August 7, 2025
BANGKOK – By any measure, Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan’s recent warning about the Thai-Cambodia border clash should not be taken lightly.
He called it “a major setback” for ASEAN’s credibility—a stinging but fair observation. The flare-up, which left soldiers dead and civilians displaced, exposed the cracks in ASEAN’s long-boasted solidarity.
And yet, to leap from “setback” to “irrelevance” would be a serious mistake.
Far from being an obsolete talk shop, ASEAN—now marking its 58th birthday on August 8, 2025—is still the single most important political mechanism preventing Southeast Asia from sliding into chaos, and from becoming a mere chessboard for the great powers.
If anything, this crisis should remind us why ASEAN exists—and what might happen if it didn’t.
Imagine Southeast Asia without ASEAN. Picture the same bloody border incident erupting between Thailand and Cambodia without an ASEAN framework in place. No joint statements. No convening power. No established habit of talking before shooting.
In that vacuum, the first responders would not be regional diplomats, but outside powers with competing agendas.
The U.S. and China would rush in, each claiming to “mediate,” but in reality pursuing strategic leverage.
History shows how dangerous this can be. In regions without functioning collective mechanisms, local disputes often morph into proxy wars—fueled, funded, and manipulated by rival powers. Without ASEAN, Southeast Asia could easily go down the same path.
Obviously, ASEAN didn’t stop the shooting—but it stopped the slide
ASEAN did not prevent this clash. Soldiers still exchanged fire. People still died. That is a sobering failure. But in the aftermath, ASEAN’s mechanisms kicked in—and they worked just enough to prevent the violence from spiraling into something far worse.
One of ASEAN’s understated but crucial strengths is precisely this: its dispute settlement mechanisms.
Over decades, it has built habits of dialogue, structures for mediation, and a diplomatic culture that favours resolution over escalation.
In the Thai–Cambodian case, Malaysia, as ASEAN Chair, stepped into the breach. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim didn’t just issue platitudes—he convened emergency talks in Kuala Lumpur on July 28, bringing both sides to the table.
The result: an “immediate and unconditional” ceasefire. That phrase may sound boilerplate, but in conflict-resolution terms it is gold: no preconditions, no face-saving delays—just stop shooting, now.
And in the process, the Asean mechanism managed to exercise, deliberately or not, the art of keeping great powers in their lane.
Another overlooked success: ASEAN, under Malaysia’s leadership, kept the ceasefire process firmly within its own orbit—even in the face of intense external pressure.
Yes, President Donald Trump inserted himself into the crisis, wielding tariff threats as a blunt form of “coercive diplomacy.” His intervention undoubtedly added urgency. But it was ASEAN’s quiet, back-channel diplomacy—led by Malaysia and supported by both Thailand and Cambodia—that ensured this was not a made-in-Washington or made-in-Beijing production.
Anwar Ibrahim’s framing was deft. He labelled the U.S. a “co-organizer” and China an “active participant.” That language gave both powers a role without handing them control. In diplomatic terms, it was like seating two alpha predators at the same banquet table, but making sure they weren’t in charge of the menu.
The ceasefire, in the end, was owned and announced by ASEAN, not by outside powers. The region avoided the slippery slope of proxy diplomacy that could have hardened the conflict into another front in the U.S.–China rivalry.
Asean’s unity may admittedly befragile, but it’s nonetheless real.
Critics like to scoff at ASEAN’s consensus model, seeing it as a recipe for paralysis. And yes—getting 10 (soon 11) sovereign states to agree on anything is painstaking work. But in this case, ASEAN Foreign Ministers issued a unified statement praising Malaysia’s role and reaffirming core principles: non-interference, peaceful dialogue, respect for sovereignty.
In a region as politically diverse as Southeast Asia, even such common language is a meaningful act of solidarity.
To be fair, compared to other blocs, ASEAN’s resilience isn’t just abstract rhetoric.
In a world where other regional groupings are struggling, ASEAN’s cohesion stands out. SAARC has not held a summit since 2016 due to India–Pakistan tensions. The European Union has endured Brexit and the strains of divergent national priorities.
ASEAN, in contrast, has expanded—welcoming Timor-Leste as its 11th member—and kept advancing its ASEAN Economic Community, strengthening socio-cultural ties, and deepening integration even amid global uncertainty.
This consistency in moving forward, even in turbulent times, speaks to ASEAN’s resilience. It remains a unifying force in Southeast Asia—attractive to new members and respected as a platform for collective voice.
And let’s not underestimate Asean’s potential for the future in this wildly fragmented world.
If the Thai–Cambodian ceasefire shows ASEAN’s present value, the ASEAN Community Vision 2045 shows its future ambition. Anchored in the theme “Resilient, Innovative, Dynamic, and People-Centred ASEAN,” this long-term plan spans three pillars:
Political-Security Community (APSC): 9 strategic goals, 178 measures to enhance peace, security, and stability.
Economic Community (AEC): 6 goals, 192 measures to build a highly integrated and cohesive economy.
Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC): 12 goals, 112 measures to foster inclusivity and shared identity.
A fourth track, the ASEAN Connectivity Strategic Plan, adds 49 measures to strengthen physical, institutional, digital, and people-to-people links.
This isn’t some diplomatic parlance —it’s a detailed playbook for maintaining ASEAN’s centrality in the Indo-Pacific for decades to come.
For sure, the “credibility gap” is still there. And it has to be resolved.
If ASEAN wants to turn “relevance” into “resilience,” it must close the gap between its aspirations and its actions. The Cambodian–Thai episode highlighted areas for improvement:
Faster response mechanisms – Crises move in hours, not weeks. ASEAN must be able to act in real time.
Preventive diplomacy – Regular military-to-military and border-security dialogues could stop disputes before they escalate.
Narrative discipline – Curbing inflammatory social-media nationalism is essential to preserving space for compromise.
Empowering the Chair – As Malaysia proved, a proactive Chair can make a decisive difference.
We need to keep reminding ourselves and the outside world that the alternative is worse—much worse
Younger generations may take ASEAN for granted. It has been around for decades; in peacetime it can feel like background noise. But the moment it disappears or is sidelined, the consequences will be immediate.
Without ASEAN, disputes like Cambodia–Thailand would be mediated in Washington or Beijing—not in Southeast Asia. Our capitals would be stages, not actors. That is dependency masquerading as diplomacy.
And it’s a birthday worth marking too. On August 8, 2025, ASEAN turns 58.
It has wrinkles. It has bad habits. Sometimes it seems out of touch. But it has also kept the peace in one of the world’s most diverse and dynamic regions for more than half a century.
That is not an accident—it is the result of deliberate choices by generations of Southeast Asian leaders to talk more than they shoot, to build consensus over coercion, and to keep the region’s fate in regional hands.
Minister Balakrishnan is right to raise concerns about credibility. The Thai–Cambodian clash is a wake-up call. But the answer is not to declare ASEAN dead—it is to make it stronger, faster, and more agile.
In a world where external powers are always looking for entry points, ASEAN’s relevance is not nostalgia—it is strategic necessity. As imperfect as it is, it remains Southeast Asia’s best, and perhaps only, hope for preventing local disputes from becoming global conflagrations.
On its 58th anniversary, the verdict is clear: ASEAN still matters. The day it doesn’t will be the day Southeast Asia wakes up to a far more dangerous neighbourhood.
Piti Srisangnam is Executive Director, Asean Foundation and Associate Professor of Economics, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.
Suthichai Yoon is founder of Thai digital outlet Kafedam Media Group and was a co-founder of media company Nation Group, Thailand.