Project Syndicate: Last year, you suggested that a prevailing “culture of pragmatism,” exemplified by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), explains the lack of major wars in Asia in recent decades. How should this inform efforts by Western diplomats to engage with Asia, and where do you currently see the kind of “geopolitical incompetence” that could lead to war?
Kishore Mahbubani: Western diplomats must first understand how much power has shifted from Europe to Asia. In 1980, the European Union’s GDP was ten times larger than China’s. Today, the two are roughly equal. Goldman Sachs projects that China’s GDP will be nearly double that of the EU by 2050. When power shifts, behavior must change. European diplomats have become addicted to sanctions and threats. They must now break that addiction, and return to the traditional means of diplomacy: persuasion and compromise.
Also, it was foolish of NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to suggest the expansion of NATO to Asia. NATO’s militaristic culture would pose a threat to the longstanding peace in the region. More broadly, Europeans need to change their attitude toward Asia, learning from the region, instead of lecturing it.
PS: Though China has long sought a “quiet rise,” it seems to be acting increasingly disruptively, such as through its aggressive pursuit of territorial claims in the South China Sea and the Himalayas. How solid are China’s relationships with its Asian neighbors today, and where are the risks to regional stability most acute?
KM: It is perfectly natural for rising powers to become more assertive as they gain influence. China is no exception. Yet, as Harvard political scientist Graham Allison wrote, “Americans enjoy lecturing China to be ‘more like us.’ Perhaps they should be careful what they wish for.” After all, during its own rise, the United States fought wars, expelled other powers from countries where it sought a foothold, and acquired distant territories. China has done none of these things.To be sure, there are issues and disagreements – including, notably, territorial disputes – that severely challenge China’s relationships with some of its neighbors, such as India, Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines. But China’s relations with other neighbors – including most of the ASEAN countries – are more harmonious, thanks not least to deep economic ties. China-ASEAN trade has exploded from $40 billion in 2000 to $975 billion in 2022, providing a positive model for EU-Africa or US-Latin America relations.As for regional stability, there are risks within Asia. But the biggest risk stems from the US-China geopolitical contest, which grows more dangerous practically by the day.
PS: Last November, you praised Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim for his pursuit of “institutional and economic reform rooted in democratic values.” How do you rate his government’s progress so far, including his efforts to join the newly enlarged BRICS grouping of emerging economies? What lessons from your time working in Malaysia do you hope the government considers as it pursues its goals?
KM: Malaysia has clearly demonstrated its resilience. Despite having had six prime ministers since 2013 – an indication of political instability – its economy grew from $328 billion in 2013 to $416 billion in 2023, and it is projected to reach $600 billion in 2030. Most developing countries would envy this record. And Malaysia’s positive economic performance is likely to continue: Ibrahim is poised to stay in office longer than his immediate predecessors, and with increased political stability comes a new wave of foreign investment.
More here.
