What’s in a sign?: Signboards of Asean 2025 have been put up all around the country in conjunction with Malaysia’s chairmanship of the regional bloc. — Bernama
JUST a few days ago, a peer sent a photo of a massive Asean: Malaysia 2025 LED sign plastered across a prominent building in Kuala Lumpur to a group chat. “Look at all this...,” he captioned the photo.
The message elicited a few laughing emoji reactions.
Others chimed in with doubts about whether Malaysia’s young even understands what Asean does – let alone what Malaysia’s chairmanship this year actually means.
(For context, this was a group chat of youth involved in local advocacy, which explains the political undertones of what was otherwise a simple observation about urban aesthetics.)
It got me thinking: What does Malaysia’s Asean chairmanship really mean to the youth, what does it entail and more importantly, where do young people fit into all of this?
If my peers' reactions were any indication, Asean appears to have a serious perception problem among this cohort of people it strives to serve.
Think tank Lowy Institute describes Malaysia’s chairmanship as a "catalyst, not a panacea", an opportunity to push for change but not a magic fix for Asean’s deeper problems.
While there is no strict rulebook on what the chair does, the broad expectations are to represent Asean, promote regional stability, and strengthen external relations.
This year’s chosen theme of "Inclusivity and Sustainability" suggests a focus on shared progress and resilience.
Yet, like many of my peers, I have questions.
Asean’s slow, consensus-driven model makes it notoriously ineffective at responding to crises. The Myanmar conflict is a prime example. After more than three years, the much-touted Five-Point Consensus has done little beyond producing diplomatic statements.
Many pundits revel in fresh hope that Malaysia, under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s leadership, will reinvigorate Asean. But these high expectations may be unfair; I feel there is too much emphasis placed on the rotating chair. These expectations must be tempered by the limitations of what can be realistically achieved in a single year.
Instead of fixating on consensus, Malaysia’s real contribution could be in laying the groundwork for a more cohesive, forward-looking Asean and setting the momentum for subsequent chairs. This includes ensuring that youth, who represent 34% of Asean’s population, are given a seat at the table and youth issues are made one of Asean’s priority action areas.
The Asean Youth Development Index (YDI) makes it clear that young people want to be part of the conversation, but they aren’t always given the space to do so. The YDI highlights that while Asean’s economic role is acknowledged, young people place greater emphasis on social and cultural exchanges, yet these are often sidelined in the broader policy agenda.
For example, educational exchanges rank as a top concern across Asean countries. Yet, these programmes remain limited to a privileged few.
Similarly, poverty reduction and healthcare consistently rank among youth priorities, but Asean’s bureaucratic structure has made previous regional cooperation slow and inaccessible. Asean’s success in economic integration has not necessarily translated into a shared sense of belonging among its people.
This is where Malaysia could make a difference. If its chairmanship is to mean more than diplomatic fanfare, it must push for policies that give young people real influence in Asean’s future.
A permanent Asean Youth Advisory Council (AYAC) could change this. Modelled after the Youth Advisory Council in the European Union, it should serve as a platform that brings together youth networks and NGOs to provide direct policy recommendations on education, economic cooperation, and regional governance. This would put youth voices in the room where real decisions are made.
Another key issue is the education-employment gap across Asean. Many young people graduate with degrees misaligned with job market needs, leading to high youth unemployment.
Malaysia could champion a regional skills and competency framework, standardising skills certification across Asean to make it easier for young people to work across borders. It could also fund sector-specific training programmes in digital skills, sustainability, entrepreneurship, and cross-cultural leadership, ensuring youth are future-ready.
Finally, Malaysia should push for an Asean-wide youth exchange initiative, modelled after successful ones like the EU’s Erasmus programme. Right now, Asean youth exchanges are reserved for elite university students.
A properly funded, accessible programme would allow youths from all socioeconomic backgrounds to study, train, or intern in other Asean countries, fostering stronger regional ties beyond just economic agreements.
We have already seen how young people in Thailand and Indonesia have mobilised on governance and democracy issues. Rather than fearing this political consciousness, Asean should embrace it.
A chairmanship that prioritises youth, skills, and regional mobility could turn Asean from a distant bureaucratic entity to the youth into a platform that actually reflects its young people’s aspirations.
The LED sign in Kuala Lumpur might be an easy target for criticism, but there is still a lot that Malaysia can achieve for South-East Asian youth, especially those in the country.
For one, if Malaysia ensures that young voices matter beyond the confines of official statements and ceremonial events, its year at the helm will be really significant for the region’s youth.
Student Jonathan Lee traces his writing roots to The Star’s BRATs programme. He is now a Malaysian youth advocate. The views expressed here are solely his own.
