Resources as weapons, loyalty as script: Trump’s tariff theatre and Asia’s test

These three fronts may appear to be disconnected trade moves. In reality, they are a synchronized performance—a loyalty test, a compliance narrative, a geopolitical screenplay in which every country is being cast, judged, or sidelined. Trump is not seeking trade fairness; he is engineering behavioural conformity.

Contrary to common belief, Vietnam—not Indonesia—was the first Southeast Asian country to be “announced” as having reached a deal with the US. However, Hanoi has yet to confirm the agreement. While Washington claims a 20% tariff deal, Vietnamese officials assert it was below 20%. This is not diplomacy—it’s narrative manipulation, staged before the ink dries.

Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s largest economy, has now been offered a “deal” that could reshape its resource export future. As the world’s largest nickel exporter—and a key supplier of cobalt and lithium—Indonesia is pivotal to China’s green technology supply chain. Trump’s gesture is not a favour; it is a strategic lock-in. He is not trading—he is scripting economic submission.

As one international economist warned:

“This is 21st-century economic colonialism—not by force, but by contract. Not by occupation, but by structured dependence.”

The 30% tariff on Europe and the 100% “energy penalty” on Russia are not merely aimed at those powers. They are scripted to intimidate Asia—specifically, to influence how Asian nations react, align, or remain neutral.

Trump’s ultimatum to Russia is not about peace. It is about punishing any nation that continues to engage in legitimate trade with Russia, particularly in the energy sector. This is coercion by association—a secondary sanction with primary intent.

It sends one message to the world:

“Who you trade with defines where your loyalty lies.”

Malaysia now stands at the crossroads of this geopolitical theatre, facing three concurrent pressures:

1. Chip Export Controls Misread as Allegiance

Malaysia recently tightened its export control on AI chips and sensitive semiconductors under its Strategic Trade Act. This is a legal, sovereign act. Yet externally, some have interpreted it as a quiet alignment with US tech containment policy. If China misreads this, it risks mistaking compliance for capitulation—falling right into Trump’s divide-and-distrust strategy.

According to Bloomberg Southeast Asia economist Dr. Tamara Mast Henderson, ASEAN-5 GDP growth could drop to 3% in 2025 and possibly as low as 1.5% in 2026, primarily due to reduced investment flows, declining exports, and fragile business confidence under prolonged US tariffs. For Malaysia—where over two-thirds of GDP comes from exports, and 7.5% from exports to the US—the economic pressure is structural, not just diplomatic. Malaysia’s key sector, electrical equipment, is particularly vulnerable. Meanwhile, oil revenues are falling amid lower production, further straining fiscal space.

In ongoing tariff negotiations, the US is not just asking Malaysia to ease restrictions in logistics, telecoms, cloud services, or semiconductors—it is demanding across-the-board liberalization, extending into aviation, communications, financial services, and construction. Agreeing wholesale would mean Malaysia losing strategic control over its public services and national resources.

In effect, it would reduce the state to a “lame-duck government” in its own economy—watching markets move, but unable to govern them.

Critics ask: how can Malaysia champion open markets while preserving ethnic-based equity structures? But the real question is:

Can free markets truly be “free” if they ignore structural inequality?

As a WTO member, Malaysia has the legal right—under GATT Article XVIII, and GATS Articles IV and XIX—to uphold differential treatment and protect critical national interests as a developing country. This is not protectionism; this is principled asymmetry, recognized in multilateral trade law.

What violates the spirit of free trade is not Malaysia’s equity structure, but attempts to price market access in exchange for institutional surrender.

Make no mistake—China is Trump’s ultimate strategic target. But his method is not direct confrontation. It is cutting China off from its partners, its suppliers, and its strategic breathing space.

He pressures Europe to block tech pathways. He offers Indonesia deals to close China’s backdoor to minerals. He tests Malaysia and Vietnam—not for economic gains, but to sever the emotional and policy depth between China and Southeast Asia.

What he’s attacking is not just product flows—but trust structures. Not just tariff lines—but geopolitical alignment capacity.

If China misjudges, and if ASEAN hesitates, Trump’s playbook succeeds. But if we, collectively, expose this script and respond with regional coherence, his theatre collapses—and space for real cooperation reopens.

In this theatre, it’s not just governments being tested—it’s the patience and perception of every citizen.

While some Malaysians compare Malaysia’s 25% tariff to Vietnam’s 20% or Indonesia’s 19%, it’s important to note the complexities beneath the surface. Vietnam has not confirmed the 20% figure publicly, and its factory output has already started slowing after a rush of exports in April. In contrast, Malaysia’s broader production base and more layered strategic exposures mean that any deal cannot be rushed without long-term consequences.

“Why are we slower?”

“Why hasn’t our government just signed?”

But the real question is:

Are you willing to trade decades of national sovereignty for a few points off a tariff sheet?

Vietnam has not confirmed its figures. Indonesia’s deal comes with strategic trade-offs. If we rush into submission for short-term applause, we may lose our long-term negotiating voice forever.

Calling for faster deals may seem patriotic—but demanding faster surrender is not nation-building. It is enabling new economic colonialism in disguise.

In Trump’s theatre, there is no dialogue—only choreography.

Vietnam is being edited.

Indonesia is being directed.

Malaysia is still under audition.

Europe is being paraded—for potential humiliation.

Russia is rendered an outcast.

Every nation’s fortune is now tied to the choreography of this global cinematic production—a finale already scripted to please and titillate the 47th President of the United States.

But Asia need not take the stage under someone else’s script.

We must articulate our logic—not be forced to explain our silence. We must design cooperation—not be coerced into alignment.

As Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said:

“Malaysia doesn’t choose sides. We choose principles.”

To that, we now add:

Asia doesn’t follow a script—because Asia is building its own stage.

Freedom is not granted. It is held, defended, and built—together.

As tariffs redraw the investment map and trade flows across the region, data and diplomacy must now walk together. It is not enough to resist the script—we must also present the facts that justify writing our own.

---

CW Sim is Chief Strategic Advisor on Greater China, Strategic Pan Indo-Pacific Asia (SPIPA)