Asean Can Avoid The US-China Tussle Over AI

ASIAN nations face a stark choice. The US AI Action Plan, with its explicit goal to "counter Chinese influence in international governance bodies", frames the issue in binary terms: in the race for AI dominance, you are either with us or against us.

Infrastructure as control

AI requires infrastructure and know-how: data centres, energy, and technological expertise to develop, deploy, and upkeep. The heart of AI is not just data, but advanced semiconductor chips. The emphasis on semiconductor export controls in the US AI Action Plan means developing nations cannot access cutting-edge chips without Washington's approval. China offers alternatives — at the cost of explicitly aligning yourself with Beijing. Countries adopting either system inherit not just technology, but the social values encoded within algorithmic decision-making.

Countries across Asia face a choice: whose technology will define their digital destiny?

Technical infrastructure quickly becomes governmental infrastructure. Chinese smart city systems carry embedded assumptions that state surveillance is a public good. US platforms embed the belief that market competition drives innovation. Both overlook other national approaches like Singapore's "Smart Nation" which balances state guidance with market efficiency, or Japan's "Society 5.0" that prioritises social cohesion.

The binary trap

This forced choice isn't theoretical — it's embedded in the technological and institutional architecture itself, creating pressure points where neutrality becomes impossible.

US export controls, tightened since October 2022, don't just restrict China's access to advanced chips, they create compliance webs that ensnare Southeast Asian companies. Any firm using US-origin semiconductor technology faces the same restrictions when dealing with Chinese partners in advanced AI projects.

This creates cascading choices: access to cutting-edge US AI capabilities requires demonstrating alignment with US strategic priorities. Meanwhile, China's Digital Silk Road offers alternative pathways. However, accepting Chinese infrastructure means operating within Beijing's governance frameworks and potentially alienating the West. The middle ground of "neutral cooperation" with both sides becomes technologically unfeasible.

The governance standards trap

The contest for dominance in international AI governance standards sets another trap. Current Western standards are founded on assumptions of individual rights. The Chinese approach emphasises state coordination. Choosing which AI system will power a nation's digital future also means aligning with the institutional structures, cultural values, and economic principles embedded in those systems. Neither framework reflects Asean's diversity, values like Thai kreng jai (considerate reluctance), Indonesian gotong royong (community cooperation), Filipino kapamilya (family-orientation), or Malaysian unity ideals.

Some countries have begun charting their own path. Malaysia's "National Guidelines for AI Governance and Ethics" incorporate the Rukun Negara, embedding principles such as Belief in God, Loyalty to King and Country, and Courtesy and Morality. Japan's "Social Principles of Human-Centric AI" ground its "Society 5.0" vision in social cohesion rather than pure market or state control.

A third way: The Asean AI collaborative

But choosing between the US and China isn't inevitable. On top of current efforts by Asean to build an AI Safety Network, I think an alternative is an Asean AI collaborative framework that preserves cultural diversity while building technological sovereignty.

The approach begins by recognising different AI readiness stages among the Asean 6 countries: Singapore leads the region, Malaysia and Thailand have intermediate frameworks, and Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam are building foundational capacity. Rather than forcing identical frameworks, tiered cooperation allows countries to contribute according to capabilities while benefiting from regional coordination.

Singapore's SEA-LION project offers the next step forward: open-source language models pre-trained for Southeast Asia, capturing regional diversity that Western and Chinese systems neglect. This paves the path for Asean nations to build their own sovereign AI models, and along with them, their national AI governance frameworks.

Building digital sovereignty

Four practical steps can make the vision of the Asean AI collaborative a reality:

Establish an Asian AI infrastructure consortium: Pool resources for shared cloud infrastructure and regional AI training, following models like the Asian Development Bank.

Create culturally-adaptive governance frameworks: Embed Asian philosophical and ethical principles from the ground up: community impact assessments, relationship-based accountability, collective consultation processes.

Establish protections against algorithmic colonialism: An Asian AI Bill of Rights guaranteeing cultural preservation, economic self-determination, and technological choice.

Build regional capacity through culturally-grounded education: AI governance starting with Asian traditions — Confucian harmony, Buddhist mindfulness, Islamic justice — rather than Western individual rights.

The US AI Action Plan frames the future as a choice between American individualism and Chinese collectivism. Asean need not choose either. Digital sovereignty means building systems that reflect our values.

Nigel Hee is the managing director of OpenNexus Consulting, a boutique regional government relations and research consultancy.

Source: Theedgemarkets