Can ASEAN survive? The challenge of maintaining unity amid great power rivalry

As great power competition intensifies in the region, countries in Southeast Asia have struggled to maintain the position of not taking sides, following the traditional stance of centrality and unity of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). However, it may become increasingly difficult to do so. Great power rivalry and various internal and external developments may be eroding ASEAN unity and centrality and exacerbating divisions between and among member states.

ASEAN “centrality” is defined as a regional architecture based on a framework that supports and strengthens each other, with ASEAN as the main driving force.  ASEAN centrality emphasises that ASEAN must become the dominant regional platform to overcome common challenges and engage with external powers.  ASEAN’s motto — One Vision, One Identity, One Community — promotes unity and consensus building among member states.

In recent years, ASEAN unity has been challenged and ASEAN centrality questioned.  

In October 2024, four ASEAN members — Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand — joined nine other global south nations to become partner countries of BRICS, a group of emerging economies often seen as a counterweight to the US-led Group of Seven (G7). BRICS was first formed in 2009 as BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and expanded to include South Africa (hence BRICS) in 2010 and added Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia and Iran as full members in 2024 (thus BRICS+). China is a founding member and a significant player in BRICS+.  

With a combined population of 3.2 billion and about 37.3% of the global gross domestic product (GDP), BRICS+ is already much larger than G7 or the EU and is poised to grow further as a major force in today’s international political economy.

The four ASEAN members’ effort to join BRICS+ is quite telling of how developing countries are responding to the global power shift in an emerging multipolar world. Simply put, the Western domination of global affairs has come to an end and developing countries are diversifying their relations with different great powers.

However, not all Southeast Asian countries are developing such a diversification strategy to maximize their national interests, which raises a question about ASEAN’s unity in the midst of US-China rivalry. 

Undoubtedly, Southeast Asian countries do not want to choose sides in the great power competition. Singapore stands out as the most outspoken against being forced to take sides. Time and again, Singaporean political leaders have stated that Singapore does not take sides but upholds principles to advance its long-term national interests. 

Security and economic interests may pull ASEAN countries in different directions. Notably, the Philippines and Thailand are formal US allies while others like Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam are US partners. Meanwhile, all ASEAN countries have deep and dynamic economic, cultural and social ties to China. Naturally, the best strategy for these countries appears to be taking a neutral position in the US-China rivalry and maintaining productive relations with both powers. Unfortunately, disputes in the South China Sea and conflicting security and economic interests make this difficult to achieve.  

For example, the past few administrations in the Philippines have swung between a more pro-China approach and a more pro-US approach, which highlights the dilemma the country faces. The US has vowed to defend the Philippines in a hypothetical war between the island nation and China. The stakes are therefore extremely high in the South China Sea, since a war between the Philippines and China means a war between the US and China. It is a daunting challenge for these countries to manage the territorial dispute and prevent it from escalating into a military conflict.

In September 2024, Cambodia formally withdrew from the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area (CLV-DTA) agreement.  The CLV-DTA has been in existence since 2004 and comprises 13 border provinces of the three countries, focusing on joint development of the border regions. The withdrawal, which seemed to be driven by domestic politics, may enhance legitimacy of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party and promote national unity while addressing concerns of territorial integrity and anti-Vietnam sentiments at home, but it will hurt trilateral cooperation and Cambodia’s relations with the other two countries. And it also does damage to ASEAN unity in combating common development challenges.

While the world has been preoccupied by the Russia-Ukraine war and the conflicts in the Middle East in recent years, the civil war in Myanmar and worsening human rights crisis have continued, which creates another challenge to ASEAN unity, with ASEAN members unable to reach an agreement on how to handle the situation.

More than one million Rohingya refugees have fled Myanmar over several decades, including about 740,000 since August 2017, when Myanmar’s military launched a brutal counterinsurgency operation. The Rohingya are not recognized as an official ethnic group and have been denied citizenship since 1982, making them the world’s largest stateless population. A majority of stateless Rohingya refugees (98%) live in Bangladesh and Malaysia.  

Ethnic militias have been fighting the Myanmar junta since February 2021, when the military overthrew the democratically elected government led by Aung San Suu Kyi. The last few years have taken a huge toll on Myanmar: thousands of people were killed, three million displaced, entire towns destroyed and the middle class cut in half.  Myanmar has also become a hotbed for transnational crimes such as money laundering, cyber scams and drug trafficking.

The incessant civil war has not only created instability in Myanmar and the border areas of neighbouring countries but also highlighted ASEAN’s division and ineffectiveness to address the ongoing crisis.  

For nearly seven decades, ASEAN has played a significant role in promoting regional unity and development despite many differences among member states.  It has also played a positive role in promoting peace and development beyond the region through multilateral forms such as the Shangri-La Dialogue, ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit.

Both the US and China have strong interests in Southeast Asia, and both have invested tremendous economic, diplomatic, and cultural resources in the region.  For China, Southeast Asia is right next door and is the focus of its “good neighbour diplomacy”.  China-ASEAN trade reached US$911.7 billion in 2023, making China and ASEAN each other’s largest trading partners for four consecutive years. For the US, Southeast Asia is a critical part of its Indo-Pacific Strategy as Washington beefs up relations with allies and partners to push back China’s growing influence. The South China Sea, a vital global trade route, has become an area of US-China rivalry for power and influence.

Clearly, the US and China have conflicting interests in Southeast Asia, but they also share common interests in promoting regional development and peace. Instead of pushing their rivalry into the region and forcing regional countries to choose sides, the two great powers need to behave more responsibly and constructively and respect ASEAN’s centrality and unity. ASEAN countries, on their part, must be firm in defending their interests while urging the US and China to focus on areas where they can cooperate in Southeast Asia.

Related: Are the Philippines’ tough South China Sea tactics a risk to ASEAN centrality? | Biden skips 2024 ASEAN Summit: US not walking the talk in Southeast Asia | ASEAN-China Summit in Laos: Focusing on cooperation amid global challenges