Reinflating Zelinsky's Singapore Speech That May Have Fallen Flat
Chris Cottorone
President, TriOrient Investments. Co-Chair, Private Equity Committee at AmCham Taiwan.
Concerns over how effective Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was in wooing support in Asia at the Shangri-La Dialogue may impact not just Ukraine's security, but Taiwan's as well. Getting it right at the coming peace summit in Switzerland in mid-June will be critical for both.
Starting off the 21st IISS Shangri-La Dialogue that was held from May 31st till June 2nd in Singapore were opening remarks from Kajsa Ollongren, the Netherland's Minister of Defense, at the Special Session on "Deterrence and Reassurance in the Asia-Pacific." Ollongren recognized that it was important for those attending the event to:
"...keep that dialogue going, to continue to talk even, and especially when perspectives differ – and necessarily they do because we are in different regions with different cultures and different traditions. However, what we all have recognised, I think, is that the world has become a more dangerous place."
Ollongren continued:
"And the geopolitical landscape, it changes, and that means that old truths no longer hold true, that uncertainty, unpredictability and instability, that they grow. And what does that mean for reassurance and deterrence in this world of swiftly shifting power dynamics?"
Only about a week later, Ollongren's concerns would prove prophetic and be put on display as the Dutch frigate, HNLMS Tromp, and a Dutch helicopter were approached and encircled at times by two Chinese air force fighter jets and also a Chinese helicopter. The aggressive move by China occurred as the Dutch vessel and helicopter traveled through international air space and waters in the East China Sea.
The Netherlands Defense Ministry warned afterward that such a move by China created a potential unsafe situation. This was particularly concerning given it occurred in a region that has increasingly seen the United States, Japan, the Philippines and Australia, among others, carefully trying to avoid military miscalculations and mishaps whenever Beijing decides its wants to warn vessels in international waters to steer clear of what the Chinese Communist Party perceives as Chinese territory.
Conveying a Message in Singapore
In between the Dutch defense minister's comments and the incident involving the Netherlands and China in the East China Sea saw Bloomberg News ' Karishma Vaswani in her commentary raise important considerations with regards to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue during his visit to Singapore.
Vaswani wrote:
"(Zelenskiy would) come to sell the idea that Asia needs to join Ukraine in its life-or-death fight for democracy against autocracy. But his pitch fell flat. Perhaps it was always destined to fail: Zelenskiy and his Western partners?have long ignored that Asia could provide support to Ukraine in the face of Russia’s war. It is now too little, too late."?
While some can point out Mr. Zelenskiy's lateness in seeking support in Asia was in part due to his having his hands full these past two years trying to win a war and also secure a supply of weapons from Western powers, Vaswani raised a crucial point. Western leaders need to address and respond to if they are to find the support for Ukraine that the country’s president took the time to travel to Singapore to win.
Arguing that Mr. Zelenskiy's attempt to win support from leaders in Asia had fallen flat, Vaswani suggested how European powers and the United States ought to understand the concerns by nations in Asia share on what the war in Ukraine means to them. Among those concerns included how other current conflicts were apparently not being highlighted or addressed at the event.
Helping explain those concerns was Dewi Fortuna Anwar, a research professor at the Indonesian National Research and Innovation Agency who Vaswani interviewed. Anwar argued that there was skepticism about Mr. Zelenskiy’s visit to Singapore, based on sentiment widely held in some parts of Asia that the West cares more about Russia’s war in Ukraine than it does about Israel’s war against Hamas, which has seen tens of thousands of civilians killed in Gaza following an attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7, 2023.
The latter conflict is, as the professor pointed out, a subject very close to the hearts of countries in Asia that have large Muslim populations, such as Indonesia and Malaysia. Dr. Anwar recommended that Mr. Zelenskiy recognize that when he talks about Russia undermining the rule of law, as some in the region see the West’s support of Israel and the complete disregard of Palestinian suffering also undermining it as well.
For its part, however, the Philippines - which, too, has a sizable Muslim population - and its leader, Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., appeared to be willing to focus instead on the significance of the war in Ukraine. This was not surprising as the Philippines increasingly finds itself threatened by Russia's greatest supporter, Beijing, in the South China Sea.
Rising Conflicts
Vaswani's suggests Mr. Zelenskiy and his supporters in Europe and the United States focus on the explaining the sanctity of borders is important if they want their calls for support to resonate with leaders around Asia, in addition to understanding the sentiment on Gaza to which Anwar refers.
Such advice on Vaswani’s part is critical these days. Those who do not voice their concerns when others' borders are violated may themselves find their borders being crossed by invading troops one day as well. This includes a variety of nations in Asia that have faced hostile forces in their vicinities, including India, South Korea, and Japan as well as the Philippines. Perhaps, though, the biggest threat of such an invasion exists in Asia's potential next Ukraine: Taiwan.
Although some following the dialogue in Singapore may believe Mr. Zelenskiy's speech fell flat, the increasingly aggressive behavior by Beijing toward Taiwan since the island’s new president, Lai Ching-te, took office on May 20th requires there be a serious effort to help re-inflate the Ukraine president's original goals for the dialogue as he prepares for a coming peace summit in Switzerland in that starts on June 15th. There will be considerably more at stake in Switzerland, and not rising to the occasion could create severe problems for not just Ukraine but Europe and even nations around Asia as well.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the War in Gaza, and Beijing's possible invasion of Taiwan are all serious problems for the world to address. However, these flashpoints neither can be grouped together nor can they be ignored individually simply by any leaders who prefer picking or choosing which conflict or group they want to support.
Vaswani noted that so far, only two leaders are slated to attend the coming summit from Asia - José Ramos-Horta, the president of Timor-Leste, and Sim Ann, Singapore’s senior minister of state for foreign affairs - with even the leader of the Philippines not yet committed to attending. Besides Dr. Anwar’s assessment on why leaders in Asia may have not warmed up fully to Mr. Zelenskiy’s overtures, there were likely additional reasons for their response.
Keep in mind that the dialogue's venue was in the backyard of the region's major power, China. All the participants in Singapore watched how China's Defense Minister Dong Jun sought to remind - rather emphatically - the world's superpower the United States that it better respect Beijing's policy on Taiwan. Dong added that any attempt to create an Asian version of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which was a key focus of U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's remarks, will face opposition from Beijing.
Making Important Comparisons
In order to avoid a repeat of his performance in Singapore, Mr. Zelenskiy as well as his supporters when in Switzerland will need to confront the concerns by some in Asia head-on, rather than try to avoid them. Ukraine’s president can make credible arguments as to why Asia's failure to support Ukraine in its war with Russia would be short-sighted and result in long-term problems for not just Europe but Asia as well as globally.
To do so, Mr. Zelenskiy first must hit home the point that silence in the face of barbarism only encourages aggressors elsewhere to threaten others. As Moscow seeks to unravel a global, rules-based system in order to assist Russian President Vladmir Putin in re-creating what he believes is Russia’s historical empire, Chinese leader Xi Jinping also seeks to achieve his “China Dream,” which includes taking nearby territory such as Taiwan, by force if necessary.
Here, too, Vaswani's advice to the Ukraine leader to particularly focus on explaining the sanctity of borders is again wise counsel and needs to be understood all leaders in Asia. However, a second and perhaps a more important point will need to be made by Mr. Zelenskiy if he is to ensure leaders around Asia understand the dilemma that his people face, as well as why they as leaders of nations in Asia with large Muslim populations must look at current geopolitical hostilities differently than they do now.
While recognizing Dr. Anwar's argument that there exists a view among Asian nations that have large Muslim populations that the West does not care about the tens of thousands of lives being lost in the War in Gaza and thus they feel a special solidarity with those in Gaza, Mr. Zelenskiy will need to make an important distinction the is borne from the realities of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Just as the Slavs in Ukraine have little if anything in common with those Slavs in Russia who support Moscow’s aggression in order to assist Mr. Putin’s desire to re-build Russia’s empire via invasion, Mr. Zelenskiy will need to convince Asia’s Muslim leaders that they as Muslims in Asia, too, have little in common with those in Hamas who launched a bloody attack in order to annihilate the Israelis.
Here, Mr. Zelenskiy may want to refer to the recent findings in the UN Commission of Inquiry (COI) report that covers the period from October 7th to December 31st, 2023, which accuses Hamas of intentionally directing attacks against civilians and committing murder or wilful killing, among many other atrocities. While the report also lists Israeli war crimes, such a report by a United Nations which has demonstrated its concern of Israel's war in Gaza will prompt leaders in Asia to carefully consider where and with whom they wish to throw their support and sympathy.
Making a such a distinction will be an important one for Asia, which as a region has had address tensions between local populations and Chinese communities in the past. Those leaders in Asia who today place greater importance on ethnicity, race or religion as a key determinant when voicing their support could one day backfire. An increasingly aggressive Chinese Communist Party that believes its own security at home and potential leadership abroad will be determined by how much it defends Chinese in other regions which the party believes are being treated unfairly could make leaders around Asia regret that they supported the politics of identity.
For their part, leaders in Europe will need to also remind their counterparts in Asia of the fascist powers who in the 20th century annexed territory by vowing to free their oppressed ethnic brethren in other countries. This rationale is exactly the one Mr. Putin uses today in this century with his invasion of Ukraine.
At the same time, those in Asia who view themselves as ethnically Chinese will also need to consider what Moscow's and, in the future, Beijing's, vision of a new world order will mean for them. If they understand that the Chinese who run the Communist Party in Beijing have little in common with those Chinese living in free societies elsewhere which respect the rule of law and protect human rights, then the threat that Taiwan increasingly faces will become more personal to others around Asia. So far, there has been a concerning silence by many ethnically Chinese communities around Asia toward Beijing's intimidation of Taiwan, indicating that they either hope the tensions will someday go away or that Beijing perhaps is justified in its attempt to annex the island.
If anything, the lessons of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its significance for Taiwan should clearly show that leaders hoping to rebuild past empires will go to great lengths militarily - and do great damage to peace and economic stability along the way - to achieve their goals. Empire-building eventually becomes a never-ending affair, history has shown, with leaders conquering societies well beyond those lands nearest to them that they vanquished.
Taipei and Tel Aviv
Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, many have sought to identify the similarities between the war in eastern Europe and the potential one that may occur should Beijing decide to invade Taiwan. Helping leaders in Asia as well as in Europe understanding the precarious existence of Taiwan will best be explained by those leaders from the United States who will make their way to the peace summit in Switzerland.
Having both important responsibilities and special relationships with Taipei and Tel Aviv, American officials at the summit in Switzerland can assist both Mr. Zelenskiy and, indirectly, Taiwan's new president by explaining that America's support for Tel Aviv in its war in Gaza has been more about ensuring that no power feels justified it can wipe Israel or any nation off the face of the map. They can also note that the increasing pressure being placed on Israel by the U.S. Biden administration in order to reduce civilian casualties and focus on rescuing hostages.
United States officials will then have the opportunity to draw the logical connection between the attack on Israel by extremists in Gaza with the increasingly extreme policies toward Taiwan by a party in Beijing that in reality constitutes only seven percent of China's population of 1.4 billion. This reinforce the argument that the threat to peace has often been extremism and the violence extremists use to justify their attacks on others, rather than simply underlying cultural differences that exist between two societies.
It would be understandable if all those attending the peace summit demand that peace in Gaza be viewed as importantly by the United States as Washington values peace in Ukraine. Any attempts to steer the conversation away from tensions in Gaza would be a mistake, particularly at a summit focused on peace. Otherwise, and as Vaswani argues, calls for support of Ukraine by Mr. Zelenskiy and his supporters will likely continue to fall flat with leaders in Asia.
Moreover, the United States and Israel, for that matter, should be able to withstand such criticism of their policies and even defend them if they intend to win the kind of support against barbarism and hatred that threatens their own societies as well.
Just wars - whether they are being fought by societies trying to avoid annihilation, combating aggressors, or simply battles of words being waged to win hearts and minds - are not won by stifling dissent and opposition but by explaining where the aggressors are misguided and their supporters are being misled. Importantly, societies that want most to avoid violence and end war in the pursuit of peace must be willing to accept and encourage debate and even disagreement, principles upon which all democracies were built and a condition that all dictators fear. With that, the voices and concerns of leaders in Asia can play a critical role in ensuring that the solutions in Switzerland go far beyond resolving just the tensions in Ukraine.
A Reluctance to Choose Sides in Asia
Throughout much of the rising competition between the United States and China has been met in Asia with increasing concern and an unwillingness by many around the region to "choose sides." As the former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and current The Brookings Institution senior fellow Dr. Richard C. Bush observed during a speech in Taipei several years ago - when the trade war tensions between the United States and China were just getting underway - Asia for decades had looked to America for security on the one hand and China for growth on the other.
Since then, the battle has only grown fiercer between the two global powers, with Beijing's aggressiveness as well as its economic problems simultaneously becoming more concerning for many in the region. While this would appear to provide Washington with a chance to win support for its objectives given that the United States' economy appears to be holding up better than China's, there continues to be a reluctance by some leaders around Asia in throwing their support with America.
Just as choosing which side to support - regardless of whether it is a trade war between the United States and China, a war of aggression in Ukraine or in Gaza, or someday an invasion in the Taiwan Strait - should not be based on race, ethnicity or religion, the need for leaders and their societies to decide which side to support in the conflict between the United States and China should be based more on what will further their own long-term freedom and independence rather than what will simply reduce their immediate threats.
Moreover, such an intertwined global economy and the likelihood that the tensions between the United States, China and even Europe will give most nations little ability to remain silent on the sidelines. Picking sides once hostilities heat up should prompt nations to favor those sides which are calling for the sanctity of borders, as Vaswani suggests, as well as protection of all people's rights and freedoms.
The leaders of predominately Muslim nations and communities?in Asia to which Professor Anwar refers should themselves respect this idea. They and their societies?have worked too hard to throw their support behind groups or movements which may not completely share those values for which they in Asia have worked hard to achieve here in the region.
Asia's leaders when listening and assessing the various arguments will at the same time have to be careful not to follow those who call for aggression against others so that empires can be built or so their enemies can be subjugated. They will eventually - or even immediately - find that such strongmen making those calls are not interested in honoring the sacrifices the peoples of Asia have made over the years to achieve rapid economic growth, which was largely won via the enacting of policies that have fostered peaceful co-existence.?Instead, such autocrats are interested only in seeing their own missions being achieved. It is doubtful that Messrs. Putin or Xi seriously ponder how small countries in their region will view their invasion plans, or the impact such plans may have on those nations' economies.
Reinflating the Lessons of the Past for a Peaceful Future
Arguably what has benefited Asia's rise economically in the latter half of the 20th century has been a desire to maintain peace in the region, as opposed to the aggression and invasion that dominated Asia in the first half of that century.
Leaders at the summit will want to keep in mind that Russia when it decided in February two years ago to attack Ukraine destroyed the peace on a European continent that had largely remained free of cross-border invasions since 1945. Meanwhile, Hamas launched an attack on its neighbor in October last year, ironically as a potential major step toward peace in the region was being presented in the form of Saudi Arabia recognizing Israel. Both Russia and Hamas before and after their attacks have been trying to convince the world that their aggression was justified.
Concerningly, Beijing has been warning war will result in the Taiwan Strait or the South China Sea unless the world respects what the Chinese Communist Party wants in the region. The remarks of China's defense minister in Singapore which argued that Taiwan's and the Philippines' attempts to defend themselves against aggression by China is instead a threat to China's security should be a wake-up call that Beijing may be seeking to make a similar justification before launching a possible attack.
It is important, though, to understand that these attacks and threats - particularly in the case of Russia and China - are in reality mostly aimed at a power they both seek to undermine: the United States, while Hamas has sought the annihilation of Israel, which is America's strongest ally in the Middle East. Moscow, Beijing and Hamas have shown each care little about protecting peace in order to ensure regional or global economies can continue to develop. Rather, they are quite willing to dismantle the United States-led rules-based international order that since the end of the Second World War has largely helped foster the growth enjoyed globally and particularly in Asia.
As such, Mr. Zelenskiy, the United States and the nations which are part of NATO must remind all participants but particularly those from Asia at the coming peace summit to send clear messages to Moscow and Beijing that their destabilizing goals, strategies and tactics will not be tolerated. Otherwise, more alliances will be built as nations in Asia seek to support those who want peace and economic development rather than conquest to grab territory.
The success of the peace summit in Switzerland when it concludes on June 16th will be shown by how clear the message is to all that ensuring economic growth and security can no longer be guaranteed by remaining silent on the aggressive behavior by autocrats. This new generation of strongmen - like the ones nearly a century ago in Europe and Asia - intend to neither act paternalistically as did autocrats in Asia of the past, nor will they try to preserve peace. Instead, they intend to carry out historical vendettas sought to resolve past grievances or, at the same time, cover up past mistakes of their own doing so that their power can be protected. Their success, however, will come at the expense of others' economic growth, peace and security.
Whatever problems Mr. Zelenskiy may have had conveying this message to leaders in Singapore in late May, the coming summit in Switzerland will provide him an opportunity to once again call for all nations' support of Ukraine in its battle for survival against Russia's invasion of his country. China's harassment of Dutch vessels in the East China Sea and Mr. Putin's continuing reference to nuclear weapons since the end of the Shangri-La Dialogue already is increasing the chances that the Ukraine president's coming speech at the peace summit in Switzerland neither falls flat, on deaf ears.
References and Further Reading: