
Japan Times
10 hours ago
- Japan Times
Trump's transactional policies threaten global stability
The much-hyped Trump-Putin Alaska summit ended Friday without any agreement on Ukraine, despite both leaders hailing the 'progress' made. U.S. President Donald Trump conceded that no deal was reached, while Russian President Vladimir Putin insisted they had achieved an 'understanding.' The meeting, filled with pomp but lacking substance, only reinforced the perception of Trump's transactional style — warmth for adversaries but little clarity on outcomes. Just before the Alaska summit, Trump also claimed that Chinese President Xi Jinping had privately assured him that China would not invade Taiwan during his tenure, underscoring the unpredictable yet highly consequential impact of Trump's diplomacy on global security. These developments form the backdrop against which Trump's renewed tariff wars must be understood. His second term in the White House is dramatically reshaping the global geopolitical landscape, particularly in trade and strategic alignments. While some of these changes may be guided by his ambition to 'make America great again,' there is a growing sentiment — both within and outside the United States — that his actions are shaped as much by pay-to-play and personal motivations as by strategic vision. At the heart of these shifts lies a reinvigorated tariff war, which has not only targeted traditional rivals like China but also extended to strategic partners in the Indo-Pacific such as Japan and India. Trump's first presidential term (2017-20) was marked by a clear foreign-policy orientation that sought to contain the rise of China. Recognizing China as the principal challenger to U.S. supremacy, his administration sought to forge new alignments in the Indo-Pacific region, bolstering ties with countries such as Japan, Australia and India to act as counterweights. The strategic language was couched in terms of preserving a free and open Indo-Pacific, in which the U.S. portrayed itself as a Pacific power with legitimate stakes in the region's balance of power. Trump's second term, however, has seen a notable pivot: economic protectionism now overrides strategic consistency, and trade wars are being used not only as economic instruments but as tools of geopolitical leverage. As with Trump's steep tariffs on Japan , his more recent imposition of tariffs on India — America's largest democratic partner and a crucial player in the Indo-Pacific — is a startling manifestation of this shift. On Aug. 6, Trump signed an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods, raising the overall tariff to a staggering 50%. The rationale given was India's continued purchase of Russian oil, which the White House claimed represented an 'unusual and extraordinary threat' to American national security and foreign-policy interests. Yet upon even cursory examination, the Trump administration's reasoning is riddled with inconsistencies and double standards. Data shows that India accounted for only 13% of Russia's fossil-fuel revenue since the start of the Ukraine war, whereas the European Union — despite its anti-Russia rhetoric — contributed 23%. Still, the EU has been spared punitive tariffs, while India faces the economic brunt. This selective application of punitive measures suggests that the logic behind the tariffs is not solely grounded in principled foreign policy. It increasingly looks like an attempt to pressure countries that have limited leverage over the United States. Unlike China, which retaliated against earlier tariffs by banning the export of rare earth minerals — forcing Washington to reduce its tariff burden — India lacks such economic levers. With a vast population dependent on agriculture and dairy, New Delhi has long resisted opening up these sensitive sectors. Trump's insistence that India must make concessions in these very sectors adds further strain, as such demands are politically unacceptable in the Indian domestic context. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has responded with firmness, making it clear that India will not compromise the interests of its farmers, fishermen and dairy producers. Speaking at a public event, he acknowledged that India might have to pay a heavy price for its stance, but asserted his readiness to bear it, saying he will 'stand like a wall against any harmful policies' impacting Indian agriculture. This defiant posture marks a significant deterioration in U.S.-India trade ties, especially since Washington has simultaneously ruled out any further trade talks until the matter is resolved. For a relationship once touted as among the most consequential of the 21st century — not only in the Indo-Pacific region but globally — the fallout is deeply disconcerting. What adds to the complexity is Trump's seemingly contradictory behavior toward other global actors. His previous hostility toward NATO and its European members has, during his second term, given way to more transactional economic deals with both the EU and the U.K. With this change in tack he has managed to extract higher defense spending from them, fulfilling one of his longstanding demands. Meanwhile, Trump's initial soft posture toward Russia — based on the belief that he could persuade Putin to end the war — has hardened as that expectation failed to materialize. Yet, rather than directly penalizing Russia — and even taking steps to normalize relations with Putin at the Alaska summit — Trump has chosen to exert pressure on countries like India that maintain energy ties with Moscow. Even more puzzling is Trump's stance toward China. Despite earlier confrontations, he now appears to be exploring a potential trade deal with Beijing. There is speculation that he may even visit China, signaling a thaw that could have wide-ranging geopolitical ramifications. This approach stands in stark contrast to the harsh tariff measures directed at India and Brazil, both of which are founding BRICS members. Trump has also described BRICS (a 10-nation grouping of major emerging economies including Brazil, India, China and South Africa) as 'anti-American' and blamed the group for pushing de-dollarization — claims that are contested and oversimplified, but serve to justify further economic penalties. The net effect of these shifting positions is a growing perception that Trump's foreign and trade policies lack coherence and are driven more by short-term gains and political optics than by long-term strategic thinking. For India, this unpredictability represents a significant challenge. The country must now navigate an increasingly volatile external environment in which even its traditional partnerships can no longer be taken for granted. The economic consequences are already visible. According to Moody's, the new tariffs could slow India's GDP growth by 0.3% in fiscal year 2025–26, pulling it down from 6.3% to around 6%. Key sectors like electronics manufacturing may see reduced foreign investment due to the tariff gap compared to other Asia-Pacific economies. Investor sentiment is weakening, with foreign portfolio investors pulling out $2 billion in July and nearly $1 billion more in early August. Although the stock market has shown some resilience, the broader trend is one of caution and concern. At the same time, China's recent export restrictions on rare earth elements have highlighted the vulnerabilities in America's high-tech and defense manufacturing sectors. While the U.S. has invested in domestic production and diversification strategies, it remains years away from building a self-reliant supply chain. This gives China a significant bargaining chip in any future negotiation — one that India lacks. Trump's willingness to go easier on China while punishing India only reinforces the perception that his administration picks its targets based on expediency rather than principles. Another layer of complexity is Trump's sudden pivot toward Pakistan, a country he had once derided as duplicitous. His recent deal with Islamabad and the hosting of Army Chief Gen. Asim Munir at the White House are being viewed as part of a larger recalibration in the Indo-Pacific. Taken together with his softer posture toward China, this development raises serious questions about U.S. strategic priorities in the region and how India figures in the American calculus going forward. India, therefore, faces a geopolitical moment that demands both caution and clarity. As Trump's second tenure introduces a mix of unpredictability, pressure tactics, and transactional diplomacy, New Delhi must work to safeguard its long-term interests without compromising its sovereign decision-making. This will require not only diversifying its strategic partnerships but also strengthening domestic economic resilience in the face of external shocks. The tariff war may just be one front — but the battle for geopolitical stability is far from over. Anand Kumar is associate fellow at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses in New Delhi.
