Revolutionary America and ‘Asia Alone’
There is a sense that the old and reliable US is gone. But is Asia ready to go solo?
ACTIONS by US President Donald Trump on tariffs and, even more recently, in Venezuela and Greenland have caused much hand-wringing. Many commentators and experts have been negative – especially those in the West who have pushed for a liberal world order, centred on free markets, democracy and rules against the use of force.
In Asia too, questions have arisen. But they have been more about America’s long-term reliability, and not only for Taiwan, the Philippines and security allies. Dealing with the US is now so challenging that some suggest turning to China.
Beijing’s leaders have certainly sought to underline their reliability and support for international rules as well as the potential benefits in trade, investment and technology. There is good reason to strengthen ties with China, for mutual benefit and win-win outcomes. Yet continuing to engage the US is also vitally important.
What Venezuela means
Trump’s intervention in Venezuela undercuts that argument. Some take this to confirm that the US is lawless and cannot be trusted. And it is right to be concerned when any country uses force against another. Unless authorised by the United Nations or in self-defence, this is a breach of international law and the UN Charter.
Even so, it must be admitted that rule compliance is never absolute. Back in 1989, the US abducted Manuel Noriega of Panama, after a large-scale invasion with thousands of soldiers and tanks on Panamanian soil. Israeli operations have used force – when abducting Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann from Argentina in 1960, and rescuing hostages in 1976 from a hijacked plane at the Entebbe airport in Uganda.
The US and European Nato allies deployed force amid inter-ethnic conflict in the former Yugoslavia. A principle of humanitarian intervention to protect minorities was the justification but still remains controversial. Post-9/11 America also used force in the territory of other states to hit non-state terrorist groups.
Navigate Asia in
a new global order
Get the insights delivered to your inbox.
Citing international law rules will not reverse Trump’s actions. But it can help hold a line against other countries acting similarly.
While these instances differ, one thread is the claim that – unlike conventional wars – there is no intention to occupy territory or control the other country. It is here that Trump’s statement that he intends to run Venezuela opens up wider issues. This is especially as Cuba, Colombia and Iran were also named. Trump’s claim to Greenland is especially in focus now.
It remains to be seen whether there will be more interventions. Trump himself inveighed against large and long occupations, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. They remain unpopular with his base of supporters.
But we should not be naive. The US and other great powers can and will disregard rules when their vital interests require it. Or, more subtly, they will find ways to interpret international law to justify their actions.
“Asia Alone” renewed
Does that mean Asia is better off without America?
Asians who think so may be influenced by criticisms against Trump – often from within the US about policy and personality. Another influence is the belief that the US is the past and that the rise of Asia, and especially China, is inevitable.
Singapore’s own Bilahari Kausikan recently warned against making decisions based on “the myth of the Asian century”. While we hope our region prospers, there will be bumps along the path, such as the 1997 to 1998 Asian crisis, as well as potential security flashpoints.
Moreover, the rise of China stirs rivalries and competition, not only with the US but also among Asians. My 2010 book Asia Alone expressed that analysis and present circumstances revalidate it.
Consider the current tensions between China and Japan. This is not an aberration, but the latest manifestation of long-running differences between the region’s two largest economies. Note also the border and trade disputes that India has with China. Add issues over Taiwan and contested claims in the South China Sea.
Some argue that the US is stoking these issues. Perhaps. But Asians can and do find their own reasons to quarrel, as the ongoing Cambodian-Thai conflict painfully shows.
These intra-Asian differences suggest that our region cannot guarantee stability on its own. Historically, it has been the US that helped prevent conflicts – by speaking to both sides or simply having a forward presence to deter aggression.
Engaging America
But does today’s America still stand for stability?
There is a sense that the old and reliable America is gone. From a country that was admired and even loved, it now faces attitudes such as avoidance, fear and loathing. Both inside and outside the US, there are those who feel Trump is getting away with self-serving nonsense and must be stopped. Others believe wholly in “Maga” (Make America Great Again) and him as a transformative leader.
Clearly, tumult and change are ongoing within the US. This preceded Trump, even if he harnessed it with his Maga pledge. Much is domestic, but there are also international and Asian dimensions in the argument that the world (especially China) has benefited unfairly.
Most predict this American revolution will continue – whether or not Trump gets a third term, or an acolyte such as Vice-President JD Vance wins. But some hold out hope that the US can and will self-correct its course.
Remember when the Vietnam War was ending and the US was going through a domestic catharsis. Soon afterwards, a recalibration of strategy witnessed the historic opening of ties with China. From that period, Singapore and others in Asia built relationships with the US that endure to the present.
Engaging the US will be a balance of doing what is rational and what Trump asks. The adage of “Taco” – Trump Always Chickens Out – was never true. It is more that his method is to push and push, unless there is real resistance. There remains a calculation about how much can be gained with the least effort.
If the other party concedes, there is no need to push harder. If the country has control over something essential, such as critical minerals in China’s case, the Trump administration will demur. If the country delivers value and can assist the US on other issues, a trade-off and deal can be done.
Brazil has successfully held its ground. Indonesia too is reported to have a trade agreement without some of the onerous clauses that apply to others. Now, with Greenland, the unity and resolve of Europe is being tested.
Venezuela was none of these cases. In fact, its former leader Nicolas Maduro seemed to assume Taco and thumbed his nose at Trump. American power, prerogative and pride should not be underestimated. As a great power, the US will pursue its priorities and expect others to accede. Trump’s invitation for Singapore to join his Board of Peace to supervise next steps in Gaza is an example of that.
An America undergoing its own revolution is not an easy partner. But Asians remain unprepared to go ahead alone. Rather than fearing and loathing Trump 2.0, the better course will be to adapt and engage pragmatically on new terms.
The writer is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs. His new book is Island in the World: Singapore’s Geopolitical DNA. This essay is part of our new series, New Global Order, which explores how the changing world landscape is reshaping business, politics and beyond.
Decoding Asia newsletter: your guide to navigating Asia in a new global order. Sign up here to get Decoding Asia newsletter. Delivered to your inbox. Free.
Share with us your feedback on BT's products and services
