Thread on narratives: one often sees the narrative that South East Asian states do not want to “choose” between the US and China. Often this claim is found in a US domestic context, promoting policies that dampen our ability to compete with the PRC. This narrative is problematic:

First, it makes a claim about a view from SE Asia as if there was a unified view. Think tankers claim to have heard it again and again in-region. The actual reality on the ground is a disparate set of views mirroring the various stakes SE Asian nations have w/ regards to the PRC.

One does not hear this view from states that have real threats against their sovereignty from PRC absolutist and revisionist claims. I doubt they feel as though they are being forced to choose between the US and PRC. They’re intent on defending their sovereignty.

Second, implicit in the assertion is that this a “great power politics” between two nations, quietly ignoring that each power “represents” a different type of order. The US stands for UNCLOS, free and open maritime, and sovereignty. The PRC order is unclear but from indicators...

Looks as though the PRC is a “first-among-equals”, with power - not rules - being the benchmark for the resolving of issues. It’s resolution approach is preferably bilateral and implicit in its approach is combination of wearing down opponents with lawfare, economic coercion, etc

SE Asia is not choosing between two powers, but between two ways of doing business. In one order, they have legitimate claims in the SCS and resources, in the other, they only have legitimate claims vis a vis Beijing’s preferences. It’s a return to a strictly hierarchical system.

Thirdly, there are differences to how the US & PRC “do business”. Both seek to expand their norms and values. Only the PRC has a United Front approach, that subverts the sovereignty of its intended targets. Those states that seek to halt this encroachment *Australia are punished.

While US has NGOs, media, etc, they are ultimately not linked to US state-direction. By comparison, PRC versions are directed by the PRC and CCP and are quite powerful INSIDE the domestic politics of other states through economic coercion & lobbying.

This means that states that are close to the PRC will - over time - lose much sovereignty and ability to make choices against PRC preferences across range of domestic areas, incl resources, foreign policy, etc.

To sum up:
1. What SE Asian view? There’s a broad spectrum.
2. Not just great power competition. Competition of different types of ‘order’. Nominally flat vs nominally hierarchical.
3. State sovereignty is deeply compromised under a PRC hierarchical order.

So, the statement should not be:
“Don’t make us choose between the US and China.”
It should be:
“Don’t make us choose between a free and open maritime order or a hierarchical, quasi-tributary order.”
~Which is fine, as long as u know what the choices really are...