For Southeast Asians, Israel-Gaza war is more worrying than even South China Sea row – as extremism fears grow

The Gaza war resonated deeply among Southeast Asian respondents in a recent survey, given the significant proportion of Muslims in the region
The State of Southeast 2024 Survey also highlighted concerns about the global rules-based order and a potential rise in extremist activities

Joanne Lin

Published: 11:00am, 14 Apr 2024

Why you can trust SCMP

The Israel-Gaza war has become the foremost geopolitical concern in Southeast Asia, surpassing even the South China Sea dispute, according to the State of Southeast 2024 Survey.

Despite its geographical distance from Southeast Asia, the Gaza conflict resonated deeply among respondents in the region.

This concern is understandable given that more than 40 per cent of Southeast Asia’s population are Muslims, with the majority living in Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. Additionally, countries like Singapore, where around 15 per cent of its population are Muslims, have highlighted this conflict as the top concern for their governments.

The South China Sea dispute was the second most pressing concern among Southeast Asian respondents, followed by the Russia-Ukraine war and global scam operations, both in third place. A total of 1,994 people from across the region took part in the survey, which was conducted by the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute’s Asean Studies Centre.

The Israel-Gaza war has not only significantly influenced the domestic politics of Muslim-majority countries in Southeast Asia, but also sparked divisive views in the region. In the initial stages of the conflict following the Hamas attack on October 7, Southeast Asian countries displayed a range of official positions.

Countries like Singapore and the Philippines quickly condemned Hamas’ attacks on Israel, whereas others like Indonesia and Malaysia expressed solidarity with the Palestinians. This divergence was evidenced in the statement by Asean foreign ministers, which referenced the varied national stances on the conflict.

As the conflict surpasses the six-month mark – marked by escalating casualties, including aid workers, and a worsening humanitarian situation – multiple perspectives have emerged. The survey was conducted in January and February; even then, a large segment of regional respondents (41.8 per cent) voiced concerns that Israel’s attack on Gaza had gone too far.

This sentiment was particularly dominant among the three Muslim-majority countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations: Brunei (79.2 per cent), Indonesia (77.7 per cent) and Malaysia (64.4 per cent). Respondents from Singapore who felt the same stood at 46.2 per cent. Singaporeans’ views echoed statements their Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan has made on multiple occasions, urging Israel to prioritise the safety and security of civilians, especially during his latest visit to the Middle East.

By comparison, 17.7 per cent of respondents from the Philippines – the highest among all countries surveyed – maintained that Israel has the right to retaliate within the bounds of international law and felt that Hamas’ attack on Israel cannot be justified, a position endorsed by the Philippine government. Apart from identifying Israel as the “promised land” due to being majority Catholic/Christian, Filipinos’ economic considerations are also driving their support for Israel, with the country employing more than 30,000 Filipino workers, mostly as carers.

As the Israel-Gaza war worsens and remains high on Southeast Asia’s agenda, its governments are grappling with the potential impact of views that are seemingly growing divergent. The repercussions of this crisis will be significant, especially if it escalates into a wider conflict involving more Middle Eastern countries. The largest group of respondents (29.7 per cent) in the survey expressed concern over the potential rise of extremist activities, which could significantly affect domestic and regional security.

This apprehension was particularly pronounced in countries like Singapore, Cambodia, and the Philippines, which perceive Hamas as a terrorist group. Experts have cautioned that a prolonged Israel-Gaza conflict could be exploited by terrorist organisations to radicalise individuals. Likewise, the erosion of domestic social cohesion due to potential religious divisions is a pressing concern for countries like Thailand, where 31.8 per cent of respondents ranked this highest among their concerns. This issue also weighed heavily in Myanmar and Singapore.

In Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Myanmar and Vietnam, the predominant concern of respondents was diminished trust in international law and the rules-based order. Malaysia and Indonesia have for decades stridently opposed Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories, with their denunciations most recently expressed at International Court of Justice proceedings. Malaysia has additionally supported South Africa’s recent case at the court, accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians.

The importance of upholding international law, particularly international humanitarian law – a key principle of Asean – resonated deeply with Southeast Asians. Most respondents believed that the international community should prioritise supporting a ceasefire and provision of humanitarian aid (41.3 per cent). A significant proportion of respondents from Brunei, Indonesia, and Malaysia supported Palestinian self-determination as the second most favoured option (17.5 per cent). The largest proportion of respondents in favour of a two-state solution as the only outcome for Israel and Palestine was from Singapore (24.9 per cent). This was the region’s third most prevalent option (16.2 per cent) and also Asean’s common position in the joint foreign ministers’ statement released in October last year.

Singapore’s principled stand in international affairs is evident in its consistent advocacy for a humanitarian truce in Gaza and its balanced engagement with both Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and other key stakeholders in the Middle East. Foreign Minister Balakrishnan has emphasised that a negotiated two-state solution remains the sole viable path towards achieving a comprehensive, just, and durable peace in the Middle East. A clear majority of Singaporean respondents (57.2 per cent) supported their government’s position.

Unwavering support for the Palestinian cause from the governments of Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia garnered strong approval from their respective citizens who took part in the survey. This sentiment in the three countries correspondingly led to a drop in support – the lowest in the region – for US leadership in maintaining the rules-based order and upholding international law. This was also evident in the three countries’ preferred alignment choice and perceptions of the United States as a strategic partner and provider of regional security, ratings for which similarly declined. Analysts have attributed the respondents’ diminished confidence in the US to the Israel-Gaza conflict, citing Washington’s staunch pro-Israel stance, which many perceived as contradictory to the principles of a rules-based order.

Questions on the Israel-Gaza war in the survey have brought to light the diverse perspectives of the region, highlighting its potential vulnerability to religious polarisation. Despite similarly controversial violations of international law by Russia when it attacked Ukraine in 2022, and the looming threat of nuclear war on the European continent, Southeast Asia is more fixated on current events in the Middle East. Bridging the divides among religious communities in the region concerning the Israel-Gaza conflict presents a formidable challenge. Asean governments must navigate this terrain carefully to foster domestic cohesion and regional unity.

Asean should maintain its focus on rules-based approaches and encourage diplomacy and cooperation to counter any potential rise in violent extremism as the war drags on.

Joanne Lin is a Co-coordinator of the Asean Studies Centre at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, and Lead Researcher (Political-Security) at the Centre. This article was first published on the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute’s commentary website fulcrum.sg.

Post