SOUTH-EAST Asia may remain an important piece of Washington’s geopolitical puzzle, but that does not necessarily mean the region will receive the diplomatic attention it seeks. With the United States balancing its rivalry with China against competing commitments elsewhere in the world, analysts say the region risks being viewed primarily through the lens of American strategic interests.
Universiti Malaya’s International Institute of Public Policy and Management senior lecturer Dr Muhammad Danial Azman says South-East Asia could find itself in a position where its strategic importance is not matched by sustained American engagement.
“South-East Asia risks become strategically indispensable to Washington, yet diplomatically underprioritised,” he says.
The Indo-Pacific would remain central to American strategy because of China, maritime security, global trade and advanced manufacturing, he says.
However, he cautions that strategic importance did not necessarily translate into sustained diplomatic attention or meaningful economic engagement.
“Domestic political confrontation, alongside competing commitments in Europe and the Middle East, could constrain Washington’s ability to deliver a coherent regional agenda,” he says.
ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute visiting senior fellow Stephen Olson similarly says the remainder of Trump’s presidency would be dominated by several competing foreign policy priorities.
“The clock is now ticking for the remainder of the Trump presidency. Two years is not a lot of time and dealing with Iran and Ukraine while managing the relationship with China will suck a lot of oxygen out of the room,” he says.
Olson says South-East Asia would remain a priority for Washington only so long as the region remained relevant to its relationship and competition with China.
However, geostrategist Prof Dr Azmi Hassan believes the midterm results could lead to a less confrontational approach towards Beijing, particularly over trade. He says voters’ concerns over the rising cost of living, which he linked partly to the US-China trade war and the conflict involving Iran, could encourage Trump to moderate his approach.
“I think it will be mellowed down,” he says, pointing to Trump’s anticipated meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the APEC summit on Nov 18.
Azmi says an improvement in the US-China relations could also have positive implications for South-East Asia, including reducing pressure on Asean countries to take sides.
For Asean, Muhammad Danial says the challenge is to ensure that South-East Asian countries were not treated merely as instruments of American strategic competition with Beijing. He notes that countries in the region had different priorities in their relationships with Washington.
“For example, while the Phillippines prioritises American security guarantees, Malaysia and several other Asean members also place considerable importance on economic cooperation, diplomatic flexibility and regional stability,” he says.
Muhammad Danial says Malaysia should avoid being forced into choosing between Washington and Beijing, as strategic competition between the two powers was unlikely to diminish regardless of which political party held power in the US.
“China policy is increasingly bipartisan in Washington. The disagreement is less about whether to compete and more about how aggressively to compete,” he says.
Malaysia could continue cooperating with the US in semiconductors and advanced technology while maintaining substantial trade and investment relations with China, he says. But, he adds, strategic autonomy requires clear national priorities, credible regulatory institutions and the ability to manage competing technological and security requirements.
“The objective is not to remain equally distant from both powers but to remain sufficiently independent of either,” he says.
Muhammad Danial also calls for stronger Asean-led institutions, regional economic integration and cooperation based on international law.
“Asean centrality must therefore be more than diplomatic rhetoric. Washington’s credibility in South-East Asia will ultimately be measured not by how often it declares the Indo-Pacific a priority, but by how consistently it shows up,” he says.
