American flags are displayed together with Chinese flags in Beijing in 2018. If China and the United States continue on their current confrontational trajectory, other actors such as Asean might need to step in to prevent further global destabilisation. Photo: AP
Opinion
Opinion
by Jikon Lai and Elina Noor
Opinion
by Jikon Lai and Elina Noor
US-China tensions: Asean should actively address the fallout from their feud
A cycle of reciprocal aggression between the world’s two largest and most influential powers cannot be the formula for stable or orderly coexistence
As a relatively neutral set of actors, Asean states should go beyond acting as mediators between the major powers and jointly identify possible solutions
The deteriorating state of China-US relations is often presented by both sides as a singular narrative – starkly accusatory of the other’s actions, unequivocally righteous of its own. As the two powers seek to outflank each other on a range of issues amid a global pandemic, neither one seems interested in accepting responsibility for its own decisions or being accountable to the rest of the interconnected world.
Since the consequences of this rupture reverberate beyond China and the United States, it is unclear if a feasible way of life to preserve multilateralism and international cooperation remains.
China’s re-immersion into international society during the past few decades has elicited both awe and concern. Its rise from an insular, largely agrarian economy to a global technology giant in just four decades is nothing short of remarkable. However, its approach and behaviour have increasingly become the subject of more excoriation than praise.
Apart from the numerous bilateral problems between China and the US, recent reports of the mass surveillance and internment of Uygurs in Xinjiang, China’s deadly border clash with India and the imposition of a new national security law in Hong Kong suggest a more bellicose approach from China towards states other than the US.
The effects of China’s damming the Mekong on its downstream neighbours hint at mainland Southeast Asia emerging as the next flashpoint for regional tensions and great power competition. Several Southeast Asian states are taking a stronger stance against China’s jettisoning of international law. Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam – this year’s Asean chair – have all pushed back against China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea.
02:31
Have China’s dams been drying up the Mekong River or is low rainfall to blame?
Have China’s dams been drying up the Mekong River or is low rainfall to blame?
China, therefore, is sometimes its own worst enemy. Yet, it is problematic to understand China’s actions without also considering those of the United States. Although US policy is not premised on determining “a particular end state for China”, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s resolve to induce change in China and the insistence on distinguishing the Communist Party from “China or her people” point to a desire to delegitimise the ruling party.
These statements also sit oddly with the United States’ calls for “respect for sovereignty and independence of all nations”, serving only to highlight America’s track record of interference in many other countries.
Additionally, the United States’ advocacy of international law, particularly as regards China in the South China Sea, rings hollow given the numerous documented examples of America’s own defiance, past and present. Despite being a Pacific and Atlantic power, the US has yet to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea after 26 years. Its reticence towards international human rights instruments, withdrawal from international treaties and bodies and condemnation of the International Criminal Court simply reinforce the facade of a rules-based order.
It has also turned its back on the World Trade Organisation, claiming to be disadvantaged by the very rules and procedures the US itself had a primary role in creating. To compel China to compete “fairly”, the US initiated a trade war, employing tariffs to bully China into submitting to American demands.
It encouraged its allies to reconsider their relatively open investment regimes and restrict state-backed foreign acquisition of home firms and assets. Many now believe the United States’ real intentions to constrain China’s techno-economic ascent on account of national security have been laid bare with recent actions against TikTok, WeChat and Huawei.
It was always presumptuous to assume China would have evolved to become more like the US, but as large, powerful countries, their actions have not always been constructive for the international, multilateral order. A cycle of reciprocal aggression between the two cannot be the formula for stable or orderly coexistence.
The return to a multilateral, cooperative order must involve stakeholders as contributing players and partners, not proxies or protectorates to be cultivated by different patrons. Governments also need to engage with each other in a diplomatic manner, not with accusatory megaphones.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, as a relatively neutral set of actors with vested interests in the future of a multilateral global order, should address and manage tensions that have emerged in recent years. The East Asia Summit may be a platform for initial discussions.
Alternatively, an out-of-cycle summit could be considered to specifically address the regional implications of China-US fissures. Asean member states should also go beyond acting as mediators and jointly identify possible solutions and pathways before such a summit. This would not be the first time that Asean acted as convenor between major powers, but the need is arguably more urgent now.
Jikon Lai is an assistant professor in the Centre for Multilateralism Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Elina Noor is a visiting fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia. The views expressed here are the authors’ own
