Trump II and South East Asia: Geopolitics and Geoeconomics

On January 13th, the HDFF team attended a seminar facilitated by the Institute of Security and International Studies (ISIS) titled “Trump II and South East Asia: Geopolitics and Geoeconomics”. 

The speakers in attendance were the following:

• Nirmal Ghosh, writer, foreign correspondent, artist and wildlife conservationist. 
• Thitinan Pongsudhirak, Professor and Senior Fellow of ISIS
• Professor Sidel, Chair in International and Comparative Politics
• Pavida Panamond, Professor of International Business
• Moderated by Dr Pongphisoot Busbarat, Director of ISIS Thailand. 

Nirmal Ghosh discussed the historical factors that contributed to Donald Trump’s rise to power. He stated that Trump’s success was fueled by the backlash against progressive gains and inherent contradictions in the U.S. He highlighted the U.S. as an “immigrant nation” and the growing anti-immigrant sentiment, as well as the negative effects associated with free trade. Additionally, climate regulations and progressive values alienated the middle class and small-town America. Religion’s influence, especially the rise of the religious right, also supported Trump’s movement. Disillusionment over Obama’s presidency, globalization, and foreign policy failures further paved the way for Trump. Ghosh noted that such moments of distrust in the state can lead to a revolutionary backlash or the rise of an outsider like Donald Trump.

Professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak emphasized the need to differentiate between Donald Trump and the movement behind him, which has been growing since the 1990s. This movement, rooted in anti-imperialism, opposes the liberal international order (LIO). Fueled by strong anti-China sentiment and a feeling of being exploited by the LIO, Trump’s administration seeks “payback” and aims to stop giving money away. Following the U.S. elections, countries like Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia are seeking alternatives to the collapsing LIO, with Indonesia joining BRICS. Pongsudhirak warned that Trump’s nativism and protectionism could drive more countries toward other alliances.

Professor Sidel emphasized the importance of not assuming a decline in American power on the international stage. The U.S. remains a major military and economic power, with the U.S. dollar still in a very strong position. The key question is how this power will be used. Sidel predicts a continuation of the China policy from Trump’s first term and the Biden administration. He does not expect a “re-shoring” of American industries but anticipates a strategy of “weaponized interdependence” and “mercantilism.” This would strengthen the U.S. regulatory power in the global economy, and diminish the multilateral institutions of the LIO. Professor Sidel also pointed out that the weaponization of U.S. state power is linked with U.S. economic interests, especially as they relate to perceived security threats from China. For example, rerouting submarine fiber optic cables away from China, framed as a national security issue, also benefits American big tech, particularly StarLink. Professor Sidel suggests that Donald Trump’s foreign policy will most likely be shaped more by economists and business leaders, like those connected to Elon Musk’s defense and space contracts, than by traditional political and international relations experts.

Professor Pananond focused on the evolving nature of globalization, arguing that the world’s resilience is stronger than often assumed. She noted that the trade-to-GDP ratio and DHL’s Global Connectivity Index suggest a new type of globalization is emerging, and Southeast Asia has no interest in ending globalization.

While U.S.-China relations are diminishing, she emphasized they are not decoupling, with both countries still highly interconnected. Southeast Asia, though economically aligned with China, does not want to take sides. Each country in the region plays a unique role, and Southeast Asia could provide an alternative to the China+1 model.

She also discussed the shift in the LIO from efficiency to security concerns, highlighting the differing security priorities of the U.S., China, and Southeast Asia. The region’s security is influenced by its reliance on foreign investment and exports. She noted the shortening of supply chains due to COVID-19, regulations, and the Suez Canal crisis. Finally, she suggested that the trends under Trump’s second term should serve as a “wake-up call” for ASEAN to take more decisive action in regional planning and implementation.

Question from the audience about Donald Trump’s “bluster and bravado”, while taking into account that tariff tools are easy to enact. What is the impact going to be on Southeast Asian trade and investment? What is the recommended position for Thailand?

Nirmal Ghosh noted that the Trump administration sees its term as a time for retribution. He highlighted the uncertainty for allies, given Trump’s disregard for norms, and stressed that Southeast Asia must adapt to U.S. deals while building its own agency. His approach, centered on deterrence, might be better than past interventionist policies.

Professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak argued that U.S. power is increasing, particularly in Asia, despite claims of decline. He pointed out Thailand’s internal challenges and regional divisions, particularly over issues like Myanmar and U.S.-China tensions. He suggested the Global South could offer a third way.

Professor Sidel expressed that Trump’s second term poses more concern for Europe than Southeast Asia, which should focus on inflation, interest rates, and the global economy. Professor Pananond added that SEA’s key challenge is staying competitive in the supply chain.

Image source: ISIS Thailand