During the early and middle phases of the Covid-19 pandemic, national-level responses to control the spread of the virus became a means of comparing nations and regions from a geopolitical perspective, particularly between the West and Asia. The results have been the further recognition of fundamental differences in ideologies between the West and Asia, whether political or societal.

Generally speaking, Asian populations were more understanding and compliant with government policy on lockdowns, travel bans and vaccinations – for example, Vietnam’s policies enjoyed public trust, while Malaysia has an 83% vaccination rate, nearly 20 percentage points higher than the US. In the West, there was much more uproar over limited individual rights, to the point that mask-wearing and vaccinations became hugely controversial topics.

This divide between the West and Asia (and the United States and China, in particular) was so important because it aggravated an already existing paradigm that was developing in Asia: Western approaches and prescriptions are not more responsive to the changing needs and contexts of Asia.

However, Westerners are likely unaware of the impact their individualistic response to the pandemic – which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of additional deaths – has had on international relations and Western geopolitical perception. We are not simply moving forward into a post-pandemic era; we are moving forward in a post-Western world.

The soft power of the West – especially that of the United States, which was already in question – has been badly damaged by the pandemic. As international relations scholar Stephen Walt has noted, one of the foundations of American strength, in addition to its military might, economic clout, and cultural superiority, was a perception of American competence: that, in general, the United States knows what it is doing. Even if the political system is blocked, the American institutions and system could be widely trusted to determine a way out of the crisis.

The pandemic has dramatically undermined that perception, as the world watched the American political system frustrate its people while individuals stood in the way of protecting the collective well-being. As a result, America’s political institutions and unfettered individual rights have been challenged more than ever, given that they have not been able to adapt as vigorously as their collectivist Asian counterparts in this particular crisis.

We have also witnessed another trend during the pandemic: Western politicians, frustrated at being clearly outclassed in response to the pandemic by Asian nations and angry at their diminished influence in a restricted world, have chosen to revoke participation in certain international bodies in favor of systems where they could retain primacy.

For example, the White House revoked funding for the World Health Organization; prominent politicians have called for the abolition of the World Trade Organization; and the Trump administration, fearing the electoral consequences of its failure to control the pandemic, has notoriously relied on aggressive and confrontational rhetoric about China, trying to force a decoupling few wanted. Yet the pandemic is far from being China’s “Chernobyl,” as the Financial Times suggested when the disease first emerged.

Unfortunately, these are trends we see continuing in the post-pandemic landscape. First, Western influence in some multilateral organizations has become increasingly problematic, such as the formation of Aukus – a trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US for the sole purpose of arming Australia with nuclear submarines against China – or more recently, and devastatingly, NATO’s failure to diplomatically resolve the Russian-Ukrainian war before it started.

Second, the West’s desire to pin the blame for the pandemic on China’s doorstep and delay the spread of vaccine technology (declared “vaccine apartheid”) had racial overtones that have not been lacking in the rest of the world. world. The anti-China rhetoric is continued today by the Biden administration. Recently, the White House had to scramble to produce a statement explaining President Joe Biden’s alarming remarks about Taiwan’s military defense — comments that demonstrate the normalization of Western geopolitical belligerence.

American journalist James Fallows noted how the aggressive US attitude towards China has contributed to worsening the Covid-19 pandemic, both in the United States and around the world. Despite tensions elsewhere in their relationship, the United States and China had maintained a close relationship on public health, working together to help combat the Ebola outbreak in 2014. In addition, the United States had observers stationed throughout China to monitor potential epidemics: a concession granted by Beijing because they too wanted to benefit from these observations and technical expertise.

This is what many imagined to be the purpose of multilateral cooperation. Yet these observers left last year and were never replaced. Nor was there any interest on the part of the US government in helping Beijing manage the potential crisis. As Singaporean diplomat Kishore Mahbubani recently pointed out, since the start of the pandemic there has been a general decoupling between the United States and China when it comes to science and technology, and that is something that the world simply cannot afford.

These are geopolitical trends that Asia – and in particular ASEAN, as the most stable union of non-interference in the world – should learn from. It is imperative that leaders find ways to defuse tensions and build a truly universal global system that is not obsessed with the West’s desire or belief that it must rule the world and strengthen Western supremacy. Neutrality facilitates peace. This is not to deny that internationally condemnable acts are taking place, but it is a diplomatic truth that aligning with one side will cost opportunities for mediation.

The upcoming G20 summit in Indonesia – the first in ASEAN – is a perfect opportunity for ASEAN nations to demonstrate to the world that cultural acceptance, non-interference, neutrality and – above all – peace can permeate a diverse block. Indeed, a post-pandemic world will be a world with many different powers: China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Europe, Asean, Nigeria, Brazil and the United States. Tensions will no doubt exist between these different countries, and the limits of their influence will be contested. All countries are going to have to figure out ways to mutually coexist with each other.

But there are also important global issues that can only be managed through close cooperation. The pandemic is clearly one of them: new diseases can appear anywhere, and the world must commit to strategies that monitor potential epidemics and fight them when they occur. Other global issues requiring global cooperation are peacekeeping – which has failed miserably and tragically in Russia and Ukraine – climate change and managing the global economy. But if Western countries continue to claim moral superiority and refuse to engage with other powers, even those with which they have serious disagreements, then these global problems will not be solved and global society will suffer – that is quite evident with the NATO-Russia relationship.

This cannot be repeated, be it a new pandemic, a potential economic crisis, the outbreak of war or any other global shock. The Covid-19 pandemic shows that the global system is falling flat in the face of a global problem. The next generation needs to make sure they don’t the next time there’s a global shock.

---

Chandran Nair is the founder and CEO of the Global Institute for Tomorrow. This article is the latest in a series on the key areas where ASEAN, as part of a regional and global system, must consider transforming itself if it is to learn lessons from the pandemic, identify future opportunities and achieve social change for the better.