Malaysia and the ‘Indo-Pacific’: Why the Hesitancy?

The past few years have seen near-constant discussion about the implications for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in the evolving power rivalry between the United States and China. Over the years, ASEAN has taken pride in its role as a key player in regional security and economic processes, an ambition that is captured in the notion of “ASEAN centrality.” As China-U.S. strategic competition intensifies in the region, the idea of ASEAN centrality has been increasingly challenged by the rise of the “Indo-Pacific” as a strategic concept. Key official documents and white papers, including the 2019 “Foreign Policy Framework of the New Malaysia: Change in Continuity,” the 2019 Defense White Paper, and the 2021 publication “Focus in Continuity: A Framework for Malaysia’s Foreign Policy in a Post-Pandemic World,” notably do not explicitly mention the Indo-Pacific. During the 33rd Asia Pacific Roundtable in 2019, Tan Sri Rastam Mohd Isa, the former chairman of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies, one of Malaysia’s leading think-tanks, acknowledged that while the discussion on the Indo-Pacific was growing, there is no intention from ISIS Malaysia to rename its signature international conference to the “Indo-Pacific Roundtable.” Nevertheless, a panel discussion titled “Asia Pacific vs Indo Pacific: Rationale, Contestation and Implications” was included to initiate a discussion on what the Indo-Pacific concept means for the region’s security. He said, “Malaysia is ready to discuss relevant issues through the IPEF to ensure that the members can optimize the economic and strategic benefits as outlined in the framework.” However, in an exclusive interview with Nikkei given on the sidelines of the conference, former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said he did not share the government’s sentiment.