Looking Past 2016: Southeast Asia in US Foreign Policy
Comprised of eleven countries, Southeast Asia is a region with diverse political regimes, economic trajectories, and demographic characteristics. However, despite these differences, for many countries within the region, ties with the United States have followed similar patterns over the course of President Obama’s time as president. Most significantly, the Obama administration’s proclaimed “pivot to Asia,” an integral aspect of its broader foreign policy regime towards Asia, has had important implications for Southeast Asia.
On the political and diplomatic front, significant developments have included increased support for the ASEAN through such agreements as the ASEAN-US Plan of Action 2016-2020, encouragement of the democratic transition in Myanmar, and further engagement with such treaty allies as Thailand and the Philippines. With regard to security policy, the United States has strengthened or revived defense cooperation and agreements with several countries, including Singapore, the Philippines, Myanmar, and Malaysia.
Given Southeast Asia’s prominence within the current administration’s policy platform, the degree to which the next U.S. president prioritizes the region will affect the future U.S. foreign policy trajectory as a whole. The perspectives and positions that presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have advanced suggestions that policy approaches to the region will revolve around three key areas: trade and economic issues, military cooperation and engagement, and national security considerations.
Multilateral Trade Agreements and Forums
Donald Trump’s foreign policy is partly shaped by isolationist tendencies that may result in decreased involvement in and support for regional economic and political bodies, including the ASEAN. Trump has also vocally criticized the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and directly stated that he will seek to withdraw from it. Such a position threatens cooperation with Southeast Asian countries that have participated in TPP negotiations, including Malaysia, Vietnam, and Singapore.
Additionally, Trump’s tendency towards more restrictive immigration policies may have negative economic impacts on countries like the Philippines. Members of the Filipino population who reside in the United States contribute 31 percent of total remittances, which account for nearly 10 percent of the Philippines’ national GDP. The implementation of stringent immigration regulations under a Trump administration could reduce the number of Filipino citizens who travel to the United States, ultimately slowing the flow of remittances from the United States to the Philippines.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, continues to prioritize economic engagement on a global scale in her policy platform. However, her change in stance on the TPP has led to confusion concerning her true intentions. As Secretary of State, Clinton stated in a 2012 address to the Australian parliament that the “TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade” and creates “the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field." However, Clinton rescinded her support after negotiations for the deal ended and just before election season, citing the TPP’s failure to address currency manipulation and to increase patent protection for pharmaceutical drug companies in developing countries. Ultimately, according to Clinton, the fully negotiated deal fails to meet the previously hoped for “gold standard.” Implications for Southeast Asia mainly impact the countries involved in the TPP, and will depend on Clinton’s final stance on the agreement should she become president.
Military Engagement
Trump’s military and defense engagement proposals also reflect isolationist views. He has emphasized that countries within Asia and the Middle East should bear the full economic burden of their own defense. Such an attitude could reverse the current administration’s efforts to strengthen military ties within South and Southeast Asia. According to the Southeast Asia Globe, the practical implications of Trump’s declaration could “lead to swift withdrawal of US troops stationed on bases in Southeast Asia.” However, this would likely empower China as a regional actor and could therefore undermine a clear priority within the Trump platform: that of curtailing China’s power in and through bilateral trade measures.
On the other hand, Clinton seeks to engage more aggressively within Southeast Asia. After signing the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation on behalf of the United States in 2009, she stated as Secretary of State that “[TAC] seals our commitment to work in partnership with the nations of ASEAN to advance the interest and values we share.” Having visited the Asia-Pacific region 61 times as Secretary of State and 19 times as First Lady, she is the candidate with the most experience in the region.
Regional Security
In the interest of national security, Trump has advocated pursuing “aggressive joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS.” Given the increasing influence of the group and its affiliates in South and Southeast Asia, Trump’s stance could support military intervention in the regions. His platform also advocates more restrictive immigration regulations and screening procedures, as well as a complete moratorium on immigration from countries “that have a history of exporting terrorism.” In the past, Trump has called for immigrants who identify as Muslim to be banned from the country entirely. These views could lead to a deterioration in relations with South and Southeast Asian countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Pakistan, all of which contain large Muslim populations.
Clinton has continued to cite her extensive experience as Secretary of State and tenure on the Senate Armed Services Committee to back up her experience in security issues. The Clinton platform reiterates her commitment to fighting ISIS and prioritizing counterterrorism. Clinton has promised air power and other support to allies in the Middle East, with the caveat that the United States will not deploy troops on the ground. Counterterrorism efforts in Southeast Asia are predicted to follow a similar trend: support with no direct military commitment. Clinton has also made clear that she wants to take a different approach to eliminate ISIS. For example, Clinton has proposed working with American technology firms "to prevent ISIS and their operatives from being able to use the Internet to radicalize, even direct, people in our country, and elsewhere."
Additionally, cybersecurity is an important aspect of Clinton’s national security platform. Citing the Democratic National Committee’s hack in connection with Russia, she has declared that “cyber warfare will be one of the biggest challenges facing the next president.” In fact, cyber warfare is becoming a major concern in Southeast Asia. Brig. Gen. Hamidin, director of prevention at Indonesia's counter-terrorism agency, has stated that "radical movements are benefiting from information technology,” especially when recruiting lone wolf extremists. Thus, Clinton’s counterterrorism strategy and focus on cyber warfare speak directly to developments within the region.
Ultimately, policy towards Southeast Asia under a Trump administration would likely reflect competing patterns of isolationism and aggressive military involvement. In contrast, a Clinton administration would almost certainly pursue policies of greater economic engagement, defense collaboration, and military cooperation on behalf of national security goals in the region.
This article is part of a special Caravel series about how foreign policy proposals by the US presidential nominees will affect the regions that make up our sections. Foreign policy implications for other sections are available below: