Chan Chun Sing: Not pro- or anti-China or the US, ‘We are pro-ASEAN’

To become a trusted partner, nations must actively engage with their counterparts, as “action without communication” only breeds suspicion. Whether increasing defence spending or developing new capabilities, countries must state their intentions clearly. “Action and communication” is the only way to dispel doubts, and in the end, nothing is impossible.

The importance of action and communication combined

Singapore’s Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister for Defence Chan Chun Sing shared these insights during a joint media interview on 31 May following the conclusion of the 23rd Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD). He highlighted the crucial role the forum plays in facilitating defence communication.

“We must spend the time and effort to reassure others of our intention,” Chan noted. “The more powerful we are, the more effort we need to spend to reassure others, because ultimately, in the defence sector, people look at not just capabilities, but intention.”

Speaking earlier that morning at the forum’s final plenary session, titled “Evolving Security Partnerships in a Fragmenting World”, Chan used a series of Chinese rhymes to drive his point home: “If you have words without action, nothing is achieved; but if you have action without communication, trust is destroyed; if you have no action and no communication, everything is impossible. But if you combine action and communication, then nothing is impossible.”

During the press conference, Chan elaborated that the SLD allowed partners to deeply understand the intentions behind each other’s actions, thereby reducing the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculation. These candid exchanges also enable defence ministers to “check our own blind spots” and learn from each other. When disputes arise, the SLD provides a vital “behind closed doors” environment for conflict resolution. It also allows participants to turn abstract discussions into concrete initiatives.

Chan argued that defusing crises before they erupt remains the ideal approach, “For us, very often no news is good news. So we are not trying to create issues and then be seen to be resolving it. The art of defence is to be able to pre-empt issues before they are formed.”

A tangible outcome of the SLD is the Guiding Principles for Underwater Infrastructure Defence Exchanges jointly released by 17 nations on 30 May. Chan revealed that the initiative grew out of discussions on critical underwater infrastructure at the 2025 dialogue. Following 12 months of bilateral and multilateral consultations, the framework was successfully launched.

Chan also noted that his longstanding relationships with various defence officials allowed for open and upfront communication. He shared that a close counterpart was unable to attend this year’s SLD due to urgent domestic matters, yet they still kept each other informed of progress over the phone.

The ‘Shangri-La DNA’

The SLD, organised by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), convened representatives from 44 countries this year, including 54 ministerial-level officials. However, China’s decision not to send its defence minister for the second consecutive year drew considerable attention. 

Chan said that Beijing’s level of participation depends on its own considerations, and its delegation profile varies from year to year. “It’s not that the Chinese are not here. I think the Chinese delegation has made their presence felt during many of the plenary sessions.”

He also disagreed with the description that China sent a low-level delegation and added, “Whether it is the ministerial level, the permanent secretary level, the academic think tank level, we take them all seriously, and we treat them with respect. That’s part of the Shangri-La DNA.”

Responses must adapt to evolving conflict

In his SLD address, Chan pointed out that the nature of international conflict is shifting profoundly, moving beyond geography, military firepower, and the here-and-now. National responses must therefore adapt accordingly.

Today’s conflicts are no longer just about yesterday’s quarrels or today’s disputes; they are also about setting frameworks for tomorrow’s contests. These may involve access to vital lifelines like information systems, energy grids and water systems, as well as the “Regulation Paradox” various countries face. 

This refers to the dilemma governments face when trying to implement effective guardrails when harnessing new technologies. Regulating too early risks stifling innovation, while regulating too late allows flawed norms or behaviours to become too entrenched and nearly impossible to reverse.

Chan stressed the need to both maintain and update the principles, institutions and norms that are critical to global security and progress. He also called on nations to establish new networks of flexible, overlapping, issue-based partnerships to complement existing multilateral frameworks. Such networks could build trust and foster practical cooperation in cybersecurity, military artificial intelligence governance and the protection of critical underwater infrastructure.

He also pointed out that the leaders of a society filled with anxiety and distrust would have less room to negotiate abroad. So, there is a need for leaders to resist the temptation of populist solutions for short-term domestic support. A country can only become a more credible and attractive partner on the international stage through resolving its domestic challenges and building trust. 

The Shangri-La Dialogue is like an airport

Chan also shared at the joint media interview that the true value of the SLD is best reflected in the participation of various parties and the networks established as a result. It draws support from a growing number of countries and organisations, demonstrating that participants find value in this event and prize it as a platform to connect with others.

Chan also pointed out that for a transport hub like Singapore, its real competitive advantage lies in enabling people to make more connections, with the final outcome measured by the volume of passengers served. 

“For the Shangri-La Dialogue, we are cheered by the support from many countries, a growing number of countries and organisations that come and participate. It shows that they find value in this event, and find value in using it as a platform to connect with others.”

ASEAN will not, and must never, become complacent

Compared to other conflict-ridden regions, ASEAN is relatively fortunate, but the regional grouping will not, and must never, become complacent. Chan stated that ASEAN must establish frameworks, build mutual trust and develop real capabilities in order to tackle both present and future challenges.

“Circumstances don’t define ASEAN, our responses to circumstances define us,” Chan remarked at the joint media interview.

On 30 May, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth delivered a speech at the forum urging Indo-Pacific allies and partners to increase their military spending. Hegseth outlined a specific target of 3.5% of GDP to counter regional security challenges posed by China’s rapid military expansion. At the 2025 SLD, Hegseth had similarly called on Indo-Pacific allies and partners to raise defence spending to 5% of GDP.

No linear correlation between expenditure and capability

Media representatives questioned Chan on whether such a move would deepen divisions within ASEAN, given that some member states might not be able to afford a significant hike in defence spending.

Chan responded that while rising defence budgets was part of the ministerial roundtable conversation among defence chiefs, the critical issue is not just how much is spent, but how the money is used. As with many emerging technological fields, the key is not how much you invest, but whether the ideas are innovative enough to achieve greater results with the same — or even less — spending.

“I have been in the defence sector for the last almost 40 years. There is no linear correlation between expenditure and capability. Different countries spend different amounts, different countries use their expenditures differently, wisely to build up capabilities according to their needs,” he said.

Chan argued that the real priority is consistent and stable funding over many years to build genuine capabilities, particularly in human capital. For instance, training a pilot or a sailor takes years. Building up a scientific community and technological capabilities requires an even longer horizon to successfully translate defence spending into real capabilities.

“Some countries spend a lot, but they do not get commensurate capability. Part of the reason is that if you adopt a feast and famine strategy, you don’t stretch your defence dollar, and you don’t get bang for buck.”

Securing an adequate defence budget relies fundamentally on public support. Chan revealed that the defence ministers also discussed how to convince the public to invest consistently rather than having a “feast and famine mindset of spending only when the trouble starts”. By then, he warned, it is usually too late. With a new generation of technologies becoming available, being highly discerning in how money is spent has become even more important.

‘We are pro-ASEAN’

Chan articulated this exact perspective during the Q&A segment of the dialogue’s final plenary session. A participant noted that varying levels of cooperation between individual ASEAN member states and external powers could allow foreign actors to sway ASEAN’s agenda and decision-making. The attendee asked how ASEAN could strengthen its internal cohesion and collective security mechanisms to maintain its regional centrality.

In response, Chan emphasised that ASEAN must always remember that its member states are not in competition with one another. The real competition lies in how they coordinate and harmonise their efforts to compete with the rest of the world and make positive contributions.

“The world has enough troubles. If ASEAN stays out of trouble, we would have distinguished ourselves.”

According to the State of Southeast Asia Survey 2026 report published back in April by the ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, ASEAN countries expressed higher trust in the US than in China. However, when forced to choose between the two superpowers, more ASEAN respondents indicated a preference for China.

Addressing why this trend was particularly pronounced in nations like Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, Chan provided a concise retort on how ASEAN navigates the China-US rivalry that was met with enthusiastic applause from the floor: “We are not pro-US or anti-US, pro-China or anti-China. We are pro-ASEAN.”

This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “陈振声：要成为值得信赖伙伴 “边做边谈”才能“万事不难””, “陈振声：香会如机场 关键在于中转与互联能力” and “陈振声：亚细安须立框架增互信应对各种挑战”.

Related: Chan Chun Sing: Why small states must choose principles, not sides | Shangri-La Dialogue — more than US-China competition