The new unequal treaties: How US tariff tactics mirror old imperialism
Just as some Asian countries had little choice but to sign unequal treaties with Western powers in the past, today’s tariff negotiations with the US look to be resulting in modern-day unequal treaties. Japanese academic Sukegawa Seiya makes the comparisons.
In April 2025, the Trump administration in the US introduced a policy of “reciprocal tariffs”, imposing varying tariff rates on countries around the world. This move evoked the post-World War II concepts of egalitarianism and reciprocity that were promoted to foster international cooperation and globalisation — but in this case, the name does not match the reality. The Trump administration unilaterally imposed high tariffs and used the promise of tariff reductions as leverage, offering minimal concessions in exchange for substantial gains.
Initially, the US granted a 90-day grace period and shifted its focus to bilateral negotiations. Among Southeast Asian nations, Vietnam — faced with the threat of a 46% tariff — was the first to enter talks with the US, ultimately signing an agreement for a 20% reciprocal tariff. Likewise, Indonesia, which had originally faced a proposed 32% tariff, ended up agreeing to a 19% reciprocal tariff. The Philippines also signed a 19% agreement.
... it is in fact a form of negotiation without the freedom to choose — in essence, coercing others into accepting subordinate economic relationships.
According to reports, these countries granted the US full market access with zero tariffs on American exports. At first glance, these agreements might appear to be the result of negotiation and compromise. In reality, however, they serve as a mechanism for the US to expand its market access, far removed from the ideals of equitable free trade. The unilateral imposition of high tariffs followed by the signing of such agreements effectively undermines the economic sovereignty of Southeast Asian nations.
Reciprocal tariffs as ‘unequal treaties of the 21st century’
This scenario inevitably brings to mind the colonial domination and forced signing of unequal treaties by Western powers following the Age of Exploration. One notable example is the Kingdom of Siam (now Thailand), which while never formally colonised, was compelled to accept unequal conditions in treaties such as the Bowring Treaty with Britain in 1855 and the Harris Treaty with the US in 1856, where it lost extraterritorial jurisdiction and tariff autonomy.
To amend these treaties, the Kingdom of Siam had to undergo decades of diplomatic effort and national modernisation. It was not until 1937 that Siam succeeded in revising the treaties, regaining extraterritorial jurisdiction and restoring control over its own tariffs.
The US’s reciprocal tariff policy today can be likened to a “21st-century version of the unequal treaty”. While technically bilateral agreements are reached through negotiations, in practice, the US leverages its vast economic power and market access to pressure other countries into accepting unfavourable terms. How is this any different from the tactics of past imperialism?
While cloaked in the language of “reciprocity”, it is in fact a form of negotiation without the freedom to choose — in essence, coercing others into accepting subordinate economic relationships. This approach is fundamentally no different from the “gunboat diplomacy” used by Western powers in the 19th century against Asian and African nations. The only difference is the method, with economic power now replacing naval might as the means to reimpose an unequal international order.
... the US strategy of isolating individual countries for separate negotiations has significantly weakened ASEAN’s bargaining power, resembling the old colonial tactic of “divide and rule” once used by Western powers in Asia and Africa.
ASEAN divided
In response to US policy, ASEAN member states such as Vietnam and Indonesia have accepted the agreements from their respective national standpoints, but the outcomes may not necessarily align with ASEAN’s collective interests. In fact, the US strategy of isolating individual countries for separate negotiations has significantly weakened ASEAN’s bargaining power, resembling the old colonial tactic of “divide and rule” once used by Western powers in Asia and Africa.
Without solidarity among nations, there is no foundation for joint diplomacy or coordinated economic policies. Individual states in isolation are more likely to yield under pressure, and before long, the entire region may be forced to accept unfavourable terms.
Even more concerning, these tariff agreements may exert a centrifugal force within ASEAN. If the terms and tariff levels negotiated with the US vary widely among member states, others will feel compelled to enter their own negotiations with Washington. This could undermine the principle of fairness and unity within the bloc, ultimately eroding the concept of “ASEAN centrality”.
Furthermore, these agreements may also conflict with the “most favoured nation” (MFN) principle upheld by the World Trade Organization (WTO). If only American goods are granted duty-free or low-tariff access to ASEAN markets, other countries may view this as discriminatory treatment and could potentially file complaints for violations of WTO rules, which would present a serious legal and diplomatic challenge for ASEAN countries. Prioritising short-term benefits may come at the expense of long-term trust and economic stability.
... it is now time for ASEAN to come together and stand against the unequal treaties of the 21st century.
Southeast Asian nations can learn from Thailand’s experience in history. For ASEAN to act as a unified bloc, its member states must coordinate with one another and reopen negotiations with the US as a collective. By leveraging regional frameworks such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the ASEAN–Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership (AJCEP), ASEAN — an economic community of over 700 million people — can wield its collective strength to resist a new generation of unequal treaties.
Otherwise, 21st-century international trade may carry the dangerous potential of reviving the imperialist domination of the past. Thailand once spent decades revising its unequal treaties — it is now time for ASEAN to come together and stand against the unequal treaties of the 21st century.
