3 days ago
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Dangerously unprepared Asean needs own nuclear 'deterrence'
THE proliferation of nuclear powers in Asia is no longer confined to Cold War-era rivalries. It now includes China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and potentially Iran.
Even South Korea flirts with the idea of an indigenous deterrent. Invariably, the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) security pact, which provides nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, signals the irreversible arrival of nuclear propulsion technologies in Southeast Asian waters.
Asean, bound by the 1995 Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ), finds itself encircled by these shifts.
Without urgent steps to reinforce its unity, voice and institutions, Southeast Asia risks becoming collateral damage in an era of nuclear brinkmanship.
The logic is simple: nuclear proliferation requires collective non-nuclear resilience.
With no integrated missile defence, no mutual defence treaty and little capacity to respond to nuclear escalation scenarios, Asean stands dangerously unprepared.
Any nuclear clash would send shockwaves through Asean. Economies would suffer. Diplomatic space would shrink. Populations could be displaced.
Yet Asean has no coherent contingency framework for such scenarios. What makes the situation more precarious is that Asean's security platforms— like the Asean Regional Forum— are now being sidelined by exclusive minilateral pacts.
The Quad, AUKUS, and trilateral dialogues involving the US, Japan and South Korea increasingly define regional security priorities, sidelining Asean's once-vibrant forums.
These new clubs dictate terms on deterrence and defence cooperation while Asean remains absent from the room where nuclear security decisions are made.
To remain relevant, Asean must reclaim space in regional dialogue. It must articulate a common position on arms control, non-proliferation and strategic transparency.
Failure to do so leaves Asean in the role of a bystander, watching its strategic environment change without its input or consent.
Asean's nuclear-free status also suffers from a long-standing credibility gap.
The SEANWFZ Treaty has yet to be signed by any of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — China, US, UK, France and Russia — who worry about its impact on their naval and aerial freedom of operation.
However, as nuclear-powered submarines traverse Southeast Asian waters and US and Chinese military vessels shadow each other near Asean coastlines, this gap becomes glaring.
Asean must restart its diplomacy with these powers, not only to safeguard Asean's nuclear-free identity but also restore its global credibility as a normative leader in arms restraint.
Confidence-building measures (CBMs) offer another avenue. Asean could propose missile test notification systems, crisis communication hotlines and rules against the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons near or within its maritime zones.
The Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting Plus provides an existing platform to implement such initiatives. What's lacking is the collective political will.
As the US and China engage in intensified rivalry, some Asean states face growing temptation or pressure to align militarily with one side.
Such alignment may bring with it security guarantees but could also involve hosting military infrastructure that undermines the region's nuclear-free ethos.
Maintaining neutrality is not about silence or indecision — it requires coordinated diplomacy and strategic coherence. A stronger Asean gives member states the ability to resist external coercion, uphold regional norms and avoid becoming pawns in nuclear gamesmanship.
Equally urgent is the need to address rising technological vulnerabilities.
Nuclear threats today are not only from bombs but also from cyber manipulation of nuclear infrastructure, surveillance systems and command-and-control mechanisms.
As small modular reactors and artificial intelligence-powered early warning systems proliferate, the region needs an institutional upgrade.
Asean must build capacity for nuclear oversight, crisis simulation, and technical coordination with global agencies such as the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Finally, public education must not be neglected. Deterrence theory and arms control are often locked away in policy circles.
Yet in an age of social media disinformation, misperceptions about nuclear policy can inflame domestic debates, push nationalist agendas and provoke poor decision-making.
Asean's nuclear-free status must be grounded in both legal frameworks and widespread public understanding.
Asean's only sustainable response lies in becoming stronger, more agile and more credible. It must speak not only for peace, but with the capacity to preserve it.
