Asean expresses ‘concern’ about American rates, but strives for dialogue

The Association of Southeast Asian countries (ASEAN) has expressed its concern about the punitive American rates announced last week, but says it will look for a dialogue instead of taking revenge against the American relocation.

The 10-country block, which was particularly hard hit by the ‘reciprocal’ rates announced by Trump on 2 April, understood his dedication to pursue an ‘frank and constructive dialogue with the US to tackle trade-related concerns’.

“Open communication and cooperation will be crucial to guarantee a balanced and lasting relationship,” said it in one joint explanation After a special meeting of Asean ministers of the economy yesterday. “In that spirit, ASEAN undertakes not to impose retaliation measures in response to American rates.”

However, the joint statement also said that ASEAN was ‘deeply concerned’ about the Trump rates, which imposed tariff percentages of 49 percent on Cambodia and 46 percent on Vietnam to 10 percent on Singapore and Timor-Leste.

Although the Trump government has since announced a deferment of 90 days in mutual rates, except the astronomical rates for China, Asean’s economic ministers said that Trump’s dramatic movements had sent a shock of uncertainty by the international trading system.

“The unprecedented imposition of rates by the US will disrupt regional and global trade and investment flows” and influence millions of people in both Southeast Asia and in the United States.

The statement also confirmed the support of ASEAN for a “predictable, transparent, free, honest, inclusive, sustainable and ruled multilateral trading system with the world trade organization in the core.”

Yesterday’s meeting took place after Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, the current chairman of ASEAN, insisted The block to coordinate a uniform response to the American rate announcement.

It is not surprising that Asean chose the path of discussion instead of retribution. To begin with, trade wars and confrontation are very anathema for the ‘ASEANMANIER’, which (sometimes gloomy weakened) dialogue and economic interaction of positive sum prices. It also reflects the fact that the economies led by the region are highly dependent on the American market and fear the consequences of decoupling on the ability of the region to maintain a balance between rival geopolitical blocks.

Whether ASEAN can go further than his joint statement and a real collective reaction can coordinate, let alone negotiating as a block with the Trump administration, remains unclear. Several of the most difficult countries, including Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, have already communicated their desire for dialogue over the rates and have sent or sent delegations to Washington for this purpose. Vietnam and Cambodia have also offered to remove or considerably lower their remaining rates for American goods.

In the longer term, however, the tariff crisis and the threat it is for the export-dependent economies of Southeast Asia can breathe new life into the aim of ASEAN. The block was founded during the Cold War according to the principle that the new independent countries of Southeast Asia had to hang together, otherwise they will hang separately. Since the end of the Cold War, the extensive block has often been accused (sometimes unfairly) of alternating a Feckless Talk shop that has not succeeded in taking collective action on important issues, from the disputes of the South China Sea to decades of human rights in Myanmar.

Harder Economic times can sharpen the spirit of Southeast -Asian leaders and new goal and direction in the block. “In a peaceful, globalized and intertwined world, ASEAN integration is good,” James Chai wrote this week For Asia channel news. “But in a conflicting, protectionist and autarkic world it becomes a necessity.”

Whether ASEAN can succeed in promoting a regional interest that the national interests – or better yet, convince the Member States that the two are synonymous – can still be seen. However, if an existential threat to the export -driven development model of the region cannot promote a sense of regional interest, nothing is possible.