A

SEAN wants a clear Indo-Pacific strategy in order to claim its stakes in a changing global economy that is increasingly dependent on China’s growth, experts concluded in a recent discussion.

Officials from Southeast Asian governments, as well as representatives of academic institutions and think tanks from around the region convened last week in a Foreign Ministry-hosted workshop to brainstorm a more proactive approach to developing a shared Indo-Pacific agenda.

Their goal was to prevent the regional bloc from being inadvertently affected by the saber-rattling of major powers in their own backyard.

The discussion on an Indo-Pacific strategy has been gaining ground since major powers like the United States, Japan, Australia and India used the term last year, even though the notion dates back to 2002 when it was raised during the East Asia Summit.

ASEAN nations, especially Indonesia, have a growing interest to elaborate on its Indo-Pacific strategy due to its geographical location, with a number of vital sea lanes for communication, trade and shipping crisscrossing the region.

The Foreign Ministry’s head of policy analysis and development, Siswo Pramono, could not overstate the importance of this strategy as Indonesia, along with ASEAN and the world’s largest economies, the US, China, Japan and India, have a total gross domestic product (GDP) of up to US$43.5 trillion.

“So, the more inclusive the [Indo-Pacific] cooperation, the more economic benefits the countries can get,” he told The Jakarta Post on Friday.

As such, the looming trade war between Beijing and Washington that has sent a chill through financial markets and the corporate world was not something Indonesia and other ASEAN member states would gladly accept.

Indonesia and several of its neighbors may still be wary of Washington’s scrutiny, having made it onto a list of countries with large trade imbalances with the US.

Siswo said that instead of rivalry, there had to be a push to turn the situation into an opportunity for cooperation — something he believes will be best embodied in a clear Indo-Pacific strategy.

Cooperation could, for instance, be explored within ASEAN-led mechanisms like the East Asia Summit (EAS), of which both the US and China are already members.

ASEAN, he said, has agreed that whatever form it takes, the concept “has to be open, inclusive, transparent, mutually beneficial and with fair interest, as well as respect international law”.

Some experts involved in last week’s discussion, however, still have some reservations.

Jose Rizal Damuri, head of the economics department at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said that from an economic perspective, he questioned the need for yet another economic cooperation scheme.

“Currently, there are a lot of [economic cooperation schemes] that already cover the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, citing ASEAN’s free trade agreements with partner countries and the Belt and Road infrastructure scheme with China.

“Don’t use economics to justify a geopolitical push.”

On the other hand, CSIS executive director Philips Vermonte believes there is some merit in finding an Indo-Pacific strategy well-suited to ASEAN.

Moreover, Philips said that economic cooperation was still relevant for the Indo-Pacific discourse, because the rise of China as a superpower was unique in that its economic growth made geopolitical and geo-economic arguments overlap.

“China is a unique superpower country because throughout history, a country becomes a superpower through military force. China, on the other hand, uses its economic power,” he said.