Soft Power, Hard Choices: ASEAN’s Vision and the Philippine Pivot

In today’s world where competition and fragmentation are two of the key issues faced by nations, ASEAN finds itself in the same condition: balancing sovereignty and regional ties in Southeast Asia. Given the shift of traditional power structures and the emergence of a multipolar world, its role as a regional actor has become more crucial than before. Each member state faces difficulties and tensions, with no exception for the Philippines.

 The ASEAN Third Way

Differing from the creation process of Europe, ASEAN was founded based on two principles: fragmentation and crisis, more than shared identity. Its catalyst was the hope to set up stability in a region engraved by economic underdevelopment and political diversity. This remarkable pathway is often named “ASEAN Third Way,” a regional model founded on consensus and non-interference, taking its distance from Western models and shaping a uniquely Southeast Asian track anchored to pragmatism, diversity, and strategic caution.

To exemplify its rising prestige, in 2024, trade with China increased by 10.6%, nearly $770.9 billion, compared to the previous year.

ASEAN will likely become the world’s fourth largest economy by 2030. Whereas challenges persevere, the region’s strategic positioning and emphasis on economic integration highlight its increasingly pivotal role in the global landscape. Prospects of becoming the next real economic hub are only a matter of time and viewpoints, but its rising is beyond doubt. The world is certainly observing its course, and soon it may echo it, but its success depends on ASEAN providing its flexible, non-aligned approach that can withstand growing global geopolitical pressures.

 The Philippines Pivot

ASEAN remains the backbone of the Philippines’ foreign and trade policy. Additionally, the country persistently funds initiatives that promote a peaceful, stable, and rules-based Southeast Asia. It plays a leading role in shaping ASEAN’s regional agenda, consistently advocating for its centrality, ensuring that the bloc remains the primary platform for addressing regional issues and engaging with external powers. Regardless of the ambition to become both a political and economic community, it is not a supranational body. All member states uphold full sovereignty, and decision are directed by national interests.

Consequently, there can be volatile positions on central issues causing conflicts, especially regarding delicate matters such as human rights, democracy, maritime disputes, and trade. Namely, its direct exposure to hostilities in the South China Sea represents both a limitation and an opportunity. Since the political and socio-economic landscape varies among its members, Manila embraces a careful and diplomatic posture, fostering its interests and at the same time preserving ASEAN unity.

The country necessitates multilateral cooperation and bilateral accords. Therefore, it established a strategic partnership with Vietnam, settled in mutual respect and cooperation, covering numerous sectors, including defense, marine affairs, and trade. Simultaneously, Manila maintains a delicate approach with exterior powers. While strengthening defense cooperation with the United States, it also engages China economically, embodying the very “multi-alignment” strategy that ASEAN exemplifies.

 Charting the Course for Regional Agency

ASEAN is fascinating, although it represents an evolving governance structure when compared to Western models of integration and global governance. As an alternative to contesting multilateralism completely, ASEAN reevaluates it by three fundamental principles, that is, inclusivity, non-alignment, and strategic autonomy. It might seem slow-paced, but it has offered stability for over five decades in one of the world’s most disputed regions. The real test ahead will be whether this easy strategy of balance and integration can endure the intensifying demands of an increasingly multipolar world.

For the Philippines, the way ahead lies not in prioritizing sovereignty or integration, but in consolidating both. By broadening its leadership within ASEAN while pursuing evened-out ties with external powers, Manila can enhance a regional order that is inclusive, stable, and resilient. ASEAN’s “Third Way” may not unravel every crisis, but in an era made of strategic uncertainty, it offers a reliable structure for middle powers pursuing both autonomy and agency.

 Author Bio:

Rita Borriello is an analyst at IPSC. Her work focuses on the Indo-Pacific region, including maritime security, territorial disputes, and governance structures of regional mechanisms such as ASEAN.