Why ASEAN is engaging Putin while the G7 looks away

The recent ASEAN-Russia Commemorative Summit held in Kazan, Russian Federation, marked 35 years of ASEAN-Russia relations and 30 years of dialogue partnership between the two sides. Of note was that the Kazan summit partially overlapped with the G7 meeting in France, carrying a powerful symbolic message about the direction of the emerging world order. While Western powers gathered in France to reaffirm their determination to isolate Moscow, Southeast Asian leaders were in Tatarstan shaking hands with President Vladimir Putin.

This reflects the growing reality of a multipolar world that can no longer be dictated by one or two traditional centres of power. Choosing Kazan as the summit location was especially symbolic. Historically and culturally, the city serves as a bridge connecting the Islamic world, Eurasia and Asia. The presence of Southeast Asian leaders, such as Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, underscored a simple reality that the diplomatic isolation pursued by the West does not extend far beyond the transatlantic sphere.

ASEAN’s practical approach

For Moscow, the 2026 Kazan summit was an opportunity to demonstrate that Russia remains a consequential actor with significant multilateral influence in the Indo-Pacific. For ASEAN, active engagement with Russia represented a practical expression of the region’s longstanding commitment to strategic autonomy and multidirectional diplomacy. Amid intensifying competition between the US and China, and mounting pressure to align with one camp or another, Southeast Asia has chosen a more pragmatic course, one that prioritises national interests over ideological loyalties.

The summit’s most tangible outcomes were reflected in the adoption of four key strategic documents, including the Kazan Declaration 2026 and the Comprehensive Plan of Action for 2026-2030. Together, these agreements provide an operational roadmap for cooperation across political affairs, cybersecurity, food security and energy diversification. Through these instruments, ASEAN-Russia relations have formally advanced into a more structured and future-oriented strategic partnership.

Russia as a ‘niche balancer’

Within Southeast Asia’s geopolitical landscape, Russia is often overshadowed by China’s economic dominance and America’s military influence. China has entrenched itself through massive trade penetration and large-scale infrastructure investments under the Belt and Road Initiative, even as it continues to face friction in the South China Sea. The US, meanwhile, relies on its network of formal defence alliances and its promotion of a liberal, rules-based Indo-Pacific security architecture. Yet the Kazan summit demonstrated that Russia has successfully carved out a distinctive role as a niche balancer, offering targeted solutions without demanding politically burdensome conditions.

Russia’s comparative advantage in Southeast Asia lies in strategic sectors such as civilian nuclear energy. State-owned nuclear giant Rosatom offers advanced technologies ranging from conventional reactors to small modular reactors (SMRs), supported by financing schemes covering up to 85% of construction costs. Such projects inevitably create long-term technological and political linkages, granting Moscow structural influence in Southeast Asian capitals seeking pathways toward cleaner energy transitions. At the same time, discounted Russian fossil fuel exports have become an important economic buffer for several ASEAN countries struggling with elevated energy prices driven by geopolitical tensions in the Middle East.

Beyond energy, cooperation in non-traditional security fields, including cybersecurity, transnational crime prevention and artificial intelligence, has emerged as another important pillar of engagement. These areas provide ASEAN members with alternatives for diversifying their digital ecosystems and reducing dependence on either Western or Chinese technology monopolies. Through a distinctly transactional and results-oriented approach, Russia has persuaded many Southeast Asian governments that closer cooperation with Moscow can coexist comfortably with their domestic development priorities.

The Marcos Jr chairmanship paradox

The success of the 2026 Kazan summit also dispelled concerns that the foreign policy orientation of the Philippines might obstruct ASEAN’s collective engagement with Russia. Under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, whose country held ASEAN’s rotating chairmanship in 2026, Manila has significantly deepened its military partnership with Washington. Yet rather than allowing bilateral alignments to dictate ASEAN’s regional posture, Marcos Jr acted professionally as co-chair of the Kazan summit and personally led the Philippine delegation to meet President Putin.

The behaviour of other key ASEAN states in Kazan further illustrated the maturity of the region’s diplomacy. Indonesia, under President Prabowo Subianto and represented at the summit by Foreign Minister Sugiono, concentrated on concrete energy security objectives. Jakarta has actively explored cooperation with Rosatom on floating nuclear power plants as part of its broader energy transition strategy for the archipelago. Indonesia’s insistence on technology transfer and the highest safety standards demonstrated a negotiating posture grounded in confidence rather than dependency.

Malaysia, under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, showcased a more expansive diplomatic vision by positioning itself as a bridge between ASEAN and the wider Eurasian sphere. Through business forums held alongside the summit, Anwar promoted deeper economic engagement with both the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), while simultaneously strengthening Malaysia’s role in the broader BRICS-related economic landscape.

Singapore, meanwhile, offered perhaps the most elegant example of principle-based diplomacy. As the only ASEAN member to impose unilateral sanctions on Russia following the Ukraine conflict, Singapore nevertheless participated in the Kazan summit. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong emphasised that Singapore’s position stemmed from its principled commitment to territorial sovereignty rather than allegiance to any geopolitical bloc. At the same time, he openly supported Russia’s inclusion in an inclusive regional security architecture, demonstrating that political disagreements need not prevent strategic dialogue in pursuit of regional stability.

The fading hegemony of the G7

The broader significance of the Kazan summit lies in the geopolitical message it conveyed: the era of uncontested Western dominance has passed, and the ability of the G7 to shape global outcomes unilaterally is steadily diminishing. Economic sanctions promoted by Washington and its allies have failed to produce comprehensive global isolation of Russia.

For many developing countries in Southeast Asia, complying with such measures without meaningful economic compensation from the West would carry substantial costs. The rise of transactional multipolarity is encouraging a more pragmatic style of diplomacy, one less constrained by ideological narratives of “democracy versus autocracy”. In this environment, states increasingly prioritise flexibility, economic resilience and strategic diversification over rigid geopolitical alignments.

By strengthening strategic ties with Russia while simultaneously building institutional connections with organisations such as the SCO and the EAEU, ASEAN is seeking to avoid being trapped in a binary contest between the US and China. This diversification strategy provides Southeast Asian countries with greater room to manoeuvre in securing supply chains, attracting investment, and protecting long-term economic interests. The region has little interest in becoming a proxy battlefield or a pawn in great power competition.

Ultimately, the 2026 Kazan summit highlighted ASEAN’s growing geopolitical maturity in navigating an increasingly uncertain world. The strategic partnership with Russia is not viewed as a challenge to the West but rather as a practical mechanism for enhancing regional energy, food and technological security. Through this approach, Southeast Asia is demonstrating that it can remain an independent anchor of stability, capable of navigating geopolitical storms without sacrificing its sovereignty or strategic autonomy.

Related: G7 unity: Europe yields as Trump declares ‘I’m the boss’ | Xi meets Putin after Trump summit to balance China-US-Russia triangle