Now, however, this approach appears to be in limbo. The Supreme Court’s overturning of the Liberation Day tariffs raised questions about the sanctity of the trade deals that the US made with Cambodia, Malaysia and Indonesia. In fact, there is ongoing confusion in Malaysia about the status of their deal with the US. The announcement of the Section 301 investigations into excess capacity and forced labour raised further questions about the value of entering deals with the US when they can be broken so easily.
Public hearings for the Section 301 cases will occur in late April and early May. Accused Southeast Asian countries are expected to attend the hearings to plead their cases, though it is unclear what they will offer or promise to earn Washington’s favour.
A NEW ANCHOR FOR US-SOUTHEAST ASIA TIES?
Overall, countries are choosing to continue engaging a “revisionist” Washington, whether in pursuit of potential benefits through pragmatic arrangements or to mitigate disruptive outcomes from tariffs.
Pointing out that countries are embarking on diversification efforts to reduce their vulnerabilities in response to these challenges has almost become a cliche.
A question for the future, however, is what happens if engagement with Washington becomes largely aimed at preventing negative outcomes instead of encouraging positive results.
Such an arrangement could create a new impetus for Southeast Asian engagement with Washington. Yet, it could also make the relationship between this region and Washington exceedingly fragile. Governments would be far less patient with a disruptive and belligerent actor, especially if there are few upsides to persevering in that relationship.
Kevin Chen is an Associate Research Fellow with the US Programme at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He writes a monthly column for CNA, published every first Friday.
Read the full article here
