Strategic autonomy, economic interdependence, and risk mitigation drive Asian responses to US policy changes.
Overview
Recent years have witnessed significant volatility in US foreign policy, particularly toward Asia, characterised by the “America First” doctrine under the Trump administration and ongoing strategic competition with China. This has prompted Asian nations to recalibrate their diplomatic and economic strategies, increasingly prioritising national interests and embracing a pragmatic approach to engagement with both Washington and Beijing. This analysis examines how key Asian actors have responded to perceived shifts in US commitment, the implications for regional stability, and the evolving dynamics of the US-China rivalry. Understanding these responses is crucial as the region’s trajectory will significantly influence global geopolitics and economic interconnectedness.
Historical Context
For decades, the US played a central role in maintaining the post-war regional order in Asia, providing security guarantees, fostering economic integration, and promoting democratic values. This “hub-and-spokes” model, with the US at the centre and bilateral alliances with nations like Japan, South Korea, and Australia forming the spokes, underpinned regional stability. However, even before the Trump presidency, there were growing concerns about the sustainability of this arrangement, driven by China’s rising economic and military power and a sense that the US was overstretched.
The “America First” policy, marked by trade disputes, questioning of alliance commitments, and a withdrawal from multilateral institutions like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), dramatically accelerated these anxieties. While the Biden administration has sought to restore traditional alliances and re-engage with multilateralism, the perception of potential US unreliability persists. This has directly influenced Asian calculations, fostering a trend towards greater strategic autonomy and diversification of partnerships. Previous US administrations arguably took regional stability for granted; recent events have demonstrated its fragility, and the need for Asian nations to account for a wider range of potential outcomes.
Key Actors & Positions
Several key actors demonstrate varying approaches to navigating the changing US-China dynamic. Japan, traditionally a staunch US ally, has deepened its security cooperation with Washington, while also actively pursuing economic engagement with China, recognising its economic importance. Tokyo seeks to balance maintaining its security alliance with the US with mitigating the economic risks of alienating Beijing.
South Korea faces a more complex dilemma. Reliant on the US for security against North Korea, Seoul must also carefully manage its economic ties with China, its largest trading partner. It seeks to avoid being forced to ‘choose sides,’ advocating for continued dialogue and engagement.
Australia, despite experiencing tensions with China following calls for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19, has doubled down on its alliance with the US, including through the AUKUS security pact. However, Canberra recognises the necessity of maintaining economic engagement with China, albeit cautiously.
ASEAN nations (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Brunei, Laos, Myanmar, and Cambodia) present a more diverse landscape. Nations like Singapore advocate for a neutral stance, prioritising regional stability and promoting dialogue between the major powers. Indonesia, as the largest ASEAN economy, also seeks a non-aligned position, emphasising economic cooperation. Others, like Vietnam, are increasingly wary of China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea and are cautiously strengthening ties with the US.
China seeks to reshape the regional order, promoting its economic influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative and asserting its territorial claims in the South China Sea. It frames its actions as promoting a ‘multipolar’ world, but critics argue this serves to undermine the US-led system.
Analysis
The common thread across these diverse responses is a pragmatic calculation of national interests. Asian nations are not necessarily abandoning the US; instead, they are hedging their bets. They recognise that the US remains a significant security and economic power, but they are unwilling to become solely dependent on it. This hedging manifests in diversifying economic partnerships, strengthening intra-regional cooperation, and pursuing independent foreign policy initiatives.
The withdrawal of the US from the TPP, for instance, demonstrated a potential for abrupt policy changes, prompting other nations to pursue alternative trade arrangements like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) – a China-led agreement. This signals a shift from expecting the US to set the rules of the game to actively shaping regional norms and institutions.
The increased emphasis on ‘strategic autonomy’ is not necessarily anti-American, but rather a reflection of a changing geopolitical landscape. It’s driven by a recognition that even a renewed US commitment may not guarantee the same level of stability and predictability as in the past. The risk lies in potential miscalculation. If Washington interprets hedging as a sign of disengagement, it could further reduce its commitment, creating a security vacuum that China could exploit. Conversely, aggressive US pressure on Asian nations to unequivocally choose sides could backfire, pushing them closer to Beijing.
Outlook
In the foreseeable future, Asia is likely to continue navigating a complex geopolitical landscape. The US-China rivalry will remain the central dynamic, but Asian nations will strive to maintain a balance, avoiding a full-blown confrontation between the two powers. Expect continued investment in regional institutions like ASEAN, aimed at promoting dialogue and managing disputes.
The trend towards economic diversification and strategic autonomy will likely accelerate, particularly as nations seek to mitigate the risks associated with geopolitical tensions and supply chain vulnerabilities. The willingness of Asian nations to work with both the US and China, even amidst strategic competition, suggests a pragmatic approach that prioritises stability and economic prosperity. While a total abandonment of US alliances is unlikely, Asian nations will increasingly assert their own agency, reshaping the regional order to reflect their evolving interests and priorities. The future of Asia is less about choosing sides and more about navigating a multipolar world with strategic foresight and resilience.
Sources:
* Fishman, Evan. “Why allies in Asia Are willing to work with Trump”. The New Yorker, 19 December 2023. [https://www.newyorker.com/news/evan-fishman/why-allies-in-asia-are-willing-to-work-with-trump](https://www.newyorker.com/news/evan-fishman/why-allies-in-asia-are-willing-to-work-with-trump)
* Council on Foreign Relations. “U.S.-China Competition in Asia”. [https://www.cfr.org/asia-program/us-china-competition-asia](https://www.cfr.org/asia-program/us-china-competition-asia) (Accessed 26 October 2023).
* Kynge, James. “Asian nations seek to hedge bets amid US-China rivalry”. Financial Times, 14 Nov. 2023. [https://www.ft.com/content/9a89383f-c9a0-457a-aeb8-2515eb0ade91](https://www.ft.com/content/9a89383f-c9a0-457a-aeb8-2515eb0ade91)
