Photo by The White House on Creative Commons
The playground chants and books from our childhoods have rooted in our minds that “First is the worst.” However, as usual, governments and political deals at the international level present a contrasting view, with countries like China adopting a “China First” ideology to counter the West’s “US First” plans. Such goals on the international scale have led to fierce competition, not only for internal growth, but for placement on ASEAN’s friend list in terms of trade relations.
For years, trade deficits for the US when trading with ASEAN have reflected inconsistency between the high levels of imports from ASEAN in comparison to the low levels of US exports. The United States Trade Representative Report quantifies that the trade deficit between the US and ASEAN was 228.5 billion dollars for goods, representing a 12.3% increase from the year before. The export-oriented industrialization of ASEAN countries explains why they export more to the US than they import, but this also puts the US economy at a disadvantage in trade negotiations.
As a result, on October 26, 2025, at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, President Trump signed bilateral trade agreements with Malaysia and Cambodia and framework agreements with Thailand and Vietnam, centered on reducing tariffs with all countries. Specifically, the Atlantic Council explains that the United States will cap tariffs on ASEAN countries at 19% in exchange for eliminating tariffs on up to 99% of US goods. However, regardless of how organized the trade agreement might seem on paper, the chances of Trump’s trade agreements lasting are slim, mainly as time goes on, both countries will start losing traction on the trade commitment.
1: Neglecting ASEAN Multilateralism
The creation of ASEAN itself demonstrated the countries’ goals of creating a climate of multilateralism, where all countries would cooperate collectively on political and security issues, including diplomatic measures. As such, programs like the ASEAN Regional Forum were established within the coalition to highlight the importance of communal presence in the international community.
Unfortunately, Trump’s recent agreements with ASEAN neglect this longstanding culture. Trump’s trade deals specifically involve bilateral relations with countries like Malaysia and Cambodia, emphasizing commitments from the US and only one ASEAN country. In fact, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace quantifies that Malaysia itself has agreed to $66 million worth of investment in the US market, and $70 billion in the next ten years, in exchange for the US’ cap on tariffs against Malaysian exports.
This deal itself has already received backlash from other ASEAN members, especially due to the impacts of US tariffs earlier this year. In fact, when US tariffs from the Trump administration were imposed at rates up to 46% for ASEAN countries, export competitiveness and profit from the US market on technological developments drastically plummeted. Countries like the Philippines express their reservations about new agreements, specifically noting that recent trade agreements showcase the US’ emphasis on protectionism in July of this year. Even Vietnam itself has already had original concerns about the imbalances in the investments from bilateral agreements with the US, and they seem reasonable. Recent agreements do not eliminate the US tariff; it simply is the slightly better option compared to ASEAN’s disfavorable trade relations in the status quo.
2: Embroiling China
Although indirect, Trump’s trade agreements with ASEAN seem to be perceived as a response to Chinese interest in the countries’ economic diplomacy. For the last sixteen consecutive years, China has been ASEAN’s largest trading partner, with total trade reaching almost $600 billion in the first seven months of 2025 alone. The Associated Press explains how China is particularly interested in ASEAN to expand a stable market for its abundance of critical minerals, utilized in growing artificial intelligence technologies and green energy supplies.
In response to the recent US agreements with ASEAN, China has expanded the China-ASEAN Free Trade, created in 2010, with its new version of ACFTA 3.0. The updated version of the trade agreement expands cooperation in modern technological sectors while reducing trade barriers from the past.
When it comes to trade agreements with ASEAN, the US is not the only one in line; China is as well. In this case, it seems like China might be closer to the front. As China continues to advance trade relations with ASEAN countries, it simultaneously condemns US policies, emphasizing the interest of ASEAN to avoid US protectionism and the “US First” ideal. Economically, free trade with China provides a substantial amount of benefits to ASEAN countries, especially considering that US tariffs will still exist, whether it be countries directly involved in bilateral agreements or others who still suffer from its long-lasting implications.
The impacts here are critical. An article from the Council on Foreign Relations explains that ASEAN’s stance in terms of their preference between trade with the US or China remains inconsistent. ASEAN countries indicated lack of interest to directly align with either country; however, countries tend to favor trade with China by a small amount. Not only does this put the US behind in terms of trade with ASEAN, but it also promotes trading relationships with authoritarian regimes like China. Currently, the majority of ASEAN countries are considered to be on the path towards backsliding democracy, potentially falling into authoritarian rule in the near future. In the last five years, almost half of the countries around the world declined in at least one democratic indicator; ASEAN countries should not be added to that growing list.
Although trade agreements might seem plausible on paper, just like the phrase “First is the Worst,” the real applications often reflect a different story. In order to maintain strong trading relationships with ASEAN, the US should focus on creating trade agreements that promote collective benefits for all countries in the region, while maintaining competitiveness against the Chinese market to solidify its economic hegemony in the international community.
Be First to Comment