Back in November is the High Level Dialogue on ASEAN Italy Economic Relations, the initiative that The European House - Ambrosetti and the Associazione Italia ASEAN have been implementing since 2016

Di Lorenzo Tavazzi, The European House – Ambrosetti

The landmark event for bilateral relations between Italy and ASEAN countries is back: the High Level Dialogue on ASEAN Italy Economic Relations, the initiative that The European House - Ambrosetti and the Associazione Italia ASEAN have been carrying out since 2016 and this year reaches its eighth edition.

Each year the High Level Dialogue is hosted by an ASEAN country: this year it will take place in Manila, Philippines, at the Dusit Thani Hotel, on Tuesday, November 5 and Wednesday, November 6, 2024, with the support of the Philippine government, through the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), as co-organizer of the event.

The Dialogue, since its first edition in 2017 in Indonesia, and subsequent editions in Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand, along with two digital editions in 2020 and 2021, has brought together more than 3,500 presidents, CEOs, and government and institutional leaders from ASEAN countries and Italy. The 2023 edition alone, held in Bangkok, was attended by more than 450 high-profile delegates.

This year's Dialogue will address a number of priority issues for the development of Italy-ASEAN relations with a dual character in partnership opportunities between Italian companies and their counterparts in Southeast Asia. These include: the supply chain of critical raw materials for the strategic sectors of the future, artificial intelligence and digital innovation, the role of the blue economy for economic cooperation, the evolution of the creative industry, opportunities for technological and industrial collaborations in space, defense and high-tech manufacturing, financing and services to support the development of sustainable businesses and infrastructure. 

Within this framework, the specificities and opportunities offered by the Philippines, with which Italy celebrated 75 years of bilateral relations in 2022, will also be explored.

Participation in the High Level Dialogue is free and by invitation only. 

To register for the event: Registration

To get more information about previous editions of the event: High Level Dialogue website

We publish here an excerpt from an article by Maria Siow published in the South China Morning Post

The prospect of Southeast Asian countries joining BRICS has sparked heated debate among analysts: supporters argue that membership could unlock lucrative trade and geopolitical opportunities, while skeptics warn that it risks dragging the countries into the orbit of China and Russia and further eroding regional unity. Thailand and Malaysia have announced in recent weeks that they will apply to join the platform, following in the footsteps of Laos and Myanmar, which declared their interest last year. Contrary to fears that BRICS membership will erode ASEAN's unity and centrality, several Asian analysts believe the Association has the flexibility and resilience to maintain its relevance to member states. Many ASEAN members also belong to other organizations such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the Indian Ocean Association and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. Other multilateral institutions to which Asean members already belong are the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. "BRICS membership will provide access to a new source of financing for the many development needs of countries in the Southeast Asian region," said Jayant Menon, senior fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, referring to the New Development Bank established in 2015 by the BRICS countries. Indonesia and Vietnam also said they are considering the benefits of BRICS membership. Joining the group of emerging economies could provide better access to lucrative markets, increased foreign investment, and opportunities for collaboration on infrastructure projects. BRICS membership can also be seen as a strategic move to diversify economic partnerships and reduce dependence on Western-led financial institutions. The move, if managed effectively, could strengthen Southeast Asia's voice and influence in global affairs. Indonesia also aims to join the OECD within three years, as reiterated by the country's coordinating economy minister in May after the organization's secretary-general visited Jakarta and met with President Joko Widodo. According to OECD projections, Indonesia's gross domestic product will reach $10.5 trillion by 2050, making it one of the largest economies along with China, the United States and India.

Among the Indian PM's third term goals is to strengthen relations with Southeast Asia

Can Narendra Modi's third term as prime minister bring India and ASEAN closer together? A commentary by Syed Munir Khasru, published in the South China Morning Post, wonders. India's "Act East" policy is poised for recalibration. New Delhi's economic and strategic engagement with Southeast Asia soared during its first two terms, albeit with some shortcomings that require course correction. Modi may now reinvigorate this key foreign policy as India seeks to establish a stronger presence in the Indo-Pacific. On the economic front, trade and investment ties with Southeast Asian countries have received a major boost, with annual bilateral trade soaring from about $80 billion in 2014 to more than $110 billion by 2021-22. However, the existing trade agreement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations-the Asean-India Free Trade Area-is seen as strongly favoring the Asean side, frustrating India. India's exports to Southeast Asia increased moderately in FY2023 to $44 billion from $42.3 billion in the previous year. Meanwhile, imports from ASEAN countries increased at a faster pace, from $68 billion to $87.6 billion, resulting in a substantial trade deficit of $43.6 billion for India. The need to address the trade imbalance is even more urgent considering that in 2011 the trade deficit was only $5 billion. But the Modi government has not seized all opportunities for economic rapprochement with ASEAN countries due to reluctance to undertake market reforms and tariff liberalization. On the strategic front, India's efforts under the Act East policy helped bring seven Asean members into the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, an initiative to strengthen economic cooperation between the two regions. Participation in these complementary Indo-Pacific strategies allows for greater coordination of respective interests in this strategically vital region. Initiatives involving connectivity, such as the $484 million Kaladan multimodal transport project linking India to Myanmar and the trilateral India-Myanmar-Thailand highway, are examples of what collaboration between ASEAN and India can achieve in this area.

Southeast Asian countries are the most active and willing to avoid nuclear weapons proliferation in the region

By Francesca Leva

At a United Nations speech delivered last March, the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declared that the risk of a nuclear war is at “its highest point in decades” and that nuclear weapons are “growing in power, range, and stealth,” adding that “an accidental launch is one mistake, one miscalculation, one rash act away.”

Asia makes no exception: there, nuclear weapons had a profound influence on both public health and the environment, resulting in the displacement of people and hindering development, education, cultural preservation, and economic stability.

Nuclear weapons first arrived in Asia in 1945 with the tragic events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A few years later, the URSS also announced its nuclear weapons programs: during the Cold War, from 1950 to the 1990s, the MAD – “Mutual Assured Destruction” – phrase was used to describe the nuclear build-up phase between the US and the URSS. As a result, in 1957, the UN established the IAEA - International Atomic Energy Agency - recognizing the need for peaceful development of nuclear power. In 1968 the UN also adopted the NPT – Non-proliferation Treaty -, whereby only the five nuclear States of the time, the US, China, Russia, the UK, and France, were allowed to possess nuclear weapons, but would also agree to the peaceful application of nuclear technology and the reduction of their nuclear arsenals. However, several non-signatory countries of the NPT started to develop nuclear weapons on their own: among them India, Pakistan, and Israel. As a matter of fact, in 1988, India detonated three bombs close to the border with Pakistan, an action that was immediately followed by Islamabad’s nuclear tests.

What seems to be the pattern is that when a country develops a nuclear weapon, its threatened neighbors and enemies will also start nuclear testing, both for self-preservation and national pride. This dilemma poses a concrete threat to Asia, where China, Pakistan, India, North Korea, and the Russian Federation are all nuclear countries.

One of the main flashpoints in Asia is the so-called “nuclear triangle,” constituted by China, India, and Pakistan. In this case, the risk is ignited by regional competition, domestic situations and tech developments. The development of Pakistan’s full-spectrum deterrence has, in fact, led to India’s development of a preemptive counterforce nuclear system. This nuclear threat is further enhanced by US-China competition. While Beijing tries to match Washington’s nuclear capabilities, India is also incentivized to maximize its nuclear arsenal, shifting away from its traditional “no-first-use policy.” Pakistan's devolving domestic situation, as well as the increasing Pakistan–India competition, add to the risk of accidental use, inadvertent escalation, and nuclear brinkmanship. 

A further potential flashpoint is constituted by North Korea and South Korea; the risk is not only the one of a war between Seoul and Pyongyang but also the fact that both South Korea and Japan might feel pressed to develop their own nuclear arsenals. Finally, other possible tension areas are in the South-China Sea, where regional competition as well as national priorities collide.

In 1995, the ASEAN member States signed the Treaty of Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone - SEANWFZ, also known as the Bangkok Treaty – which was originally devised to reaffirm the importance of the NPT and to establish a nuclear weapons-free zone (NWFZ). There are currently five NWFZs in the world, and they all represent a regional approach to strengthening nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. In the designated areas covered by the NWFZ treaties, it is explicitly prohibited to engage in activities related to the acquisition, possession, placement, testing, and utilization of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, the States that have ratified these treaties are actively working towards establishing legally binding agreements to ensure that nuclear-armed nations refrain from deploying nuclear weapons against any of the countries within these zones.

However, there has been growing preoccupation and skepticism among the NPT signatory countries, as the five NPT states have continued to develop their own nuclear arsenals; the NPT was unable to integrate non-signatory countries – especially India, Pakistan, and Israel – and it was also ineffective in bringing back North Korea. As a consequence, in 2017, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) was crafted to reinforce the NPT and signed by all ASEAN countries besides Singapore. Although the outcome of these measures remains uncertain, it is evident that the nuclear threat represents an unacceptable risk for Asian countries, especially considering the number, the density, and the proximity of urban and inhabited areas.