.png){kind=logo}
QI Group Executive Chairman Vijay Eswaran sees opportunity where others see crisis. As U.S. trade restrictions ripple through Southeast Asia, he argues that the region’s greatest economic challenge since 1997 could become the catalyst for long-overdue integration.
The 2025 tariff disruptions exposed a core weakness in ASEAN’s structure. When Washington imposed varying tariff threats across member states, the bloc’s unity quickly fractured. Individual nations rushed to negotiate bilateral deals, eroding collective leverage. Yet Eswaran, who has spent more than 25 years building enterprises across ASEAN markets, believes the episode may prove transformative rather than disastrous.
“The tariff shockwaves of 2025 have presented ASEAN with its most significant test of unity since the 1997 financial crisis and also its greatest opportunity for transformation,” he wrote in a recent analysis of the region’s response to trade pressures.
While global attention has centered on BRICS and its talk of de-dollarization, ASEAN has been quietly putting functional alternatives in place. Malaysia’s Regional Payment Connectivity system, launched with Cambodia in April, allows citizens to make cross-border QR payments in local currencies without touching the U.S. dollar.
The difference is tangible. Where BRICS issued symbolic alternative currency notes, ASEAN has created a network that already processes millions of transactions. Systems such as Thailand’s PromptPay, Singapore’s PayNow, Indonesia’s QRIS, and Vietnam’s VietQR are now interconnected, forming an operational regional payment grid.
“This is not theoretical de-dollarization; it is already influencing millions of daily transactions across the region,” Eswaran notes. He attributes this progress to ASEAN’s origins in economic necessity rather than political ideology. Like APEC, the bloc succeeds because it prioritizes practical cooperation over symbolic posturing—a distinction that has grown more valuable amid intensifying global rivalries.
Even Beijing has adapted to ASEAN’s pragmatic framework. China’s $15 billion infrastructure fund for the region includes local content requirements and environmental safeguards, a recognition of ASEAN’s increasing bargaining power despite its internal divisions.
Eswaran advocates what he calls “strategic multi-alignment,” an evolution from Cold War non-alignment that enables nations to pursue multiple partnerships simultaneously. The approach maximizes economic opportunity while minimizing dependency on any single power.
Recent trade figures demonstrate its effectiveness. ASEAN’s commerce with China expanded 15 percent in 2024, while trade with the United States grew 12 percent and with the European Union 18 percent. Singapore exemplifies this balance, finalizing $8.2 billion in Chinese agreements while strengthening defense ties with Washington and deepening commercial partnerships in Europe.
Malaysia’s recent diplomacy provides another example. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim secured $10 billion in Russian energy and technology deals while maintaining $80.2 billion in annual trade with the United States. “Within ASEAN boardrooms, the question has shifted from how to avoid taking sides to how to benefit from all sides,” Eswaran observes.
This is not fence-sitting, he argues, but sophisticated portfolio management. During China’s April diplomatic tour of Malaysia, Cambodia, and Vietnam, regional leaders demonstrated willingness to engage without surrendering autonomy. With a combined economy of $3.6 trillion and a population of 680 million, ASEAN wields influence that individual members alone cannot match.
For ASEAN to fully capitalize on this leverage, Eswaran says institutional reform is essential. The bloc’s consensus-driven model, effective during its early years, now impedes decisive action. Vietnam’s decision to pursue its own negotiations during the tariff crisis illustrated how quickly national interests can override collective priorities.
Malaysia’s 15 Priority Economic Deliverables for 2025 offer one possible blueprint. Upgrading the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement and finalizing the Digital Economy Framework Agreement would establish clearer commitments and make collaboration more profitable than competition. Eswaran describes this goal as creating “functional multipolarity,” a system in which economic integration supports regional resilience while maintaining global connectivity.
The region’s fundamentals remain strong. ASEAN economies grew 4.3 percent in 2024 and are projected to sustain roughly 4 percent growth through 2025, outpacing both the United States and the European Union. The ASEAN–GCC partnership could add $50 billion in new trade by 2027, while the region’s digital economy is on course to reach $1 trillion by the end of the decade.
Maritime industries already generate $2.4 trillion annually, establishing Southeast Asia as a global leader in the blue economy. Gulf sovereign wealth funds have become increasingly active in the region, diversifying capital inflows beyond traditional Western and Chinese sources.
“The lesson extends beyond Southeast Asia,” Eswaran concludes. “Regional blocs from the African Union to Mercosur face similar dilemmas. By embedding digital trade frameworks, interoperable financial systems, and collective mechanisms, ASEAN can set a precedent for how regions preserve autonomy in a multipolar era.”
The stakes are high and the window for action is narrow. As major powers intensify competition, middle powers must decide whether they will shape the emerging order or be shaped by it. For Eswaran, ASEAN’s response to the current trade turbulence will determine not only its economic trajectory but also the viability of regional cooperation in a rapidly changing world.
