Why ASEAN matters - in the era of great power competition

[Ananda]

Qatar is our main supplier but all of Europe is trying to get gas from them now. Lets just hope the Russian operations end before this year's winter.

It won't matter if Russian 'special operation' will be finish 2,3 or 6 months more. Like I put in Russia-West Thread, too much bad blood happen after this. West will find other sources of their Gas and Oil, and Russia will have to find other customers.

I'm not buying much on Biden promisses on getting more oil and gas to Europe from North America. The North American producers most likely not going to pump more. So shifting on the Producers-Market that more likely to happen. For that, I see many in Asia looking to Russia.

Is supply and demand basically. When Euro Zone (especialy German and Western Euro) want to source from Middle East, they have higher buying power than most of Asia. Thus increase the price from Middle East, and many in Asia has to find other supplier that can provide cheaper sources. That's most likely Russia as they have to gain new customers.

We already see that with India, thus why I see many in Asia will not going to follow Russian sanction band wagon, due to their need to keep Russia open for potential suppliers. Off course it can be change if Russia doing something stupid like massive chemical warfare in Ukraine.

 

[John Fedup]

It won't matter if Russian 'special operation' will be finish 2,3 or 6 months more. Like I put in Russia-West Thread, too much bad blood happen after this. West will find other sources of their Gas and Oil, and Russia will have to find other customers.

I'm not buying much on Biden promisses on getting more oil and gas to Europe from North America. The North American producers most likely not going to pump more. So shifting on the Producers-Market that more likely to happen. For that, I see many in Asia looking to Russia.

Is supply and demand basically. When Euro Zone (especialy German and Western Euro) want to source from Middle East, they have higher buying power than most of Asia. Thus increase the price from Middle East, and many in Asia has to find other supplier that can provide cheaper sources. That's most likely Russia as they have to gain new customers.

We already see that with India, thus why I see many in Asia will not going to follow Russian sanction band wagon, due to their need to keep Russia open for potential suppliers. Off course it can be change if Russia doing something stupid like massive chemical warfare in Ukraine.

Your predictions are likely. Might be some marginal increases in Alberta production and probable increases from Venezuela. An absolute increase in transition to green energy will be the result in Europe. UK and France will expand nuclear. Will be interesting to see how the rest of Europe views expanded nuclear energy production.

 

[Ananda]

An absolute increase in transition to green energy will be the result in Europe.

I always very sceptical on the slogan fasten transition to green energy. I already attend enough seminar on green energy, to understand even before this War, EU schedulle toward green energy transition already ambitious and expensive enough.

Well let's see if the Eurozone consumers willing to continue paying more on energy resourcing and this fasteb green energy transition. I have doubt with more prosperous western Eurozone consumers let alone the eastern ones.

One thing for sure, many ASEAN administrations will not going to bet their constituences anger on their energy bill and inflations that follow. If they cam find bargain price on hydrocarbon supplies, they will take it.

 

[John Fedup]

I always very sceptical on the slogan fasten transition to green energy. I already attend enough seminar on green energy, to understand even before this War, EU schedulle toward green energy transition already ambitious and expensive enough.

Well let's see if the Eurozone consumers willing to continue paying more on energy resourcing and this fasteb green energy transition. I have doubt with more prosperous western Eurozone consumers let alone the eastern ones.

One thing for sure, many ASEAN administrations will not going to bet their constituences anger on their energy bill and inflations that follow. If they cam find bargain price on hydrocarbon supplies, they will take it.

Energy inflation isn’t popular in North America either, especially in the US. Green energy is more palatable in Western Europe than North America so they might accept the inflation. Certainly any drastic climate alterations in the next few years would make the inflation issue moot worldwide. Rising CO2 levels are concerning, falling oxygen levels, that would be an order of magnitude scarier.

 

[OPSSG]

Q: Maybe the correct title for this thread in 2022 should be ‘Why ASEAN does not matter’?

1. As most in DefenceTalk know, telling lies to Pinoys is a traditional pass-time of the ruling class in the Philippines — taping on this sentiment, Bongbong Marcos is the man to beat on 9 May 2022, to be the next President. Running alongside as the next VP, Sarah Duterte will help to keep her family in power. The Marcos-Duterte 2022 election campaign is highly effective in reaching the masses through social media with the help of their troll army.

​

(a) Bongbong’s father was Ferdinand Marcos Sr, who was elected president in 1965 and imposed martial law in 1972 before being deposed by a ‘people power’ revolution in 1986. During those two decades his family amassed billions of dollars in private wealth, oversaw the killing and disappearance of thousands of political opponents and created a debt-fuelled economic boom which ended in a major recession.​

​

(b) It is well known that President Duterte until the recent turn of events is deeply anti-American and tried to cosy up to Russia and China. When President Duterte took over, his administration downplayed the arbitration win and criticized the former President Aquino and the US (not China) for the loss of Scarborough. Then President Duterte started the process to cancel the VFA. Things got so bad, with regard to his tilt to Beijing, in June to July 2021, a group of retired generals and colonels calling themselves Advocates of National Interest (ANI) were forced to publish a declaration entitled “Let us Unite and Rally to our Flag in Assertion of our Rights in the West Philippine Sea”. This ANI declaration has been going the rounds of the various online chat groups of active and retired PMA alumni.​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522367802778169344

2. The failure of the political system to improve the economic position of most of the population has caused general disillusion with the state of Philippines politics. The belief that ‘everyone is corrupt’ has resulted in general cynicism. In a story familiar from other parts of the world, the success of the Marcos-Duterte campaign has come from its mobilization of populist feeling against ‘metropolitan elites’. The likely next president of the Philippines is running an entire election campaign based on disinformation. Given that Bongbong’s father was overthrown, he is unlikely to be fond of the Americans for their acquiescence of the ‘people power’ revolution or also locally known as the EDSA Revolution (from 22 Feb 1986 to 25 Feb 1986).

3. Increasingly, we see the national leadership of some ASEAN countries (eg. Cambodia, Laos and soon the Philippines, again), up for sale to the highest bidder. With the largest country and informal leader of ASEAN more concerned about its G20 troubled chairmanship and the disgraceful Chairman of ASEAN is Hun Sen — trying to cosy up to the junta in Myanmar — to please Beijing, I am not hopeful for ASEAN unity in 2022. Indonesia, as the upcoming ASEAN Chair of 2023, spoke about the need for ASEAN to synergize with international forums such as the G20 that Indonesia is chairing in 2022 and the APEC that Thailand is chairing in 2022. I suspect things will only get better in 2023.

4. In April 2021, ASEAN then under Brunei’s chairmanship announced a five-point consensus towards resolving the crisis, though no timeframe was agreed. Myanmar has been in turmoil since the military ousted Aung San Suu Kyi's elected government on 1 Feb 2021, with almost daily protests and fighting between the army and newly formed militias.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1521085843963891713

5. In the lead up to the U.S.-ASEAN Summit. Vietnam’s PM Pham Minh Chinh will give remarks on the state and future of the U.S.-Vietnam relationship on 11 May 2022.

​

(a) ASEAN’s 8 official leaders will attend the ASEAN-US Summit in Washington on 12 to 13 May 2022. This will be the second physical meeting between the ASEAN and the US since 2016, as ASEAN was neglected by the Trump administration. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has publicly declined to attend; and the Myanmar junta leader will not be invited to the meeting.​

​

(b) Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink is travelling to Cambodia and Laos from 1-7 May 2022, to pave the road to the summit. Kritenbrink will discuss the upcoming US—ASEAN Special Summit that President Biden will host in Washington.​

6. Meanwhile, in an SCMP Editorial, representing Beijing’s interests, says that ‘ASEAN leaders should think hard about summit with the US. Without a clear-cut agenda, attending risks sending a wrong signal to China.’

7. The possibility of another Marcos in the Malacañang on 9 May 2022, a possible third term for Jokowi, the likely return of UMNO alongside Najib Razak at the 15th Malaysian general election (scheduled to be held before 14 Sept 2023), PAP staying in power in Singapore after the July 2020 election (where it lost 2 GRCs), endless musical chairs with Thai Generals as PM (after yet another coup), while Hun Sen remains in power since 1985. The initial wave of pressure to extend Jokowi’s presidency came from cabinet ministers such as Luhut Panjaitan (ex-Golkar), Airlangga Hartato (Golkar) and Muhaimin Iskandar (National Awakening Party – PKB), as well as other high-profile political figures. They seemed to be pushing for an emergency extension of the President’s term in office, justified on the grounds that Covid-19 has prevented the government from completing its programme; which ran into significant public opposition. This is the sad state of politics in ASEAN.

 

[STURM]

On the Twitter feed; from Malaysia's perspective there is no ''Sabah feud'' because it does not entertain/recognise any claim to Sabah. As such the ''feud'' is a Philippines one but as it stands the vast majority of Filipinos have far pressing concerns to focus on and the Sabah issue resonates mainly with Filipinos of Tausug descent; it isn't something which resonates with a large part of the population in a way the Malvinas does to Argentinians.

On the economic situation of the population and standards of living; yes that is still a major problem but as a long time visitor to the Philippines and one who has family there; things have been steadily improving over the years. Whether the politicians should be thanked for that is the question. Something good going for the Philippines is that despite whatever limitations placed; it has a vocal press which does not shy away from questioning authority in a way that would be impossible or much harder to do compared to some other ASEAN countries.

 

[OPSSG]

Post 1 of 3: Select modernisation trends

1. Despite the diplomatic noise of the US-ASEAN summit (to be held on 12 to 13 May 2022), I believe that progress will be limited. The next 3 posts will look at ship building plans to explain, ‘Why ASEAN does not matter.’

2. The Philippine naval ship building plan, a bit too little (in amount funded), and too late (for the build and delivery of a significant number of ships, to occur by 2027). Under President Duterte’s corrupt leadership, the Pinoys had a very, very sour taste from what transpired during the course of frigate program. Now, they seek to blame HHI for local desire for corruption. It is the Pinoy politicians in a position of power would not approve of the tender or RFI (without kick backs). This is similar to the Kang Ding-Class demand for kick backs by corrupt Taiwanese officers and politicians.

​

(a) At the very end of Defense Sec. Delfin Lorenzana term of office, he said Hyundai Heavy Industries was selected by Philippine Navy for the OPV Project, beating Turkey's ASFAT. Commonality with frigate and future corvette was basis for selection. HHI offered derivativd of HDP-1500 Neo design. Having said that, I like the upcoming Philippine Navy OPV design (81m x 13.1 m x 3.5m), provided they can develop the needed CONOPS, to operate with more capable surface combatants. In terms of draft, this HHI vessel, with reconfigurable spaces below the helicopter deck, is a way superior design to the KCR-60, with the caveat that this is an apples-to-oranges comparison.​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1522210185963765760

​

(b) The South Korean government will transfer 1 more Pohang-class corvette, plus several old helicopters to the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The Jose Rizal-class vessels built in Korea are good platforms with crap weapons/sensors (until the Pinoys fund and install the MICA NG, for air defence and a towed array sonar, for ASW).​

​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1524473581073309697

(c) Looking at the trend lines, ASEAN navies in the second island chain (like the Philippines, Malaysia or Vietnam), are on their own by 2027. When the US Navy started the Virginia Class design process at the end of the Cold War, they lived urgency on steroids. It is truly painful to see zero US Navy urgency in the face of the clear shipbuilding and repair crisis today. This means that in a little while, the South China Sea is going to be a Chinese lake, with the PLA(N) able to define outcomes to the rest of us.​

​

(d) IMO, the naval fighting capability of the Philippines and Malaysia, are in serious doubt. If they met a capable enemy navy fleet, they would be spanked so hard, they won’t know what hit them. The PLA(N), their notional enemy in the South China Sea, is much more capable in comparison. The Pinoys getting the Brahmos for the Philippine Navy and Army — are just bragging rights — I will not take them seriously until they buy the 2nd squadron of MRF for their Air Force.​

3. By the time HHI is funded to build some of these imaginary and new Philippines ships (Frigate, Corvette, OPV), the Singapore Navy would have reached IOC for 10 new mid-sized vessels and 4 new submarines — more specifically, 4 OPVs, 6 MRCVs and 4 Type 218SGs. By the early 2030s, the Singapore Navy will be well advanced on the building plans for the JMMS, too.

4. Given the unscheduled delays in the Maharaja Lela-class frigates being built for the Royal Malaysian Navy (based on the Gowind-class), I will leave the discussion on the Malaysian Navy and the Vietnamese Navy, for another day, as the details are too depressing to discuss at this time.

 

[STURM]

IMO, the naval fighting capability of the Philippines and Malaysia, are in serious doubt. If they met a capable enemy navy fleet, they would be spanked so hard, they won’t know what hit them.

No doubt there but going head to head against the PLAN - a far much better resourced navy - is not within the list of to do things for the RMN.

The RMN [like all navies] caters for a whole list of contingencies but can only realistically deal with a select few; based on actual resources/capabilities and actual operational circumstances.

As is well known; the RMN's modernisation programme has been seriously impacted by various delays caused by a variety of reasons. Even if it weren't however the RMN would be in no position to go head to head against the PLAN or any other far better funded and resourced navy. For the RMN not to be ''spanked'' by a better funded and resourced navy would mean something seriously/fundamentally wrong with that navy. The RMN's leadership and planners are also acutely aware of the service's limitations; especially if faced with a better resourced opponent; they are under no illusions about what the RMN can or can't do; thus the ''won’t know what hit them'' situation will not arise ........

will leave the discussion on the Malaysian Navy and the Vietnamese Navy, for another day, as the details are too depressing to discuss at this time.

I will go into it briefly. For a variety of reasons the LCS programme has hit major delays and cost overruns. This is [from what I've heard from a number of sources] due to a variety of reasons; not merely that of a yard which was incapable. As it stands after long deliberation the government has decided to resume and continue with the programme. The amount of cash which will have to be spent to rectify this major cockup and the actually delivery schedules aren't known yet.

By the time HHI is funded to build some of these imaginary and new Philippines ships (Frigate, Corvette, OPV), the Singapore Navy would have reached IOC for 10 new mid-sized vessels and 4 new submarines — more specifically, 4 OPVs, 6 MRCVs and 4 Type 218SGs.

Good for Singapore and the RSN but hardly surprising given Singapore's threat perceptions [which differ somewhat to its neighbours]; the RSN's operational requirements; the resources the government is willing and able to devote to defence and the state of development in the RSN compared to other navies.

Hardly surprising and to be expected.

 

[Vivendi]

No doubt there but going head to head against the PLAN - a far much better resourced navy - is not within the list of to do things for the RMN.
The RMN [like all navies] caters for a whole list of contingencies but can only realistically deal with a select few; based on actual resources/capabilities and actual operational circumstances.

The illegal, unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine led to an unprecedented support of Ukraine from "the West", and demonstrated that a weak defense force with very limited resources is able to fight off a much larger force, if supported by other countries. However this was only possibly by first demonstrating the capability and willingness to fight for their own country.

It's a question of mindset and culture perhaps, but if other ASEAN countries could learn this lesson they would do like Singapore: build alliances and build a small but capable defense force (including navy) that can contribute positively to the security of the region, and motivate other countries to provide support if a larger neighbor should make the fatal mistake to invade.

This would not just provide credible defense for the small countries choosing this path, it would also provide a credible deterrence, which is what small countries really would like.

Of course this requires leaders that really care for their country, and not just care for their personal wallets...

 

[STURM]

The illegal, unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine led to an unprecedented support of Ukraine from "the West", and demonstrated that a weak defense force with very limited resources is able to fight off a much larger force

We learnt this lesson a very long time ago; that smaller countries with the various pieces in place could mount an effective resistance against a much larger and stronger opponent.. Secondly the Ukraine had limited resources in comparison to Russia but I wouldn't say it had ''very limited resources'' for the reason that it has sizeable armed forces; a pool of reservists/manpower it able to draw on; a large stockpile of certain types of weaponry, etc.

We should and must also factor in that various forms of training assistance to the Ukrainians over the years has paid off - the Ukrainians improved in some areas and they were determined to rectify certain limitations; the Russians on the other hand went into the invasion blissfully unware of their own limitations.

Sure; against Russia it was definitely the far weaker power with less resources but it also had various things going for it.

It's a question of mindset and culture perhaps

It's more of a question of priorities; threat perceptions; etc.

this lesson they would do like Singapore: build alliances and build a small

Others also 'build' partnerships and have longstanding forms cooperation of various kinds at various levels with various players but how particular countries choose to go about their security needs is driven by various factors.

Of course this requires leaders that really care for their country, and not just care for their personal wallets... .

It requires a change of focus and how they view the strategic calculus. Some countries take defence more seriously than others and have good reason to do so. Others take defence seriously but not serious enough when balanced against other factors which also require funding.

 

[Ananda]

The initial wave of pressure to extend Jokowi’s presidency came from cabinet ministers such as Luhut Panjaitan (ex-Golkar), Airlangga Hartato (Golkar) and Muhaimin Iskandar (National Awakening Party – PKB), as well as other high-profile political figures. They seemed to be pushing for an emergency extension of the President’s term in office, justified on the grounds that Covid-19 has prevented the government from completing its programme; which ran into significant public opposition. This is the sad state of politics in ASEAN.

The chances of Jokowi's third term is actually quite slim to happen to begin with. Two terms presidencies actually a compromise solutions between Political Factions and Military after Soeharto fall. This ensures every political factions chances on political manuvearing every terms.

Some of Jokowi's hard line supporters just trying the water, and got enough oppositions from various factions even from Jokowi's main political party backer in PDIP. It is still two years, thus enough game in town for political manuevering. Changing two term presidencies limit actually can open for Military intervention. Something I don't think the civilians political factions want to gamble with.

However democracy in most of developing world actually is an Oligarchs Induced Democracy. People in West now associate oligarch only to Russian system. However it is actually very common in developing countries, including some in Eastern European. It is just now nearly all western media close their eyes on that (and only talking Oligarch co-op in politics as only happen in Russia).

So ASEAN democracy is very much room of bargain between Politicians and Business Oligarch. Doing democracy in some ASEAN states is expensive for political factions, because basically they have to buy votes. For that they need Business Oligarch support. This is the consequences on doing democracy in developing nations that the marginalised low class still out numbered more politically awareness Middle Class.

The political paradigm doing democracy can only changes if middle class already become majorities. Because at that time, the majorities belong to class of people that aknowledge various political issue. While for most lower class in developing nations their political issue only two thing, where their food will come, and whose going to provide for them.

The more Middle class emerge the more chances on Political factions can survive based on their constituences support only. Until then the Political factions must relies more on Business Oligarch financial support.

Note:
PLAN will dominate SCS sooner or later. All the Asia Pacific Navies including ASEAN Navies can do is try to put limit on that dominations become a total ones. Indonesian Armed Forces including Navy building is just too make sure that it is going to cost PLAN if they encroaching too much on Indonesian waters. Basically that's what ASEAN and other Asian Pacific Navies (outside USN) can do.

Asia Pacific has to rely on them selves, against increasing PLAN power projections. Indian Navy will guard their own Indian waters in Indies, as Japan and ROK navy on Eastern Pacific. SCS in the end has to be handle by ASEAN Navies, and China knows it is the weakest point (of all other potential challanges they are facing in Indies or East Pacific).

Of all the lesson on Ukraine conflict can be learn, other parties might be going to give some supply, but in the end you have to fight on your own.

 

[Vivendi]

Of all the lesson on Ukraine conflict can be learn, other parties might be going to give some supply, but in the end you have to fight on your own.

No, not if you are in an alliance like the 30 (soon 32) members of the NATO alliance. We never have to fight on our own

 

[Ananda]

not if you are in an alliance like the 30 (soon 32) members of the NATO alliance. We never have to fight on our own

I'm talking the lesson from Ukraine. In the end they are the ones who has to pay in their own blood to fight. Whatever the weapons and supply West giving them. In the end it is Russian and Ukranian blood only.

Also there's not a thing like Nato in Asia Pacific. Exept some regional one on one alliances between US, Japan, ROK and Australia. Outside from those, US has no obligations to fight for anyone else.

Outside US, others in West will not care much for any war in Asia Pacific except some lip diplomatics talk. Just like in Asia Pacific (except Australia), that mostly only talk on diplomatic and trade actions (and it is also only related to Japan, ROK and Singapore), for Ukraine war.

Nothing wrong on that, it is part of human actions that mostly care on thing related toward their own vicinities neighbourhood.

 

[STURM]

Also there's not a thing like Nato in Asia Pacific.

There was SEATO but the idea never caught on and it became defunct.

Exept some regional one on one alliances between US, Japan, ROK and Australia. Outside from those, US has no obligations to fight for anyone else.

Thailand is a non NATO U.S. ally and the Philippines as widely known is a treaty linked ally; no idea if it's classified as a non NATO ally per see. There is also Taiwan.

As I see it; the U.S. has far too many commitments/obligations worldwide; the burden of being the world's sole super power. If just a fraction of those commitments/obligations have to be met; the U.S. would be severely overstretched.

In the end it is Russian and Ukranian blood only.

Very true; their blood being split; their country being devastated. Ultimately there will come a time when the shooting stops and when it does for their sake I hope the Ukrainians are able to come to an agreement which benefit them; without any outside parties insisting on things.

All the Asia Pacific Navies including ASEAN Navies can do is try to put limit on that dominations become a total ones.

They can have some level of deterrence capability but if shooting ever starts the only chance they'd have would be as some part of as multi national coalition against China. In time threat perceptions will and are changing; we see this in Indonesia which is displaying a greater sense of urgency in modernising the TNI.

No, not if you are in an alliance like the 30 (soon 32) members of the NATO alliance. We never have to fight on our own

Indeed but looking at things from an overall perspective; being part of a multi national alliance with treaty obligations also entails one to be involved in conflict even if one doesn't want to or even if it isn't in line with ones national interests - we can argue there's more advantages than disadvantages but it is what it is.

 

[Ananda]

I see it; the U.S. has far too many commitments/obligations worldwide; the burden of being the world's sole super power. If just a fraction of those commitments/obligations have to be met; the U.S. would be severely overstretched.

That's why I still very doubtfull US willing to put the boots in Asia Pacific on any conflict outside ROK, Japan and Australia. Those three at least has more legal binding agreement with US to intervene militarily. Others probable but questionable especially Thailand or Philipines.

In the end most of ASEAN has to fight on their own, at least under present cooperation level.

time threat perceptions will and are changing; we see this in Indonesia which is displaying a greater sense of urgency in modernising the TNI.

As I put on Indonesian thread, there's no doubt where TNI leaning presently. However it is different on Political issue where Indonesia still wants to play in the fences. As also most of ASEAN members. Modernising of the TNI will gather pace, but will not on the level that going to 2% or even 3% of GDP. Mostly in my assesment (based on projection of Government spending trend) going from present level of 0.8% of GDP toward 1.5%.

It will be back on how China going to play in SCS. If China still playing in present level of confrontation, I do see most of ASEAN bordering SCS also trying to still playing in the fences (altough bit leaning to other side). In sense they will increase the modernisation paces but still not on 5th gear speed up level.

China in the end is the biggest military threat to most ASEAN at the same time also the biggest Trade Partner. Something that many in Western media sometimes fail to understand the dilema facing by most ASEAN members.

 

[Vivendi]

I'm talking the lesson from Ukraine. In the end they are the ones who has to pay in their own blood to fight. Whatever the weapons and supply West giving them. In the end it is Russian and Ukranian blood only.

1. You made a statement without any qualifiers, I simply pointed out that this was incomplete and provided an example to illustrate the point.

2. Actually another great lesson from the war is Ukraine is directly related to my example: Had Ukraine been member of NATO, Russia would not have invaded them in the first place. Russia/USSR has invaded several neighbor countries, but has never invaded a NATO country. A strong alliance like NATO is an incredibly strong deterrent that prevents war from happening in the first place.

(a) This is the main reason why Russia is so opposed to NATO enlargement, Russia knows that NATO countries are "untouchables" and cannot be attacked by Russia anymore.​

(b) Finland is now joining NATO because the Finnish people got a strong reminder from the events in Ukraine that as long as they are outside of NATO, they can never feel safe from Russia. Thus they have decided to enter NATO, and do it rapidly while Russian soldiers are busy murdering, raping, and looting in Ukraine.​

 

[Vivendi]

Outside US, others in West will not care much for any war in Asia Pacific except some lip diplomatics talk. Just like in Asia Pacific (except Australia), that mostly only talk on diplomatic and trade actions (and it is also only related to Japan, ROK and Singapore), for Ukraine war.

Nothing wrong on that, it is part of human actions that mostly care on thing related toward their own vicinities neighbourhood.

Apart from the US, several other Western countries will no doubt provide significant military support to some Asian Pacific countries, at least those that have a history of supporting a rules based organization of world affairs, and also have provided assistance to Ukraine. Europe would provide significant assistance to Australia, Japan, Taiwan, and probably also South Korea in case of war. Asian countries that don't care about anything outside their narrow neighborhood and in particular has shown no inclination to support e.g. Ukraine after the illegal, unprovoked Russian invasion and Russian war crimes are probably at bit lower on the list, but I may be wrong of course. There is a risk however that there is something to the old proverb "You reap as you sow".

 

[Ananda]

You made a statement without any qualifiers, I simply pointed out that this was incomplete and provided an example to illustrate the point.

And what qualifiers do you have, asside your own opinion too.

Had Ukraine been member of NATO, Russia would not have invaded them in the first place.

This old argument that Ukraine being invaded because NATO inclination. This's being debating for so long, so your argument is moot. Moreover this is Asian scenarios that's why your NATO argument is moot for AsPac. Again there's no NATO in AsPac asside some one on one alliance with US as I already mentioned before.

several other Western countries will no doubt provide significant military support to some Asian Pacific countries, at least those that have a history of supporting a rules based organization of world affairs, and also have provided assistance to Ukraine.

Doubtful asside some diplomatic and logistical support. However will not going to put boots on the ground. So the only potential boots on the ground from outside Asia Pacific (from Western power) is potentially only US. That's as I already put potentially in limited scenario toward conflict against their established allies in AsPac. Most of ASEAN (aside potentially Singapore) not on that cattagories.

Again read my argument from Ukraine lessons. It is argument on fighting alone on your own as boots in the ground. So don't talk about diplomatic and some supplies sides support. That's not my argument to begin with. You're talking apple vs oranges.

Don't give unqualifier statement that European power will put boots in the ground against China. They are not going to do that against Russia in their own neighborhood. What qualifiers do you have that they will do that with China (which more and more have more power than Russia on every aspect asside nuclear heads).

Asian countries that don't care about anything outside their narrow neighborhood and in particular has shown no inclination to support e.g. Ukraine after the illegal, unprovoked Russian invasion and Russian war crimes are probably at bit lower on the list, but I may be wrong of course.

Again what qualifiers that you have on other European will not behave like many Asians as narrow neighborhood thinking ?

You claim my statement is without qualifiers, well your statement is also the same. In fact your statement is no more then some western superiority thinking that we are better then many Asians on global political perspective.

In the end it is only can be proven if War with China already break out in Asia. Don't also bring example of WW2 that European involved in Asia as example on potential next war in Asia. Europe involve in Asian war before because they have interest in part of their colonies. Those European colonies now already independent countries.

Europe for most part will have similar interests involved in any war in Asia just as much as Asians have interest on involved in war in Europe. That's human nature.

 

[STURM]

Remains to be seen what direction the new government in Manila will take towards defence. My guess is that it will stay the course; Marcos will continue implementing various things already planned for under Durterte who in turn carried out things planned by Aquino's government.

Marcos dynasty back in power: What’s next for the Philippines?

Will Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr replicate his father’s dictatorial ambitions?

www.aljazeera.com

Contrary to popular assumption; Marcos is unlikely to cozy up to China beyond what's needed to maintain fairly good relations. As has been pointed out he's actually quite fond of the West and has a particular affinity with Britain. He will continue to seek close ties with China; to be given as the Philippines economy is very tied into China's but he is unlikely to change anything with regards to his country's overall existing defence relationship with certain countries.

To those who say the Philippines is not doing enough defence wise; fine but bear in mind that what it's doing now is long overdue; enabling the AFP to have some level of capability after decades of neglect. That level of capability includes having the ability to effectively meet peactime obligations throughout the vast archipelago and having some level of deterrence against external threats.

We also need to bear in mind that various domestic issues such as development; a large low income bracket; the need to allocate certain level of funding to healthcare and education; etc; limits how much resources can be poured into the AFP. This may be a lesser issue for other regional countries but it's a major factor for the Philippines. Lest it not be forgotten the country still faces a non state threat in the form of the NPA, Maute Group and IS linked groups.

 

[STURM]

Asian countries that don't care about anything outside their narrow neighborhood and in particular has shown no inclination to support e.g. Ukraine after the illegal, unprovoked Russian invasion and Russian war crimes are probably at bit lower on the list, but I may be wrong of course.

Let me put it this way; just because certain Asian countries have not jumped on the bandwagon; condemning Russia's invasion; have not criticised Russia per see and other things; does not mean they condone the invasion; are comfortable with it or aren't concerned about the plight of ordinary citizens. Also doesn't mean they aren't in favour of ''a rules based organization of world affairs'' or are in agreement with countries launching unprovoked invasions ...

The present war in the Ukraine has global implications and we can only hope that things don't spread out of Europe; lest it be forgotten WW1 and WW2 were European affairs which eventually spread worldwide. As it stands; it's perfectly understandable that numerous non European countries; though they are against the invasion and are alarmed; are also focusing on other issues and are not actively as involved as some European and other countries are. Similarly; if a conflict were to erupt in say the South Pacific; we can't expect ordinary Norwegians; from a democratic freedom loving country in Europe; to express the same level of concern or interested they would if the said conflict was in Europe.