ASEAN-Australia Special Summit: Divisions among ASEAN Member States
The 50th anniversary of the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit ended with Australia announcing a USD1,2 billion for boosting trade and investment with ASEAN. Not only for infrastructure development, it also intends to support the green economy as part of Australia’s Southeast Asia Economic Strategy for 2040. The common and mutual interests to preserve the region’s prosperity and stability are crucial for all parties. Despite the rhetoric of mutual benefit, disparities persist, notably in the realm of security, especially those related to the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait issues, which are highly related to China.
Australia, as one of the vocal point countries in the Indo-Pacific, has a strong relationship with the US and its allies who are actively containing the rise of China, through security partnerships such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) and the trilateral AUKUS (Australia, the US, and the UK). However, for the ASEAN member states, an open confrontation would not be in favor of their economic needs with China. Becoming evidently towards the US and away from Asia just put more eroding Australia’s reputation among the ASEAN member states. Additionally, ASEAN does not have a common policy on China, and ASEAN member states have their economic interests with China. Laos and Cambodia are both having close economic relations with China, while the Philippines, are more fond of Australia and the West’s support as the Philippines has a territorial dispute in the South China Sea. Some other states like Indonesia and also Malaysia clearly stated that they are refusing to take sides.
Malaysia to Australia: We do not have a problem with China
During the 2024 ASEAN-Australian Special Summit in Australia, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim affirmed that the United States and some of its allies should not preclude Malaysia from being friendly to China. “We do not have a problem with China,” said Anwar. Malaysia viewed that the rising ‘China-phobia’ among the US and some of its allies should not quarrel with Malaysia’s relations with China, the largest trading partner. Anwar responding the US’ criticism of Malaysia with Beijing saying that the country is ‘fiercely independent’ and does not want to be ‘dictated by any force.” The preference for maintaining a neutral stance is frequently expressed about concerns regarding the increasing rivalry between China and the US, and the perceived danger of Southeast Asia being torn apart by geopolitical tensions once again.
The ASEAN Secretary-General Kao Kim Hourn also believes that the regional bloc will never pick a side on the rivalry and urges both the US and China to improve their relations. Mussolini Lidasan, director of the Al Qalam Institute at Ateneo de Davao University in the Philippines shares a similar view emphasizing that ASEAN nations have traditionally followed a policy of neutrality and non-alignment in major power competition. Similar to Indonesia’s approach, Malaysia would love to also have good relations with all countries despite their own political stance. The US and China rivalry has put some countries building a ‘middle ground’ politics where they can interact strategically with all countries necessary. For both Indonesia and Malaysia, political economic, and security interests with US allies and China remain important and they want to play it safe. The interdependence among ASEAN countries with China underscores the pragmatic approach taken by several member states like Cambodia and Lao where they prioritize economic cooperation and stability over aligning with one geopolitical bloc or another. The statement from the Malaysian Prime Minister also reflects that economic engagement with China is not just a matter of a choice but also a necessity to sustain economic growth and development in the country.
Some ASEAN member states have already shown preferences; the Philippines maintained a bilateral defense treaty with the US. Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has also told the Australian Parliament that the strategic partnership between the two nations was more crucial for upholding the rule of law and peace in the region as it is under China’s threats. Divisions among ASEAN member states reflect that there is a need for more relatable definitions of ‘Neutrality’ as it pertains to geopolitical relations and security dynamics in the Indo-Pacific regions. The ASEAN-Australian Special Summit highlighted the need to intricate the balance that member states wanted to build and maintain in the economic, security, and diplomatic relations with major powers such as the US and China. Rather than being ‘neutral,’ a non-alignment offers a more optimal standpoint for ASEAN’s foreign policy and it could still include cooperation with all partners, exceeding the defence and security issues in the face of growing geopolitical uncertainties.
