Of course, this ambiguity is not new. The securitization of the global economic network dates back decades, with the United States using the following tools: Weaponizing the dollar It includes not only trade sanctions but also the use of capital for geopolitical gain. China’s past economic coercion of Australia and Vietnam is simply a borrowed play by another team.
Of course, as in past centuries, much of this competition is enabled by, and pursued because of, technological advances. US move towards shutting down TikTok – ended by law Building up the military capabilities of Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel is the latest reminder that capital costs money too, especially if it’s the wrong kind of foreign capital.
Second, technologies that disrupt the status quo bring to the forefront the role, responsibility, and allegiance of the private entities behind that disruption. Contrary to the standard practice of treating military and civilian applications of technology as separate discussions, we have seen the two become even more blurred.
One year later, the Ukraine war is no longer ‘remote’ for Southeast Asia
For example, Russia’s war against Ukraine prompted unprecedented support for Kiev from Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Clearview AI, and others. However, it also led to questions about how the private sector could be drawn in as a participant in ongoing hostilities, potentially invoking obligations to: IInternational humanitarian law.
Elon Musk He appears to have been aware of this dilemma when, despite providing coverage to Ukraine early in the war, he declined Ukraine’s request to activate Starlink in Crimea for fear of contributing to escalating the conflict. is.
On April 1, the evening launch of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket carrying 22 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit from Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Space Force Base marked the Seen over the Pacific Ocean from Encinitas, California.Photo: Reuters
The bigger question for third countries that rely heavily on Big Tech for their digital transformation agendas is how to decide whether to partner with private companies in the face of rising geopolitical tensions, especially when there is not a clear ideological alignment. It’s up to you to survive. By developing business in Ukraine, PalantirCEO Alex Karp advances his company’s “defending the West” opportunity and doubles down on his position that employees should “stand with the West and make it a better place.” I let it happen.
In Southeast Asia, Palantir’s platform is exclusively resold in Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam by Hanoi-based FTP Software. Other companies may be less overt about their positions, but profit calculations are not necessarily politically influenced, even when operating internationally under different forms of governance. It does not mean. The benefits actually seem to have a patriotic patina to them.
Third, existing policy discussions in Southeast Asia do not sufficiently take these cross-cutting changes into account. Governments in the region appear determined to increase the scope for economic adjustment as a means of strengthening international institutions. This is partly inevitable, as the region is entangled in the global trading system. They must adapt to external changes while maintaining their autonomy.
Southeast Asia’s pursuit of digital technology must go beyond economics
A focus on economic measures also allows countries to pursue their domestic agendas and avoid sensitive political and security issues with larger neighbors. Stakeholders in Southeast Asia have therefore chosen to treat access to significant mineral resources and integrated circuits through large-scale power as an opportunity to exploit in the short term. A polarized strategic environment In the long run.
Similarly, despite surrounding geopolitical pressures; submarine communication cable Although cable has an increasingly strong presence, as evidenced by changes in ownership structures, routing decisions, and the imposition of national security agreements primarily on commercial negotiations, discussions in Southeast Asia continue to focus on these It is tied to the commercial benefits of cable and improved connectivity.
Undersea cables transmit data between continents and serve as the backbone of the global Internet.Photo: Shutterstock
As a grouping, member countries are Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is also hampered by an institutional structure that divides issues into political-security, economic and socio-cultural buckets. It is the ASEAN Economic Community that is driving the digitalization agenda, as technology is primarily seen as a means of growth and development.
However, avoidance strategies are not sustainable, and ASEAN has now realized that the long game in international affairs is always about setting rules, standards, and agendas, not just facilitating the movement of goods, services, and data. We should recognize that.
If ASEAN fails to address cross-cutting challenges as it develops, the organization’s political-security, economic and socio-cultural communities risk exacerbating its own tripartite problems of currency, centrality and relevance. It will be.
The strategic picture will become even more uncertain in the coming quarters of this year. Creeping and virulent nationalism is casting a shadow over the rest of the world’s major election calendars. Technological innovation will continue to disrupt economic space and at the same time erode the traditional boundaries between war and peace.
in the end, false information It’s already a serious business. Dual-use codes can facilitate both commerce and disputes, sometimes simultaneously. It is time for Southeast Asian stakeholders to connect these increasingly converging dots.
Elina Noor is a senior fellow in the Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
