{
"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
Southeast Asian capitals would prefer that the U.S. and PRC manage their relationship, if not get along.
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.
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.
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.
When Giorgia Meloni very publicly rebuked Donald Trump’s disparaging remarks about her, it surprised many who saw her as a European extension of Trumpism. Is the spat a sign of trouble in the radical right’s transatlantic axis?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
There is an elephant in the room when it comes to the EU’s upcoming security strategy: Donald Trump. Unless European leaders acknowledge the depth of the transatlantic crisis, true autonomy will remain out of reach.
Stefan Lehne
When the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was announced, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy declared their readiness to help demine the Strait of Hormuz and lift nuclear sanctions on Tehran. But does Europe need new tools to recover a diplomatic role?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.
Sinan Ülgen
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.