Over the past ten years, the global geopolitical landscape has witnessed a shift in the centre of gravity from the Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific region. The conceptualization of the Indo-Pacific narrative is not simply a geographical extension of the Asia-Pacific, but rather a strategic construct reflecting a growing awareness of the interconnectedness of the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
Southeast Asia, geographically situated at the confluence of these two oceans, has automatically become the epicentre of various security initiatives, competitions, and cooperation.
The latest dynamics in the Indo-Pacific region present a complex perspective on the prospects for security stability in Southeast Asia: on the one hand, it offers economic opportunities and partnerships, but on the other, it poses the risk of escalating great power rivalry that could undermine regional resilience.
Shifting Great Power Security Doctrines and Its Impact
The current Indo-Pacific perspective is inextricably linked to the rise of strategic competition between the United States and China. The US, through its Indo-Pacific strategy, reaffirms its commitment to maintaining a rules-based order, freedom of navigation, and the resilience of allies.
Meanwhile, China, with its vision of a Community for Shared Destiny of Mankind and the expansion of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), continues to strengthen its economic influence, while maintaining territorial claims in the South China Sea that conflict with the interests of several Southeast Asian countries.
For Southeast Asian countries, this position presents a dilemma. On the one hand, the presence of the US and its alliances, such as AUKUS (Australia-UK-US) and the increasing role of the Quad (US, Japan, India, and Australia), provides security and defence capacity.
However, this also increases military tensions in the region. AUKUS, particularly with the transfer of nuclear submarine technology to Australia, has raised concerns about an underwater arms race that could escalate Southeast Asian waters.
Conversely, China's economic dominance through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its extensive trade partnerships have discouraged Southeast Asian countries from taking an overly confrontational stance against Beijing. This ultimately jeopardizes the region's security and stability, as it risks becoming a proxy battlefield for the rivalry between the world's two major powers.
Southeast Asian Multilateralism in the Shadow of a New Competitive Security Architecture
Amid external pressure, Southeast Asia is not standing still. ASEAN, as the region's central organization, has launched its own outlook on the Indo-Pacific, known as the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP).
The AOIP emphasizes the principles of inclusivity, dialogue, and cooperation, rather than competition and confrontation. The AOIP prioritizes four main areas of cooperation: maritime affairs, connectivity, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the economy. This perspective represents ASEAN's effort as a regional institution to reliably maintain its centrality amidst significant rivalries.
However, the AOIP's prospects for maintaining security stability face significant challenges. With the US and China each having differing interpretations of the Indo-Pacific (the US emphasizing security, China emphasizing economics), ASEAN must navigate global geopolitical uncertainty. The greatest concern is a failure of ASEAN's cohesion.
Internal divisions, as seen in the Myanmar crisis or member states' differing stances on the South China Sea, weaken its collective bargaining position. As a result, Southeast Asia's security stability has become dependent on how external powers choose to interact, rather than solely on the region's internal mechanisms.
South China Sea Dynamics: A Test of Regional Security Stability
No compelling discussion of security in Southeast Asia is complete without addressing the South China Sea. From a contemporary Indo-Pacific perspective, this region is a major flashpoint. C
hina's increasing military activity in its claimed areas, including the construction of military bases on artificial islands, is occurring alongside increased freedom of navigation patrols by the US, Japan, and other allies.
Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei have overlapping claims in this resource-rich sea. The prospects for stability here depend heavily on two factors.
First, the claimant states' ability to manage tensions through mechanisms such as the Code of Conduct (COC) in the South China Sea currently being negotiated with China. However, negotiations on the COC have been slow and debates remain over its scope and legal force.
Second, the extent to which Southeast Asian countries are able to resist becoming a staging ground for foreign power displays. The Philippines under its new administration is likely to be more assertive toward China while strengthening security ties with the US.
This stance, while legitimate within its sovereign rights, has the potential to fuel further local tensions. In other words, a competitive Indo-Pacific perspective could complicate solutions to disputes that should be resolved bilaterally.
Non-Traditional Threats: Opportunities for Cooperation Amidst Rivalry
Interestingly, amidst heated rivalries, non-traditional threats present opportunities for stability. Southeast Asia is one of the region’s most vulnerable to climate change, natural disasters, cross-border terrorism, human trafficking, and cybercrime. In the Indo-Pacific context, these threats transcend borders and require collective cooperation.
Both the US and China recognize that long-term regional stability cannot rely solely on hard power. Through various initiatives, such as joint military exercises for disaster relief (e.g., the multi-nation Komodo exercise), maritime cooperation to combat piracy, or intelligence exchange to counterterrorism, the prospects for security stability are brighter.
The current Indo-Pacific perspective shows that in these areas, collaboration between the US, China, and Southeast Asian countries remains possible. In fact, mechanisms like the ASEAN Défense Ministers' Meeting-Plus (ADMM-Plus) have become effective forums for discussing these threats without becoming entangled in geopolitical competition.
However, the most recent and dangerous non-traditional threats relate to cybersecurity and disinformation. With rising tensions, cyberspace in Southeast Asia is often becoming a new battleground for foreign influence campaigns, which can deepen domestic polarization and disrupt political processes.
The future security stability of Southeast Asia will be largely determined by collective cyber resilience and the region's ability to resist digital interference from major powers.
Stability Prospects: Towards a Fragile Equilibrium
Looking at the current Indo-Pacific perspective, the prospects for security stability in Southeast Asia are not entirely bleak, but they are also not without threats. The region appears to be moving toward a fragile equilibrium.
This balance is supported by three pillars: first, the shared reluctance of major powers to engage in open conflict due to the risk of global economic disaster; second, a shrewd hedging strategy by Southeast Asian countries that continues to engage with all parties without permanently taking sides; and third, a growing awareness of interdependence in addressing transboundary threats.
However, the fragility of this regional security balance is often evident in the region's inability to establish legally binding conflict resolution mechanisms for major disputes such as the South China Sea.
If a small-scale incident in these waters occurs that is unlikely to be handled effectively, such as a collision between coast guard patrol vessels or a fishing dispute, a suspicious Indo-Pacific perspective could quickly turn a local incident into a full-blown international crisis.
In conclusion, the current Indo-Pacific perspective presents Indonesia and Southeast Asia in general with a fundamental adaptation challenge. The region can no longer rely on outdated diplomatic patterns that view great powers as isolated guardians of stability.
Instead, Southeast Asia must actively build collective resilience, strengthen ASEAN centrality, and forge more equal partnerships. Future security stability will not come from a balance of terror between superpowers, but from the region's internal capacity to manage diverse interests and maintain a zone of peace, free from competing doctrines.
However, without this, Southeast Asia risks becoming less a hub of connectivity and more a corridor for clashing interests in the Indo-Pacific era.
