Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
{
"authors": [
"Paul Haenle",
"Chong Ja Ian"
],
"type": "questionAnswer",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [
"Carnegie China Commentaries"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Southeast Asia"
],
"topics": []
}
Source: Getty
Biden and Xi Meet at APEC
Southeast Asian capitals would prefer that the U.S. and PRC manage their relationship, if not get along.
Published on Nov 14, 2023
On a recent episode of the China in the World podcast, Paul Haenle spoke with Ian Chong, nonresident fellow at Carnegie China, about Southeast Asian views of the Biden-Xi meeting. A portion of their conversation, which has been edited and condensed for clarity, is below.
Paul Haenle: ASEAN countries have a lot at stake in U.S.-China relations. Southeast Asian countries watch very closely the U.S.-China relationship because it is so consequential to them. The Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said recently, “You need a meeting to head in the right direction, but you don’t expect a meeting to make everything sweetness and light.” What, in your view, would ASEAN countries see as a successful meeting between President Xi and Biden? Ian Chong: In ASEAN capitals, the Biden-Xi meeting itself does not necessarily signify anything substantial. If you recall, at last year’s G20 meeting, it appeared that Biden and Xi had a very good conversation. However, the subsequent balloon incident led to an immediate downward spiral in bilateral relations.Southeast Asian capitals would prefer that the U.S. and PRC manage their relationship, if not get along. They will be looking to see if there is real momentum behind the recent economic and political dialogues, and if there will be effort to move forward on military-to-military dialogues. They will also be watching to see how far the PRC side is willing to go in softening its positions on regional security. Before he was removed, General Li Shangfu claimed that there had been an increase in maritime and aerial patrols in and near PRC waters. This, of course, is a matter of dispute. The PRC’s excessive claims put a lot of pressure on Southeast Asian capitals. So they will be watching to see if, as a result of the forward movement in U.S.-China relations, the PRC is willing to dial back its rhetoric and behavior in relation to its excessive regional claims.
To listen to the full episode, use the player below, or subscribe in your favorite podcast app.
About the Authors
Paul Haenle
Former Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair, Carnegie China
Paul Haenle held the Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and is a visiting senior research fellow at the East Asian Institute, National University of Singapore. He served as the White House China director on the National Security Council staffs of former presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Chong Ja Ian
Nonresident Scholar, Carnegie China
Chong Ja Ian examines U.S.-China dynamics in Southeast Asia and the broader Asia-Pacific.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026
- Israel’s Security Means Insecurity in the Middle EastCommentary
As negotiations with Iran and Lebanon continue, chaos is at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s calculations.
Michael Young
- Taking the Pulse: Are Western Democracies Failing Free Speech?Commentary
The battle over free speech has taken center stage since U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Europe of censorship. From travel bans to social media regulation, especially around the Israel-Palestine conflict, are liberal democratic governments weaponizing free speech?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Trump’s AI Order Won’t Stymie U.S. Competition with ChinaCommentary
Beijing regulated AI—and then Chinese AI companies took off.
Matt Sheehan
- Are Data Centers the Villains in the Battle Over Electricity?Commentary
Examples from Virginia and Lake Tahoe reveal complex situations that governments could use to fund critical grid upgrades.
Kate Gordon, Noah Gordon
