ON April 15, 2025, the annual Think Asia Forum was convened in Singapore under the compelling theme, “Contributing Asian Wisdom to Global Governance.” The conference brought together leading experts, scholars and policy thinkers from across the region to tackle pressing issues shaping the global landscape, including the intensifying China-US rivalry, the ongoing tariff trade war between the US and China, the shifting strategic environment in Asia, the evolving role of the Global South, and the emergence of a new international political and economic order. One key highlight was exploring how Asian perspectives and institutions can contribute to building a more inclusive and balanced global governance architecture.
I had the honor of being invited as a speaker in Parallel Session 2, themed “Security and Stability: Asia’s Future in a Changing World.” It was both an opportunity and privilege to share the stage with fellow thought leaders and like-minded people, and to offer my perspectives on how the disputed waters of the South China Sea (SCS), and the geopolitical and economic challenges confronting our region should be viewed using the lens of Asian wisdom, tradition and values. I now share the essence of my speech with readers.
Indeed, the world is in an age of renewed uncertainty, caught between confrontation and cooperation, power and principle, rivalry and reason. It is impossible to ignore the multifaceted challenges and opportunities that Asia as a region presents.
At the heart of our deliberation is the SCS, a contested water that is more than just geographic coordinates or maritime boundaries. It represents the crossroads of global commerce, energy flows, ecological balance and, crucially, geopolitical tension. This maritime expanse has become a litmus test of whether regional order can be preserved through diplomacy or derailed by great power competition.
SCS, A microcosm of global fractures
The world today is experiencing significant geopolitical shifts, which have created a volatile global environment where the international order is being tested. The Asia-Pacific region is at the epicenter of these geopolitical changes. It is home to some of the world’s fastest-growing economies and has become a focal point for strategic competition. The SCS, with its vast natural resources, including oil, gas, rich fishing grounds and critical shipping lanes, is a key area of contention.
Multiple claimant states, including China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei, have overlapping territorial and maritime claims in the SCS. But beneath the legal arguments and cartographic lines lies a deeper dilemma, one rooted in mistrust, unresolved historical grievances and an evolving strategic order that threatens to rupture before it reforms. Furthermore, these disputes can escalate tensions, disrupt regional stability and even threaten global trade.
Asean-led mechanisms have sought to provide a rules-based framework for peaceful negotiations and engagements. Yet these regional efforts often falter under the weight of clashing national interests and the intrusive influence of great power rivalry. Likewise, the US’ growing military footprint in the region, justified under the banner of “freedom of navigation” operations, has further complicated the already volatile dynamics in the SCS. Though publicly framed as a defense of international maritime law, these operations are increasingly seen by many as provocations and a US containment approach to curbing China’s rise, inflaming tensions rather than stabilizing the region. This trajectory intensifies the risk of strategic miscalculation, accidental skirmishes, or even open confrontation, raising the stakes for the entire Asia-Pacific.
Asia, therefore, is no longer a mere passive theater in global power politics; it is now the epicenter of a world in flux. However, as external powers compete to militarize and influence Asia’s future, a critical question emerges: Does this drift toward militarization serve regional peace, or does it entrench binary choices in a multipolar world? Asia must resist being reduced to a chessboard of great powers. Instead, it must project its own agency, history and philosophy in shaping outcomes. Only then can the region meaningfully contribute to a more stable, inclusive and just global order.
Tariff trade war
Moreover, the so-called tariff trade war launched by the US has triggered not just economic pain but a broader dislocation in global supply chains. Emerging economies like the Philippines and others, intricately tied to China’s export production network, have found themselves collateral damage in this economic conflict. Intermediate goods from Southeast Asia, especially semiconductors and electronics, have been ensnared in a battle they neither started nor benefited from.
The result? Export volatility, job insecurity in export processing zones and a retreat from multilateral trade regimes that once served as buffers of global economic stability. Worse still, this weaponization of tariffs signals a move away from rules-based trade to power-based coercion. It undermines the World Trade Organization, fractures global solidarity and sends a chilling message to developing nations: that economic integration is no longer a guarantee of peace or prosperity.
Indeed, this US tariff-based trade war against China and the world is a major setback. It has disrupted global supply chains, increased costs for businesses and consumers, and created global economic uncertainty.
Conclusion
In retrospect, in these challenging times, the world needs less confrontation and more reflection. And here lies Asia’s strength.
Asia’s civilizational heritage teaches harmony over hegemony and consensus over coercion. The “Asian Way,” though often criticized as slow or indecisive, offers a model of deliberative diplomacy where dialogue persists even amid disagreement. Confucian ethos, Buddhist pragmatism and the maritime traditions of the Malay world remind us that peaceful coexistence is not weakness; it is wisdom.
Asians must reaffirm multilateralism with Asian characteristics anchored on inclusivity, noninterference and mutual respect. Rather than importing security architectures from afar, we must evolve our own, responsive to our regional realities.
Asians must invest not only in deterrence but in dialogue mechanisms, not in military alliances but in economic complementarities. Peace and stability in the SCS cannot be achieved through power projection; it must be cultivated by transforming the SCS into a regional public good, a “regional common,” and through joint development, scientific collaboration, environmental stewardship and a shared commitment to the common good.
Lest we forget, Asian countries have a long-standing tradition of resolving disputes through dialogue and negotiation. This wisdom can be applied to the SCS dispute. Rather than viewing the SCS as a source of conflict, claimant states could explore opportunities for joint resource development. This would not only ease tensions but also bring economic benefits to all parties involved. Such an approach aligns with Asian values of harmony, cooperation and mutual benefit.
One should note that the SCS dispute is not merely a maritime or territorial conflict. It is a test of whether Asia can chart its own course in a world drifting toward division. Amid the noise of warships and trade wars, we must amplify the voice of reason, tradition and unity. As Asians, let us bring Asian wisdom to the table of global governance, not as a nostalgic echo of the past but as a necessary compass for the future.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2025/04/19/opinion/columns/navigating-scs-uncharted-waters-asian-wisdom-amid-global-turbulence/2094995
