ASEAN Sec-Gen, Japan envoy hold talks on energy transition
In his remarks during a meeting with Japan's Special Envoy and former Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at the ASEAN Headquarters here on Monday, Kao acknowledged the challenges faced by Southeast Asian nations and Japan in balancing net-zero emission goals with energy security and rising energy demand.
He said during the meeting, which brought together top Japanese officials including Japan's Ambassador to ASEAN Kiya Masahiko and Asia Zero Emission Community (AZEC) Special Adviser Yamada Takio, that a multifaceted energy transition strategy in the region is essential in balancing the net-zero emissions goals.
'Our cooperation on clean energy transition is vital, encompassing not only renewable energy and improved efficiency but also critical decarbonisation technologies such as CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage), ammonia and hydrogen,' he said.
Kao said Japan's leadership in clean technology and its role in launching the AZEC initiative were recognised as key to advancing regional decarbonisation efforts.
He said nearly all ASEAN member states are now active participants in AZEC.
ASEAN and Japan reaffirmed their commitment to the joint goals outlined in the 2023 Commemorative Summit in Tokyo, which include deeper cooperation on climate change, environmental sustainability and energy transition, he said.
Kao also highlighted Japan's longstanding partnership with ASEAN, noting contributions to the Japan-ASEAN Integration Fund, the ASEAN-Japan Technical Cooperation Agreement, and the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
'Japan continues to be one of ASEAN's most trusted and valued partners,' he said, citing strong ties in economic cooperation, investment and human capital development.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
The risk of nuclear war waned after the Cold War. It's back with a vengeance
WHEN the first nuclear bomb test took place 80 years ago, the scientists who gathered to observe the explosion in the New Mexico desert recognised they were playing with fire. Physicist Enrico Fermi tried to break the tension by taking bets on whether the bomb would ignite the atmosphere and destroy the world. J. Robert Oppenheimer wagered US$10 the bomb wouldn't work at all, and Edward Teller conspicuously applied sunscreen in the predawn darkness, offering to pass it around. The bomb exploded in a fireball hotter than the surface of the sun, producing far more destructive power than the scientists anticipated. Within weeks, the United States nuked the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, hastening the end of World War II while killing more than 200,000 civilians. The bomb hasn't been used since, apart from test blasts, and after the Cold War ended in 1991, the risk of nuclear war mercifully declined. Now the risk is back on the rise, as an alarming new nuclear age dawns. Today, we are in a 'uniquely dangerous moment'. The nuclear landscape is changing for the worse. For starters, the main players are no longer two global superpowers. During the Cold War, the US and the Soviet Union largely controlled the potential for conflict, which made the risks relatively straightforward to analyse. These days, the politics of nuclear arms have become more complicated and unpredictable. Nine nations are said to possess the weapons today, including the rogue state of North Korea, and others could build them quickly. Most people have forgotten that South Africa once developed a bomb but gave up its programme voluntarily. Iraq and Libya also had active nuclear-weapon programmes that were stopped under intense international pressure. At the moment, the focus is on Iran's nuclear programme, which the US bombed on June 22, alongside Israel. The US launched its attack even though Iran continued to pursue diplomacy about its nuclear ambitions. Iran may conclude that it needs a nuclear capability for self-defence, to deter future attacks. The same could be said for other states threatened by nuclear- armed rivals. Consider Ukraine, which voluntarily gave up the nuclear arms based on its soil after the fall of the Soviet Union. Would Russia's 2022 invasion still have occurred against a Ukraine bristling with doomsday weapons? Doubtful. Besides the chilling political calculations, the weapons used to deliver nuclear warheads have become more dangerous. Hyper-sonic glide missiles could elude defence systems before striking their targets with practically no warning, while smaller, low-yield nukes threaten to blur the lines between conventional and nuclear warfare, making all-out war more likely. Defence spending is soaring across the globe, and with it, faster and deadlier weapons are likely to be deployed. At the same time, treaties restricting nuclear arms are in decline. The most impactful of them – the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons – was undermined in 2003 when North Korea withdrew from it and built an atomic arsenal. It's time for the targets of these terrible weapons – us, that is – to rise up and say, 'No!' The 1980s witnessed mass demonstrations demanding a nuclear freeze. Today, the threat of nuclear war is beginning to enter the public consciousness again. The movie Oppenheimer about the Trinity bomb test 80 years ago was a boxoffice hit. The 2024 book by journalist Annie Jacobsen, Nuclear War: A Scenario, became a bestseller. Star movie director James Cameron has committed to making Ghosts of Hiroshima , a Japan-set movie said to be a nightmarish look at the A-bomb blasts. During the Cold War, pop culture helped convince everyday people to stand against the march towards Armageddon, and here's hoping it can do so again. For 80 years, the world has lived with the threat of nuclear destruction. Let's act now to curb it, before it's too late. — Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service
New Straits Times
2 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Beyond disputes: Turning Ambalat and Pedra Branca into platforms for maritime cooperation
THE maritime disputes over Ambalat and Batu Puteh are complex. Ambalat, located in the resource-rich Sulawesi Sea, is claimed by Malaysia and Indonesia since the early 2000s. The area is believed to contain significant hydrocarbon reserves, and both countries have issued oil exploration licences that have led to diplomatic protests and naval stand-offs. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim recently emphasised the role of Sabah — which is the Malaysian state closest to the area — in ensuring that any joint development has equitable outcomes for border communities. Meanwhile, the dispute over Batu Puteh was partially resolved in 2008 when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) awarded sovereignty over it to Singapore. In the same judgment, the ICJ ruled that Middle Rocks belonged to Malaysia, while sovereignty over South Ledge would rest with the state in whose territorial waters it is located. As the ICJ did not delimit maritime boundaries, South Ledge's status is unresolved. In recent years, bilateral efforts have intensified to resolve outstanding maritime issues. At the 11th Malaysia-Singapore Leaders' Retreat in January, both governments agreed to begin technical work to delimit maritime boundaries in the Johor Strait, using the 1927 Territorial Waters Agreement as a legal basis. Singapore's continued engagement through the Joint Technical Committee reflects its commitment to resolve maritime issues through dialogue and legal frameworks. These disputes reflect deeper questions of sovereignty, historical memory and control over vital sea lanes. But they also present an opportunity to transform contested maritime zones into shared spaces of cooperation. Malaysia and Indonesia should consider establishing a joint development authority (JDA) to manage resources and reduce tensions over Ambalat. Similarly, Malaysia and Singapore could explore cooperative arrangements around Middle Rocks and South Ledge, focusing on maritime safety, environmental stewardship and scientific research. Such frameworks — already proven in the Malaysia-Thailand JDA in the Gulf of Thailand — would allow all parties to benefit economically while preserving their legal positions. Importantly, joint development does not require any party to relinquish its claims. Under Article 83 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea , states are encouraged to reach provisional arrangements pending final delimitation. Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore have played pivotal roles in Asean's evolution and have consistently advocated for peaceful dispute resolution and regional stability. Their cooperation on Ambalat and Batu Puteh could serve as a model for other maritime disputes in Southeast Asia, including in the South China Sea. A coordinated initiative involving Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore — each addressing their respective maritime disputes — could serve as a model for broader governance reforms within Asean, strengthening its commitment to pragmatic diplomacy and peaceful resolution. Public discourse in all three countries must focus on collaboration. Parliamentarians, diplomats and civil society leaders should advocate for open dialogue, confidence-building measures and creative legal solutions. The media should frame these disputes as opportunities for partnership. Ambalat and Batu Puteh should be reimagined as foundations for a shared maritime future — where sovereignty concerns are balanced with economic pragmatism and regional solidarity. The establishment of JDAs would not only unlock resource potential but also signal that Southeast Asia is capable of resolving disputes through diplomacy and innovation. During the recent Malaysia-Indonesia Annual Consultation, President Prabowo Subianto reaffirmed Indonesia's commitment to resolving the Ambalat dispute through peaceful means. Both leaders agreed to explore joint development initiatives as they recognise that legal processes may take years. This bilateral momentum reflects a pragmatic approach to diplomacy. On the Batu Puteh front, Singapore has likewise shown its willingness to cooperate. These parallel bilateral engagements — Malaysia with Indonesia over Ambalat, and Malaysia with Singapore over Batu Puteh — signal a commitment to regional stability, peaceful dispute resolution and collaborative maritime governance.
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Indigenous voices key to Malaysia's unity agenda, says deputy minister
KUALA LUMPUR: The voices of indigenous communities will remain central to Malaysia's national unity agenda, ensuring social justice and cultural recognition. Deputy National Unity Minister Saraswathy Kandasami emphasised the Orang Asli and indigenous groups as vital to the nation's demographic and cultural identity. 'Efforts to recognise, protect and empower these communities must be continuous and inclusive,' she said at the Citra Nusa@Muzium Programme: ASEAN Natives and Indigenous Festival 2025. The event, held at the National Museum, celebrates Malaysia's ASEAN Chair role and International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples. It showcases cultural heritage from Malaysia's Orang Asli and ASEAN ethnic groups like Indonesia's Mentawai and Thailand's Karen. Saraswathy described the festival as a platform to highlight Malaysia's diverse heritage and boost public appreciation of its cultural wealth. JMM director-general Datuk Kamarul Baharin A. Kasim stressed that indigenous communities are not marginalised but key contributors to national progress. 'We aim to show their success in leadership, entrepreneurship and even social influence,' he said, citing Orang Asli influencer Nur Rafidah Man. The festival's theme, 'Dahulu & Kini', features traditional dances like Sabah's Sumazau and Sarawak's Ngajat. Visitors can explore craft demonstrations, traditional food preparation, and indigenous handicraft sales. Interactive activities include blowpipe competitions, kerchang games, and children's contests. The two-day event underscores Malaysia's commitment to preserving and promoting indigenous heritage. - Bernama
