International Security journey

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/index.html

Articles on global security

Synopsis

Tensions in the South China Sea (SCS) have somewhat abated but the latent flashpoint remains. In mid-October 2018, a near collision took place between an American and Chinese warship. The US has attacked Beijing’s expansionism. In September 2018, Japan conducted its first-ever submarine drills in the waters. If the dispute escalates, ASEAN will not be able to avoid the negative fallout.

Commentary

DESPITE PROTESTS from China to the 2016 international arbitral ruling against its territorial claim, tensions in the South China Sea have been somewhat abating. But the South China Sea waters remain a flashpoint. In mid-October 2018, a near collision took place between the USS Decatur and the Chinese warship the Lanzou.

The Decatur was conducting a Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP), asserting the right of free passage through international waterways. The Lanzou was asserting Beijing’s sovereignty claim over the South China Sea. In a speech at the Hudson Institute on 4 October 2018, US Vice President Mike Pence launched a ferocious attack against Beijing’s foreign policy of “authoritarian expansion” and “intimidation”.

Assessing the Powers’ Influence over SCS

The overarching dominant actors influencing the state of peace and tensions in the South China Sea are China and the United States. Japan, a regional power, is emerging to be a player as well given Tokyo’s concern for its economic lifeline being affected by tensions in the regional waters.

What are the goals of these three players in the South China Sea?

China’s Game

China’s goal is to gain dominance of the South China Sea. This would give it two advantages. One, control over the vast oil, gas, and fisheries resources there. This would help to boost China’s annual economic growth rate, which has slowed from 10% (after Deng Xiaoping’s Open Door Policy 40 years ago) to the current 6.5%. An estimated one-third of annual global shipping passes through the South China Sea.

Two, it would restrict other rival powers’ access to the South China Sea. Since 2005, Beijing has been unilaterally “militarising the islands” in the Sea: placing long-range warplanes and missiles. President Xi appears to see the South China Sea as a “core interest” of China, as in the cases of Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet.

In June 2018, President Xi told visiting US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis that China would not “withdraw even one inch from its ancestral land”. In effect, Beijing has formulated an Asian “Monroe Doctrine”. It is part of President Xi Jinping’s 2013 “China Dream”, which called for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”.

Xi’s Muscle Flexing?

Xi has repeatedly exhorted the military to be ready “to fight and win wars under modern conditions”.  This is a reference to Beijing’s memories of China’s “Century of Humiliation” (1839-1949).

Xi sees Washington as trying to contain China’s rise: the US has encircled China with its ring of alliances in Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines. China is keen to have good relations with the United States. Speaking at the November 2018 Canton Trade Fair, President Xi said that China would open up more for imports. A similar statement was made by Vice President Wang Qisan during his visit to Singapore in early November 2018.

In November 2018, China and the US resumed high-level talks, ahead of the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Singapore, which concluded last week. Xi and President Trump met at the G20 Summit in Argentina in early-December 2018.  While they huddled over their trade dispute, the South China Sea did not seem to have featured in their talks.

Japan’s Growing Interest

Tokyo has no claim over the South China Sea. But Japan is deeply concerned about China’s behaviour in the waters. In November 2014, Beijing had unilaterally declared an Area Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the East China Sea.

All of Japan’s oil and gas imports pass through the South China Sea and the Malacca Strait. Chinese control of the South China Sea would threaten Japan’s economic lifeline. This is clearly unacceptable to Tokyo. There is a growing strategic rivalry between Japan and China. They have a maritime territorial dispute over the Senkakus/Diaoyus in the East China Sea.

Japan has sold Coast Guard patrol ships to Vietnam and the Philippines. In October 2018, Japan sent its destroyers and conducted submarine drills in the South China Sea for the first time ever − to send a message to Beijing about its right of passage through international waterways. This is the same that Washington has been sending out to Beijing.

But amid their growing economic interdependence, Japan and China are also keen to limit their rivalry. PM Shinzo Abe visited China in October 2018 to boost bilateral ties. It was the first such high-level visit in seven years.

US Getting Tougher?

Washington is strongly opposed to Beijing’s claim over the South China Sea.  In 2017, President Trump called China a “rival”, and a “peer competitor”. The US would not tolerate Beijing seeking hegemony. Defence Secretary Jim Mattis, speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore in June 2018, had demanded that Beijing stopped the militarisation of the South China Sea.

He warned Beijing of unspecified “severe consequences”. Admiral Philip S. Davidson (Chief, Pacific Command) told the US Congress in October 2018 that the US had lost control of the South China Sea, short of war with China.

Implications: The Makings of a New Cold War?

China has taken a tough but pragmatic approach to the South China Sea disputes. There are no signs that Beijing would give up its claim. The result is a new Cold War between the two largest economies in the world.

At the just concluded 33rd ASEAN Summit in Singapore, the South China Sea disputes were discussed. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong hoped that China-US relations would remain stable. ASEAN does not want to choose between the two superpowers.

China and the US are the two biggest trading partners of the ASEAN states. But if Beijing and Washington escalate their conflict, ASEAN would not be able to escape the negative fallout: “When two elephants fight, the grass gets trampled”.

At the just-ended APEC Summit that followed in Papua New Guinea, China-US differences on trade and security were again on display. The APEC Summit ended without a formal leaders’ statement due to China-US division over trade. But it is not just about trade. The US sees Beijing as trying to establish a Pax Sinica, to replace the existing Pax Americana. The result could be more than a new Cold War.

About the Author

KB Teo is a former diplomat who had previously served in the Singapore Embassy in Cairo. He graduated with a PhD in International Relations from the National University of Singapore.

I write current affairs blogs. Welcome comments.

Hong Kong Turmoil 2019: A Dismal Future?

KB Teo

SYNOPSIS
There are three main causes.  One, fear over Beijing’s growing control. Two, erosion of its “freedoms”.   Three, the high costs of living. Many Hong Kong people cannot afford decent housing.

COMMENTARY
Under the 30 June 1997, China-UK Handover Agreement, Beijing promised to maintain Hong Kong’s “autonomy” for 50 years (until 2047): freedom of speech, assembly, and religion. Today, Hong Kong is less important to China. In 1997, Hong Kong accounted for about 20% of China’s GDP.   The proportion now is 5%, with the rise of Shenzhen, Shanghai, Chongqing, and Fuzhou. Shenzhen is fast becoming the high-tech center of the world. In 1997, Hong Kong handled 50% of China’s foreign trade. Today, it is only 12%. In 1997, Hong Kong’s per-capita income was 35 times higher than China’s; now, it is just 5 times higher. As China’s economy continues to expand,  it will become richer, leaving Hong Kong behind. There is no chance that Beijing will accept the demands of the protestors: universal suffrage, full democratic elections, and an independent inquiry into the protests. Beijing called the protestors “rioters” engaged in a “colorr revolution”.  

The radicals desecrated Hong Kong’s parliament building (LegCo) and China’s Liaison Office. Some of the protestors advocated Hong Kong independence. In early-September, they called on President Trump to “liberate” Hong Kong. This is an indication of their real goal: an independent Hong Kong.  Beijing reiterated that it would crush any attempt at secession.

Violent protests could backfire
Beijing said it would not sit idly by.  It crushes dissent. During a 2017 visit, President Xi Jinping warned that challenges from Hong Kong would not be tolerated. Xi sees the turmoil as a western-inspired attempt to overthrow the CCP rule.  In July 2019, the Chinese military warned that it could be deployed to maintain social order. Hong Kong chief executive Carrie Lam had in April 2019 introduced the Extradition Bill. It would allow for the transfer of criminals to China to face “Chinese justice”. Many Hong Kongers say they do not trust China’s politicized judicial system.  

What are Beijing’s options?
First, the use of force can be ruled out completely.  China would not want a repeat of the June 1989, Tiananmen Square protests.  With a bitter trade war with the US and a slowing economy, China would not want to intervene directly in Hong Kong, except only as a last resort.  It has started to use terms like “terrorism”, and “secession” to refer to the increasing violence. This is setting the stage for a more forceful response.

Second, Beijing would want Chief Executive  Carrie Lam to stay on to clean up the mess. From Beijing’s viewpoint, it is vital to keep the pro-establishment camp in Hong Kong united.  Beijing would want Carrie Lam to restore law and order. 

Third, give strong support to the Hong Kong police to maintain peace and stability.  It is one of the most professional police forces in the world. This includes encouraging more ordinary Hong Kongers to publicly show patriotic support for the mainland.

Four, quickly address the grievances of Hong Kongers.  Outwardly, Hong Kong is prosperous, with a big number of billionaires.  An example is Li Ka-Shing. He is one of the richest men in the world, with a personal wealth estimated at US$29.4 billion.  Other notable tycoons are the Kwok brothers (Sun Hung Kai Properties), Cheng Yu-Tung (property, services, infrastructure, transportation), Liu Chee-Woo (casinos, entertainment), Stanley Ho (casinos), and the Shaw brothers (entertainment). 

Housing Crisis
However, the majority of Hong Kongers are poor.  Hong Kong has the worst income-wealth inequality in the world. Poverty in Hong Kong is at a high of 20%.  Many Hong Kongers cannot afford decent housing. Hong Kong faces a public housing crisis. It is only 15% in Hong Kong compared with 80% in Singapore. The waiting time for public housing is more than 5 years, the largest in 15 years. Many survive in tiny cubicles, called “cage homes”.  
This situation has fueled the anger of many Hong Kongers.  Hong Kong’s economy is badly hit by the turmoil. Business and tourism are sharply down.  Recession looms despite an HK$24 billion August 2019 economic package. For 2019 as a whole, the forecast is for zero growth, the worst on record.  

External Interference
Carrie Lam has withdrawn the Extradition Bill.  She has started a dialogue to get ideas on how to peacefully resolve the crisis.  But the violent protests have continued. The West, as expected, is sharply critical of Beijing’s attempt to gain greater control over Hong Kong.  Beijing accused the US, Britain, Canada, and Germany of being the external “black hands”. Recently, Beijing warned the US “to stop playing with fire”, or get burnt.  In July 2019, the EU Parliament called on its members and other states to investigate export controls “to deny China, in particular, Hong Kong, access to technologies that could be used to violate human rights”.  Beijing rejected the EU statement as “unwarranted interference in China’s internal affairs”. This is a reference to European imperialism against China in the 19th and 20th centuries.   

Implications
Hong Kong’s turmoil is in its sixth month.  Carrie Lam’s government needs to focus quickly on the causes of the turmoil and resolutely tackle the wealth inequality, housing crisis, and the high costs of living.  If not, Hong Kong faces a dismal future.

Singapore can expect to benefit from the unrest in Hong Kong. It has a reputation for good governance, stability, and strongly pro-growth policies. This is the case for rich Hong Kongers with assets of about US$15 million. It will enhance Singapore’s role as a global Private Banking centre.  However, big IPO firms still prefer Hong Kong, as it has a good connection with other global financial hubs. Singapore, however, is careful not to be seen as profiting from Hong Kong’s plight. Singapore’s asset management industry is growing fast: it currently manages $2.4 trillion in funds.  Singapore is one of the largest fund management centres in the world.      

—————————————————————————————————————————–

KB TEO is a former diplomat with the Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs who had covered Southeast Asia, Egypt as well as the Eastern Europe/Soviet desks.

Can  China and America escape the Thucydides’ Trap?

This is an existential threat to human civilisation.  Two thousand five hundred years ago, Thucydides warned about misperceptions and fears that destroyed Athens and Sparta in ancient Greece. Today, a rising China threatens the ruling American hegemon. Fear and miscalculations led to an unwanted disastrous war.  Professor Graham Allison found that there is an alarming 80% chance of this happening.  He aptly termed it the Thucydides’ Trap. 

There are six major pathways to avoid the Thucydides’ trap.

One, China and America should consciously treat each other with greater mutual respect.  There should be no demonisation of each others’ political systems.  Twenty-five years ago, Samuel Huntington presciently warned about a “Clash of Civilisations”.  American leaders should refrain from attacking Beijing, especially on human rights, alleged intellectual theft and unethical lending policies to poor countries. In 2018, US Vice President Mike Pence made such a scathing attack against China.  Similar attacks were made by the US Senate and the House of Representatives.  Such attacks are rejected by Beijing as “unwarranted interference in its internal affairs”.

1

Two, America need to immediately end its obsolete and counter-productive Containment Policy. The US should end its string of military alliances that encircle and contain China. Washington should accept the People’s Republic for what it is.  It should not try to change China into a  US-style “democracy”.  It will not happen. China prides itself as a “responsible stakeholder”. Beijing accuses Washington of an out-dated and dangerous Cold War mentality.  China views this American policy as an “antagonistic contradiction”.

Three, America should applaud Beijing’s efforts to build a stable and strong China.  An unstable China will be a threat to global stability and prosperity.  President Xi Jinping’s “China Dream” is aimed at the “great rejuvenation” of China as a rich and powerful nation.  A powerful China will naturally challenge US primacy in Asia, its own backyard.  But superpower competition need not escalate into war. China is narrowing the gap, but America remains pre-eminent.  Washington has its Monroe Doctrine. As China gets richer and stronger, President Xi has established a Chinese Monroe Doctrine in Asia.  President Xi has repeatedly said that China’s rise cannot be stopped.

Four, America and China should be more sensitive to each others’ security fears.  Examples include the South China Sea and East China Sea conflicts, the Straits of Malacca chokepoint and US military alliances in South Korea and Japan. America has basically encircled and contained China with its ring of military alliances.  Beijing sees the US-led Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (which include democracies like Japan, India, and Australia) as a potent threat.  American containment policy will only enhance Beijing’s mistrust of Washington.   The established and rising superpower should not directly threaten each others’ core interests. 

2

Five, more confidence-building measures are needed to boost greater Sino-American mutual trust. Adherence to basic ground rules like the non-use of force and peaceful negotiations needs to be actively promoted. There should be more exchanges of high-level political and military visits, instant hotline communications to clarify potential security misunderstandings, a bi-annual publication of informative, transparent Defense White Papers, and more joint military exercises like RIMPAC to create greater mutual understanding. China and America should send senior representatives to attend regional security forums like the Shangri-la Dialogue, Boao Forum for Asia, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation dialogues, Wanshou Dialogue on global security, the Munich Security Conference, Aspen Security Forum, and the Xiangshan Forum to promote greater mutual understanding and trust.

Six, China should continue to focus on internal stability and growth.  Beijing has enough internal challenges to deal with.  These include severe pollution, debt-ridden state enterprises, slowing growth and the economic development of its restive provinces in Tibet and Xinjiang.  China and America are not necessarily destined for war.  There need not be a catastrophic “clash of titans”. This is provided China and America steadfastly develop greater mutual respect and trust.

3

————————————————————————-

Hong Kong’s 2019 Turmoil: A Dismal Future?

SYNOPSIS

As Hong Kong’s political crisis deepens, what are the options open to Beijing and what are the priority issues for the Hong Kong leadership?

COMMENTARY

THE TURMOIL currently sweeping Hong Kong is driven primarily by four main causes. One, fear of Beijing’s growing control. Two, concern over the erosion of its “freedoms and autonomy”. Three, the very high costs of living. Four, Western interference.      

Under the 30 June 1997 China-UK Handover Agreement, Beijing promised to maintain Hong Kong’s “autonomy” for 50 years in three areas: freedom of speech, assembly, and religion. Today, Hong Kong is less important to China.

Fear over China’s Growing Control

In 1997, Hong Kong accounted for 20% of China’s GDP. The proportion now is 5%, with the rise of Shenzhen, Shanghai, and Chongqing. Shenzhen is becoming the high-tech centre of the world. In 1997, Hong Kong handled 50% of China’s foreign trade. Today, it is only 12%.

Hong Kong’s per-capita income used to be 35 times higher than China’s. Now it is five times higher. As China’s economy continues to expand, it will become richer and leave Hong Kong behind.  

There is no chance that Beijing will accept the demands of the protestors: universal suffrage, full democratic elections, an independent inquiry into the protests and alleged police “brutality”. Beijing condemned the protestors as “rioters” engaged in a “colour revolution”.

Fear of Erosion of “Freedoms and Autonomy”

Extremist protestors desecrated Hong Kong’s parliament building (LegCo) and China’s Liaison Office. Many advocated Hong Kong independence, carrying American and British flags.

In early-September 2019, they called on President Trump to intervene to “liberate” Hong Kong. Protestors claim they want to preserve Hong Kong’s “freedoms and autonomy”. Not surprisingly, Beijing sees it as an attempt at secession.

China is watching the situation very closely. An authoritarian state, it crushes any dissent. During a 2017 visit, President Xi Jinping warned that challenges from Hong Kong would not be tolerated. He sees the current turmoil as an attempt to overthrow the rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the mainland.  

In July 2019, the Chinese military warned that it could be deployed to maintain social order. Four months earlier, in April 2019, Hong Kong chief executive Carrie Lam had introduced the Extradition (Fugitive Offenders’) Bill.

It would allow for the transfer of criminals to China to face justice. Many Hong Kongers say they do not trust China’s politicised judicial system.

Beijing’s Options

Beijing has at least four options to respond to the Hong Kong crisis.

First, the use of force can be ruled out, at least for now. China would not want a repeat of the 4 June 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre. With a bitter trade war with the United States and a slowing economy, China would not want to intervene directly in Hong Kong. 

It has used terms like “terrorism”, and “secession” to describe the violence. Beijing is clearly setting the stage for a more forceful response if the violence and turmoil continues.

Second, Beijing wants Carrie Lam to clean up the mess, which, contrary to expectations, got uglier despite China’s 70th anniversary on 1 October. It understands the need to keep the pro-establishment camp in Hong Kong united.  Xi wants Carrie Lam to show that she can restore law and order without Beijing’s direct intervention. 

Third, give strong support to the Hong Kong police to maintain peace and stability. It is one of the most professional police forces in the world. This includes encouraging more ordinary Hong Kongers to publicly show patriotic support for the mainland.

Four, quickly address the grievances of Hong Kongers. Outwardly, Hong Kong is prosperous, with many billionaires. An example is Li Ka-Shing. He is one of the richest men in the world, with a personal wealth estimated at US$29.4 billion. 

Other notable tycoons are the Kwok brothers (Sun Hung Kai Properties), Cheng Yu-Tung (property, services, infrastructure), Liu Chee-Woo (casinos, entertainment), and Stanley Ho (casinos). 

Housing Crisis

The majority of Hong Kongers is poor. Hong Kong has the worst income-wealth inequality in the world. Poverty in Hong Kong is at a high of 20%, the highest in a decade. Many Hong Kongers cannot afford decent housing.  

Hong Kong faces a public housing crisis. Housing ownership is only 15% in Hong Kong compared with 80% in Singapore. The current waiting time for public housing in Hong Kong is more than five years. This is the longest period in 15 years. Many survive in tiny cubicles, the size of a ping-pong table. Many young Hong Kongers say they have “no stake” in society.

This bleak situation has fueled the anger of many Hong Kongers. Hong Kong’s economy is badly hit by the turmoil. Business and tourism are sharply down. Despite an August 2019 economic package of S$4.23 billion, recession looms. For 2019 as a whole, the forecast is for zero growth, the worst in 20 years.  

Western Interference

Carrie Lam has withdrawn the Extradition Bill. She has started a public dialogue to get ideas to peacefully resolve the crisis. But the violent protests have continued. The West, as expected, is very critical of Beijing’s attempt to gain greater control over Hong Kong. Beijing accused the US, Britain, Canada, Germany, and the EU, of being the “black hands” behind the turmoil. 

US political counsellor in Hong Kong, Judith Gadeh, was recently photographed meeting protest organisers like Joshua Wong and Nathan Law. But the protests are not popular at all. Beijing warned the US “to stop playing with fire”, or get burnt.  

In July 2019, the EU Parliament called on its members and other states to investigate export controls “to deny China, in particular, Hong Kong, access to technologies that could be used to violate human rights”.  

Beijing rejected the EU statement as “unwarranted interference in China’s internal affairs”. This is a reference to Western imperialism against China in the 19th and 20th centuries.   

Implications

Hong Kong’s turmoil is in its fifth month, the longest on record. Carrie Lam’s government needs to focus quickly on the causes of the turmoil and resolutely tackle the wealth inequality, housing crisis, and the high costs of living. If not, Hong Kong faces a dismal future.

Singapore can expect to benefit from the unrest in Hong Kong. It has a reputation for good governance, stability, and strongly pro-growth policies. This is the case for rich Hong Kongers with assets of about US$15 million. It will enhance Singapore’s role as a global private banking centre.  

However, big firms still prefer Hong Kong, as it has very good connections with other global financial hubs. Singapore, however, is careful not to be seen as profiting from Hong Kong’s plight. 

Singapore’s asset management industry is growing very fast: it currently manages S$2.4 trillion in funds. Singapore is one of the largest fund management centres in the world.

About the Author

KB Teo is a former diplomat who had served in the Singapore Embassy in Cairo. He obtained a Masters’ degree (International Relations) from the Australian National University and a PhD from the National University of Singapore. He contributed this to RSIS Commentary.

ASEAN: Towards a  

Security Community?

KB Teo

SYNOPSIS

The EU is the only regional organisation to develop into a Security Community.  ASEAN is steadily growing into one. ASEAN’s main strategy is to stay united and actively engage the Great Powers.

COMMENTARY

The American political scientist Karl Deutsch defined a Security Community (SC) as one in which the members do not wage war against one another.  In August 1967, ASEAN was established to promote regional stability. ASEAN uses two main strategies. One, maintain its own unity. Two, actively engage the Great Powers. 

For ASEAN, its centrality is a cardinal principle. ASEAN sees itself as the main actor shaping regional architecture. The ASEAN region is important due to the critical sea lanes, and its proximity to India and China.  Its population of 650 million makes it attractive for foreign investment. The EU shares a common Christianity and the English language. In contrast, ASEAN is very diverse in terms of race, language, and religion. How likely are the ASEAN states to wage war against one another?  Virtually zero chance. 

1

Regionalism requires shared values to facilitate cooperation.

Unlike Europe, Southeast Asia has no similar sense of common bonding. The idea of Southeast Asia is of recent origin.  Despite the lack of cultural and political commonalities, ASEAN not only managed to survive but to thrive.

Karl Deutsch’s idea of a “security community” was adopted by Indonesia’s Foreign Ministry. It proposed an ASEAN “security community”.  This was incorporated in the 2003 Bali Concord II Declaration. Southeast Asia needs to bolster maritime security to deal with terrorism. ASEAN is building capabilities through international cooperation and assistance with external partners. 

The ASEAN states are boosting their military capabilities. Cambodia is building up its military through support from China. The Royal Thai Navy has bought a submarine from China.  Beijing has sold weapons to the Philippines. Thailand and the Philippines are US allies. 

Focus on stability and pro-growth policies   

If ASEAN economies grow at 4.1% annually until 2030, the region’s GDP would double to US$5 trillion.  This would represent 5% of global GDP. Such an accomplishment would imply GDP per capita increases of 50%.  Vietnam is set to outperform the rest of the region with GDP growth of 6.7% in 2019 and 6.3% in 2020. Strong growth backdrop enables ASEAN to focus on resilience and innovation. 

Need to boost in intra-ASEAN trade

At the June 2019 34th ASEAN Summit in Bangkok, PM Mahathir raised the issue of sluggish intra-ASEAN trade. It forms only 25% of their global trade compared with 50% for the EU and North America. Mahathir said there was an urgent need for ASEAN to increase intra-regional trade.  

Intra-ASEAN trade increased 2% (2017), from 22.1% (2002).   Japan has a significant trade surplus with ASEAN. Japan is ASEAN’s fourth-largest trading partner.  Total bilateral ASEAN-Japan trade hit a record US$218 bn (2017). Japan is ASEAN’s second-largest source of FDI, US$13.2 bn (2017).  ASEAN was growing at a rate of 5.5% compared with global growth of 4.2%. Its share of global economic prosperity has also increased. ASEAN’s contribution to global income has risen from 1.9% to 3.5%.  With an average annual GDP growth of 5%, ASEAN is expanding twice as fast as many other states. 

ASEAN  Military Modernisation

In the last few years, ASEAN’s military spending has doubled. Thailand and Indonesia’s military budget has risen by 10% annually. Vietnam arms import surged 700% over a decade.  Other ASEAN states have been importing fighter jets, frigates, helicopters, and submarines. The procurement of drone weapon systems is on the rise in Southeast Asia. Between 2006 and 2015, military expenditure in Southeast Asia rose by 57% on average. Vietnam, Indonesia and Cambodia more than doubled their spending on the military between 2005 and 2015.  For the period 2011-2016, Vietnam was in the top ten of the world’s biggest arms importers (total volume of US$ 4.1 billion). 

The ASEAN states are building up their military capacities.  The reasons include financial self-sufficiency, territorial control, expansion of capabilities, peacetime missions, and the development of local defence industries. As ASEAN responds to rising threats, investment in developing air-force capability has become a priority. 

Singapore Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said China and ASEAN should carry out more and bigger exercises to build mutual confidence. The first ASEAN-China Maritime Exercise was held in October 2018. He also urged China to engage more with other countries to assure them that the country’s rise is peaceful.   In April 2018,  Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan said that Singapore faced three security challenges: polarisation, radicalisation, and cyber threats.

Indonesia’s faces challenges in overcoming the threats of terrorism and religiously-motivated violence. Indonesia’s democracy is strong under President Joko Widodo.  He easily won a second term against Prabowo Subianto. 

Malaysia’s air-force has a mixture of Russian and US combat aircraft.  In the 1990s Malaysia acquired a small number of Mig-29 combat aircraft. In 2006, it announced the purchase of 18 SU-30 aircraft.  Malaysia also has a squadron of F18 aircraft. 

Malaysia and Singapore are defence partners in the FPDA, alongside Australia, New Zealand and Britain. The FPDA conducts regular training. It ensures that Malaysia and Singapore have a broad defence outlook.  Both countries maintain good defence ties. They conduct an annual military exercise called “Exercise Bersama Lima”. The latest was conducted by Singapore and Malaysia in April 2019. 

Thailand

The May 2014 coup by the Royal Thai Armed Forces, led by General Prayut Chan-o-cha not only gave the military authority over the whole country, but also gave them full control over their own budget.  Since 2016, the military government has placed additional focus on buying armoured vehicles, helicopters and frigates to counter the southern insurgency.

Singapore spends 5% of its GDP on defence.  It opted for a systematic “hedgehog” approach. The intent is to make the cost of invasion so high that it deters a would-be aggressor. Singapore emphasises on air and naval power.

Philippines

New missile-armed attack crafts put Philippine military modernization into focus.  The Philippine Navy is moving forward with integration of a new missile system to its capabilities.

Vietnam

Vietnam has been modernising its military force, including establishing a defence relationship with the US.  Vietnam is able to operate effectively in the South China Sea. The Vietnamese Navy has acquired six Kilo-class submarines and four Gepard frigates from Russia. 

Myanmar is faced with internal security threats, especially the Rohingya issue.  It has embarked on an arms buildup.

Intra-ASEAN Relations are positive

In September 2019, President Halimah Yaacob made an official visit to the Philippines.  It led to the deepening of bilateral ties. Both sides agreed there is room to boost trade and investment flows.

Conclusion

After fifty-two years, ASEAN continues to show dynamism.  There is little chance of the ASEAN states waging war against each other.  They focus on stability and growth. Their military modernisation is defensive. They actively engage the Great Powers to enhance ASEAN’s relevance. An ASEAN Security Community matters for a stable and prosperous region.

6

————————————————————————

KB Teo is a former diplomat who had served in the Singapore Embassy in Cairo.  He obtained a Masters’ degree (International Relations) from the Australian National University and a PhD from the National University of Singapore.