Can ASEAN find its own voice between great powers?

Nineteen years after the concept of “ASEAN centrality” was formally enshrined, Southeast Asia is standing at a crossroads amid intensifying great power competition. Surprisingly, according to The State of Southeast Asia 2026 Survey Report, ASEAN overtook the US for the first time as the most trusted actor to uphold the international order.

This finding, together with the region’s push to bolster digital literacy and continuous effort to “decolonise knowledge production”, highlights that Southeast Asia is moving to define its own narrative different from those of external actors. In other words, the region is on the path of pursuing epistemic autonomy.

“Epistemic autonomy” refers to a society’s ability to form its own views rather than importing others’ prescriptions. As an analytical framework, it has several key parts. First, it means judging information carefully and thinking critically. A society could get ideas, theories and views about world order from outside powers, especially major powers, but it should be able to weigh them, question them and make its own judgment. 

Second, it means building knowledge and stories that grow out of one’s history, culture and development experience. Essentially, a society should develop its own ways of explaining the world and guiding its actions, instead of depending too much on Western-centred ideas. Finally, it means making policy choices and shaping identity based on its interests and understanding of its surroundings.

Unity and resilience amid great power rivalry

Looking at Southeast Asia in 2026 through this framework, it is clear that ASEAN centrality remains the cornerstone of regional order and a means of preserving epistemic autonomy. The ASEAN Community Vision 2045, adopted during the 46th ASEAN Summit, describes ASEAN as a “resilient, innovative, dynamic, and people-centred” community, while explicitly calling for enhanced ASEAN centrality, stronger institutions, and more decisive regional mechanisms to respond to global and regional challenges. It also states that ASEAN should be able to project its own position on regional and global issues and remain a primary driving force in shaping the regional architecture. 

The State of Southeast Asia 2026 Survey Report suggests that such aspiration has a real social foundation. It shows that a clear majority of respondents continue to welcome ASEAN’s growing political and strategic influence. China is seen as the most influential actor in the region, while the US is trusted by only 44.0%, down from 47.2% in 2025. 

More tellingly, when asked how ASEAN should withstand pressure from major-power rivalry, more than half of respondents prioritise enhancing ASEAN’s resilience and unity.

Producing knowledge from within

The report also notes that local online news (87.2%) and social media (84.5%) dwarf foreign news sources (67.8%) as top information channels for respondents, suggesting Southeast Asia’s growing confidence in domestic narratives. This finding also aligns with ASEAN’s efforts to strengthen information resilience from within. 

The 2023 ASEAN Guideline on Management of Government Information in Combating Fake News and Disinformation in the Media calls for greater accuracy, transparency, accountability and coordination in public communication, while scholars such as Bama Andika Putra note that ASEAN has increasingly framed digital literacy as a region-wide defence against distorted narratives. 

The ASEAN University Network was created precisely to foster regional identity, solidarity and collaboration among Southeast Asian universities, while the SEASREP (Southeast Asian Studies Regional Exchange Program) Foundation has spent three decades advancing Southeast Asian studies within Southeast Asia through language training, postgraduate study, collaborative research and publications.

Recent scholarship on Southeast Asian higher education likewise argues for a “decolonial” turn grounded in indigenous and regional philosophies, while approaches such as the Thai Baan research in the Mekong Delta show how local communities can become producers of knowledge rather than objects of outside study. 

Implications for external powers

A clear trend is taking shape: Southeast Asia is no longer just a passive player. It is trying to become a region that thinks independently, speaks for itself, and plays an active role in shaping its future. 

However, it is important to point out that the region’s quest for epistemic autonomy does not mean isolation. ASEAN has extensive experience in binding external powers together through a dense web of multilateral forums. The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), convened since 1994, is one of the few Asia-Pacific mechanisms where Southeast Asian and external powers regularly engage in political and security dialogue under ASEAN’s umbrella. 

Similarly, the East Asia Summit (EAS), established in 2005, has grown into an annual leaders-level forum with participation from the US, China, India, Japan, Russia and others. Convened after ASEAN’s own summit process, it provides a venue for external powers to express strategic concerns while being socialised into ASEAN norms of consultation and consensus rather than confrontation.

As long as ASEAN remains an open regionalism endeavour, external powers will continue to find utility in working through ASEAN’s institutions to pursue their interests while Southeast Asians become more assertive in owning the narrative. 

Yet, open regionalism also places responsibility on ASEAN’s partners. As ASEAN centrality evolves, external powers cannot expect influence to generate simply from economic weight or military presence alone. They must demonstrate a willingness to co-construct regional cooperation that aligns with Southeast Asian preferences for multilateral dialogue, non-interference and inclusive rule-making.

Related: State of Southeast Asia Survey 2026: A harder balance to keep in Southeast Asia | The Philippines’ ASEAN chairmanship comes at a perilous time