Advertisement
Advertisement
Peter T. C. Chang
SCMP contributor
Peter T.C. Chang is a Visiting Senior Fellow with ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, and a Research Associate of the Malaysia-China Friendship Association, Kuala Lumpur.
Despite Trump’s transactional and nationalist foreign policy agenda, the US establishment is still committed to upholding American exceptionalism.
Washington has long resisted efforts to reform the Western-centric international order. Now Trump appears poised to withdraw from it altogether.
As US-China rivalry hinders our ability to deal with crises, Brics is using open engagement to help create a more equitable international order.
As next Asean chair Malaysia shows, an open door to all, even with intensifying great power competition, is vital to stability and development.
Advertisement
China should adopt an inclusive approach to its educational advancement that is mindful of Malaysia’s social and cultural fabric.
While the US seems focused on military alliances, Beijing is holding out a vision of economic collaboration and trust between civilisations.
While many countries mired in conflict are turning to China, ultimately it is the US’ stance that will determine how the crises in Ukraine and Gaza unfold.
The local Chinese community has forged a cultural identity with traits that are distinctly Malaysian, even as re-Sinicisation becomes a contentious issue.
Gaza sympathisers are uniting in the US and across the Global South as Washington’s unwavering support of Israel’s ruthless war against the Palestinians galvanises many people around the world.
As the Philippines looks for allies outside Asean to support its South China stance against Beijing, Southeast Asia risks becoming a theatre of war. Asean must act to to de-escalate tensions and ensure regional peace and prosperity.
The US fixation on a China threat distracts it from its serious domestic challenges and holds the world back from addressing critical challenges, from climate change and wars to AI risks.
From the US grilling of TikTok’s CEO over his nationality to Israel’s intractability over the Gaza war, ethno-religious nationalism threatens to split our world into antagonistic civilisation enclaves.
The recent G77 summit calling for global governance reform and South Africa’s ICJ genocide case against Israel underline developing nations’ distaste for – and willingness to act against – the Western-centric global order.
Use of proxy conflicts to maintain US dominance betrays its core values and the trust of allies. The world wants instead an America willing to collaborate as an equal partner in a more stable international order.
Achieving a balance between prosperity and environmental stewardship remains a formidable challenge, compounded by climate change denial. But the biggest obstacle to tackling global warming may well be our enduring hostilities with one another.
The conflict is the outgrowth of two historical tragedies. Both sides must be persuaded to acknowledge and accept each other’s right to exist. A ruthless demolition of Gaza has the potential to turn global opinion against Israel’s very existence and damage the US’ credibility irreparably.
As a green tech powerhouse, China can accelerate the Global South’s digital transition and foster a more sustainable model of economic growth. But the West remains obsessed with China’s perceived threat.
America’s tunnel vision on China and misreading of the Global South’s aspirations are pushing the realignment of geopolitics towards open conflict. As a result, developing nations must remain resolute in pursuing collaboration over confrontation.
Just as the advent of the A-bomb marked humanity’s capability for self-inflicted devastation, the era of AI signals the potential for artificial intelligence to assume control over our destiny.
The US is now fighting culture wars at home and the China bogeyman abroad, making conflict more likely. The Global South and its like-minded partners in the Global North must continue to push back and champion collaboration over confrontation.
Far from cooperating to address AI risks, the US and China are racing to weaponise the tech, making the prospect of a catastrophic world war a clear and present danger.
Anwar’s Malaysia Madani and Asian renaissance vision chime with Xi’s Global Civilisation Initiative and proposed community with a shared future. In an deeply divided world facing emerging threats, the men’s shared commitment is significant.
Southeast Asia sees China as a challenge but not an existential threat like the US does. And war over Taiwan would be misguided, unjust and catastrophic. Asean and other like-minded democracies must continue to pursue peace.
China’s investments and cultural push risk upsetting socioeconomic fragilities. It must do more than promote equitable growth and learn from Islamic culture, starting with its Muslim minority at home.
Warm exchanges between Biden and Xi in Bali did not thaw the frosty Sino-US relationship, as Washington continues its campaign against autocracies. Yet concerns about the repercussions of this struggle are leading middleweight powers in Southeast Asia and Europe to seek a less confrontational path.
China’s determination to share the success of its socio-economic model with the world has made it a threat in the eyes of the US Yet with rivalry sliding towards conflict, China must not lose sight of its peaceful aims.
Though reluctant to choose sides, Asean must preserve its centrality and Indonesia’s leadership will be important. With like-minded counterparts, Asean can regalvanise the non-aligned movement into a consequential third force, espousing conciliation to mitigate US-China rivalry.
The monotheistic world view behind the US cultural war also unites the nation in countering China’s rise and defending US hegemony. Unless Americans step back from the brink, the US risks both a violent civil uprising and a dangerous reconfiguration of the world order.
US-China tech rivalry is compounding the risks scientific advances could pose to humankind.The two economies ought to cooperate on the world’s most pressing problems instead of engaging in competition that could leave us vulnerable to climate change, nuclear disaster and malevolent AI
Insisting on a ‘with us or against us’ world view will leave Washington out of step with an Indo-Pacific eager for Chinese involvement and cooperation instead of confrontation.
