The conversation around ASEAN's role in an increasingly fractured global landscape has reached a critical juncture. At the opening of the 39th Asia-Pacific Roundtable in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia executive chairman Datuk Prof Dr Mohd Faiz Abdullah argued persuasively that the region can no longer afford to be a passive player, merely adjusting to external shocks. Instead, ASEAN and its neighbours must move decisively toward defining their own destinies through purposeful agency and collective determination.
The conceptual shift that Mohd Faiz articulated marks a departure from the defensive postures that have characterised regional strategy in recent years. Rather than viewing agency solely as the prerogative of great powers, he reframed it as a practical necessity for smaller and medium-sized nations seeking to preserve strategic autonomy in an era of intensifying great-power competition. This distinction is particularly relevant for Malaysia and other ASEAN members caught between competing interests of major powers. Agency, in this framing, is not about confrontation but about deliberate choice—the capacity to chart courses independently despite mounting external pressures.
Central to this argument is the proposition that resilience and internal capacity-building must precede meaningful regional action. Mohd Faiz emphasised that countries must first strengthen their foundations at both national and regional levels, ensuring consistent delivery of essential public goods even when global conditions deteriorate or geopolitical tensions escalate. For ASEAN, this translates into improving institutional effectiveness, deepening economic integration, and building mechanisms that allow members to weather external shocks without fragmenting. Without this foundational resilience, regional collective action becomes merely aspirational rather than transformative.
The philosophical underpinning of Mohd Faiz's remarks rests on a fundamental assertion: states are not passive subjects of history but active authors of it. This distinction, though seemingly academic, carries profound implications for how Southeast Asian nations should approach their strategic challenges. It suggests that ASEAN need not accept a marginal role in shaping the international order. Instead, member states possess the capacity to define terms, establish norms, and influence outcomes through coordinated effort and strategic engagement. This perspective directly challenges the prevailing narrative of ASEAN as primarily a balancing mechanism between rival powers.
The 39th Asia-Pacific Roundtable, running from June 30 to July 2 under the theme Accelerating Agency and Action, represents a deliberate organisational choice to pivot from defensive posturing toward proactive strategising. The conference agenda identifies four critical focal points that will dominate regional security discussions in coming years: the intensifying China-India competition, ASEAN's institutional relevance amid major-power rivalry, the resurgence of nuclear security considerations, and the geopolitics surrounding critical minerals and supply-chain vulnerabilities. Each of these domains presents both risks and opportunities for Southeast Asian nations willing to engage strategically.
Mohd Faiz stressed that the roundtable functions not as an intellectual echo chamber but as a forum where established assumptions can be genuinely questioned and challenging ideas can emerge. This emphasis on intellectual honesty and uncomfortable questions distinguishes track 2 diplomacy—unofficial dialogues among scholars, former officials, and strategic thinkers—from formal state-level negotiations. Because track 2 forums operate outside official constraints, they can explore possibilities that governments might initially dismiss as politically inconvenient. For ASEAN, this capacity to think beyond current orthodoxies becomes increasingly valuable as the region confronts unprecedented strategic complexity.
The inclusion of high-profile participants underscores the seriousness with which regional stakeholders view these discussions. Australian High Commissioner to Malaysia Danielle Heinecke's participation in a fireside chat on middle-power agency reflects broader recognition that countries of Australia's weight—neither superpowers nor minor players—face distinctive challenges in preserving autonomy. Southeast Asian nations occupy similar terrain, neither commanding the resources of China or India nor lacking influence. Understanding how comparable nations maintain agency in competitive environments carries direct relevance for Malaysia's own strategic positioning.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's scheduled keynote address on Thursday signals the Malaysian government's commitment to these strategic conversations. The fact that the nation's chief executive devotes time to addressing track 2 diplomacy forums demonstrates recognition that informal intellectual exchanges increasingly shape official thinking. Anwar's participation lends weight to the discussion while providing an opportunity for the government to communicate its own thinking on regional agency and ASEAN's future trajectory. This integration of official and unofficial channels characterises Malaysia's sophisticated approach to strategic communication.
For Malaysia specifically, the emphasis on regional agency carries particular salience. As ASEAN chair in 2024 and a nation juggling relationships with multiple major powers, Malaysia benefits from a framework that elevates Southeast Asian collective action above reactive adjustments to external pressures. The agency-centred approach Mohd Faiz outlined provides intellectual justification for ASEAN to assert itself more confidently in defining regional norms and outcomes. This is especially relevant as issues like maritime security, supply-chain resilience, and technology governance increasingly demand regional initiatives rather than simply accepting solutions imposed or proposed by external actors.
The shift from previous roundtable iterations reflects broader evolution in strategic thinking across the region. Earlier conferences focused substantially on navigation and balancing—how to traverse dangerous geopolitical waters without capsizing. The current emphasis on agency and acceleration suggests growing confidence that ASEAN can move beyond mere survival toward shaping broader regional architecture. This mindset shift, though incremental, carries significance for how Southeast Asia engages with major-power competition in the years ahead. Rather than viewing regional autonomy as merely preserving existing arrangements, the new framing suggests proactively creating conditions favourable to ASEAN interests.
The four strategic fault lines identified—China-India dynamics, ASEAN resilience amid rivalry, nuclear security, and critical-minerals geopolitics—represent interconnected challenges requiring integrated responses. Southeast Asian nations cannot address each in isolation. The China-India axis directly influences ASEAN's capacity to maintain institutional coherence; nuclear security concerns in the region reflect broader strategic competition; supply-chain vulnerabilities connect to both major-power rivalry and technology competition. Comprehensive regional agency requires analysing these elements as part of coherent strategic fabric rather than disconnected problems.
What distinguishes this year's conference is its implicit assertion that ASEAN can graduate from defensive positioning toward confident engagement. This does not mean ignoring external pressures or pretending that great-power competition will simply disappear. Rather, it reflects recognition that the region possesses resources, strategic location, and institutional experience enabling more assertive role-playing. Malaysia and its ASEAN partners, through coordinated action and strengthened resilience, can genuinely influence how regional order evolves. This framing offers both intellectual foundation and practical roadmap for Southeast Asian strategic autonomy in an era of systemic competition.
