Blogs

Asia Unbound

CFR fellows and other experts assess the latest issues emerging in Asia today.

Latest Post

U.S. President Donald Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim hold up trade deal documents during a bilateral meeting at the 47th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on October 26, 2025.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim hold up trade deal documents during a bilateral meeting at the 47th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on October 26, 2025. Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters

The White House Transformed Asia in 2025: Expect Much More in 2026

In 2025, the second administration of U.S. President Donald Trump dramatically changed the trajectory of U.S. engagement with Asia through its tariff-heavy approach, a trend that seems set to continue in the year ahead. 

Read More
Thailand
Thailand, Other American Partners Downgraded to Worst Ranking in New Trafficking in Persons Report
  In the new State Department 2014 Trafficking in Persons report, officially released this morning by Secretary of State John Kerry, the administration pulls no punches. In previous years, some countries that had deserved being downgraded from a Tier 1 country to a Tier 2 country, signifying deteriorating progress in combating trafficking, or from a Tier 2 to a Tier 3 country, the worst possible rating in the report, had been saved from downgrades. Usually, they were saved due to their close strategic ties with the United States and their effective lobbying of this administration and its predecessors. A ranking in Tier 3, according to the report’s definition, means a country “whose government does not fully comply with the minimum standards [in combating trafficking in persons] and are not making significant efforts to do so.” Countries that fall into Tier 3, the report notes, “may be subject to certain restrictions on bilateral assistance, whereby the U.S. government may withhold or withdraw non-humanitarian, non-trade-related foreign assistance.…Governments subject to restrictions would also face U.S. opposition to assistance from international financial institutions.” In the run-up to this year’s report release, the Thai government, as it had in the past, desperately attempted to lobby the United States to keep Thailand from being dropped into Tier 3, which is a particularly tough blow at a time when Thailand has just suffered a military coup and is facing penalties for the coup not only from the United States but also from Europe, Australia, and many other countries. Besides Thailand, other countries downgraded in the new report also had lobbied the administration hard, stressing not only that they were (allegedly) taking action against trafficking but also emphasizing their increasingly warm bilateral ties with the United States. Qatar, an important American partner which received a ranking slightly above that of Thailand, had pushed to be given a higher rating. This time, to its credit, the White House was not swayed. For example, Thailand surely deserves to be placed among the Tier 3 nations, and should have been downgraded to Tier 3 years ago. In just the past year, the Thai navy has been implicated in the trafficking and outright murder of refugees fleeing Myanmar, Thailand’s seafood industry has been the subject of damning reports from nonprofit organizations and journalists revealing outright slavery in the industry, and in just the past two weeks over 100,000 Cambodian migrant workers in Thailand, many of whom worked under slave-like conditions, have fled the country in panic, fearing that the junta is going to arbitrarily detain and abuse them. The Thai governments–both the elected government that was in place until May 2014, and the new junta government–have taken only woefully inadequate measures to reduce Thailand’s status as one of the biggest centers of trafficking in the world. The State Department got it right in this report.
Bangladesh
Bangladesh: Behemoth Garment Industry Weathers the Storm
Over the weekend I had the opportunity to participate in an excellent conference focused on Bangladesh, its development, and its garment industry hosted by Harvard University. The organizers did a tremendous job convening the many diverse stakeholders on this issue—the Bangladeshi garment exporters associations, representatives from the Bangladeshi and U.S. governments, representatives from major buyers and retailers, fashion industry associations, labor rights advocates, the International Labor Organization (ILO), and scholars examining developments in global retail and labor. The background to the gathering, obviously, was last year’s tragic collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Dhaka on April 24, 2013, which killed more than 1,100 and left more than 2,500 injured. In the aftermath of Rana Plaza, many feared that global brands and retailers—primarily in the European Union and the United States—would shift their orders away from Bangladesh, thus potentially disrupting the source of livelihood for some four million workers, primarily women. In the year since, there has been intensive negotiation and consultation among governments, international organizations, and the private sector in the United States, European Union, and Bangladesh, resulting in agreements that provide better oversight, governance, and compliance on workplace safety and labor matters. Between the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety, and the EU-ILO-Bangladesh Global Sustainability Compact (which the United States endorsed in July 2013), there is now more significant focus on factory safety conditions, including structural integrity and fire safety protections, than ever in the past. Bangladesh’s garment industry is huge, the world’s second-largest garment exporter after only China, and as the Economist Intelligence Unit report, “Garment shift,” commented recently, Bangladesh’s scale is “nearly on par with total combined capacity of its main competitors in Southeast Asia.” It has nearly 5,000 factories producing exports valued around $20 billion (2013). Fixing its problems with factory and labor conditions thus has represented an effort of historic scale. And over the past year, there has been positive change. Bangladesh has made progress with a new labor law, higher minimum wage, and one hundred fifty-plus new labor unions registered. The ILO and International Finance Corporation have launched the largest Better Work program in history. Inspections of factories supplying members of the Accord and the Alliance are well underway, with remediation taking place to get buildings up to international standards. Factories found to have irremediably unsafe conditions have been shut down. Still, with such a large industry, much work remains. As the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh noted in his remarks at the conference, Bangladesh still needs to complete hiring and training the two hundred building inspectors they committed to employ; all the buildings housing factories need to be inspected and brought to safe standards; reports of those inspections should be made public per the Compact; and harassment and intimidation of labor unions and activists should stop. Bangladesh can get this done, but it needs to keep pushing ahead. From my perspective, the surprise has been how well Bangladesh has weathered this difficult storm so far. No one knew how the global garment industry would respond after Rana Plaza—perhaps by diversifying their sourcing slightly, or greatly? Would Bangladesh’s workplace conditions present just too much risk until fully remediated? Back in January, admittedly on the heels of a violent political season that saw road traffic shut down for days on end, it seemed that Bangladeshi garment exporters were facing tougher times. Press reports detailed exports “losing steam,” with growth at 7.1 percent in January, “less than a quarter of the year-on-year growth recorded in November.” People worried that the hartals (street strikes), higher wages, and company interest in hedging supply chains was causing a turning away from Bangladesh. The latest data show that has not transpired. Looking at the latest export statistics shows only a slight drop, with textile and apparel exports to the United States falling only 0.56 percent to $1.77 billion (US Commerce data, year over year). The latest data from Bangladesh show 14 percent growth for the industry overall in the July 2013-May 2014 period. The Bangladesh Garment Buying House Association has reported that orders from “compliant” factories are rising 15-20 percent. And the U.S. Fashion Industry Association just released a survey of brands and retailers detailing that 76.9 percent of those surveyed currently source from Bangladesh, with 60 percent anticipating that they will “somewhat increase” from Bangladesh in the “next two years.” With the Accord, Alliance, Compact, Better Work program, and such focused attention to needed improvements in Bangladesh’s workplace, the systems are in place to preserve the gains the country has made over the years through the garment industry. It now depends on all parties seeing this through at the scale needed to transform the industry. Follow me on Twitter: @AyresAlyssa
China
Friday Asia Update: Top Five Stories for the Week of June 20, 2014
Ashlyn Anderson, Lauren Dickey, Darcie Draudt, Charles McClean, Will Piekos, and Sharone Tobias look at the top stories in Asia today. 1. China sends more oil rigs to already-tense South China Sea. Two rigs are now stationed between China and the Taiwan-occupied Pratas Islands, and one has been given coordinates to be towed just outside Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone. Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang asked China to remove the rigs that are in disputed waters. China has been increasingly assertive in its claims to the Paracel and Spratly Islands, all of which are off Vietnam’s coast, and is reportedly moving sand onto reefs and shoals to support buildings and surveillance equipment. In Hanoi, Chinese and Vietnamese officials met on Wednesday for the first time to discuss the disputed waters, without much progress. The talks come on the heels of deadly protests in Vietnam against Chinese companies in May. 2. Japan protests Korean live-fire drills near disputed islands. On Friday, South Korea held a live-fire naval exercise thirteen miles south of the islands known as Takeshima in Japan and Dokdo in Korea. Korea has maintained administrative control of the islands since 1954, but Japan also claims sovereignty over the islands.Japanese chief cabinet secretary Yoshihide Suga “strongly demanded that the South Korean government stop its plans,” and called the decision to go ahead with the drill “extremely regrettable.” In response, a South Korean defense ministry spokesman said that “when it comes to conducting a military drill for the self-defense of the Republic of Korea, any outside demand or interference is not a subject for consideration.” The South Korean navy went on to say that the drills were not meant to be aimed at Japan, but rather to practice targeting North Korean submarines. 3. Tens of thousands of Cambodian migrant workers flee Thailand. A month after the Thai army seized control of the country, rumors of a crackdown on undocumented workers have sent at least 200,000 Cambodians in eastern Thailand fleeing over the course of just twelve days. Many of the workers are leaving voluntarily, but the police have reportedly also forced many on buses and charged a 3,000 baht ($92) fine. The Thai government denied any new policy, saying, “No crackdown order targeting Cambodian workers has been issued.” According to the International Organization for Migration, most of the 2.2 million migrant workers in Thailand are from Myanmar and approximately 438,000 are from Cambodia. Thailand has a very low unemployment rate at 0.9 percent and could face a labor shortage if more workers flee. 4. Modi faces his first foreign policy test. Forty Indian expatriates were abducted in Iraq when the Islamic militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) seized Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city. A spokesman for the Indian Ministry of External Affairs announced today that the forty kidnapped workers had been found, but did not provide further details. In addition, forty-seven Indian nurses are stranded at a hospital in Tikrit, abandoned by their employers when ISIS stormed the city. The Ministry of External Affairs issued a travel advisory and set up a twenty-four-hour call line for families with missing relatives in Iraq. With over ten thousand expatriates working in Iraq, ISIS’ victories are chilling news for India. 5. China executes thirteen in Xinjiang. Thirteen people were executed in the restive province of Xinjiang, convicted of “organizing, leading and participating in terrorist groups; murder; arson; theft; and illegal manufacture, storage and transportation of explosives.” It was also announced that more than sixty terrorist and extremist suspects had been captured in the past month. The executions and arrests are part of the Chinese government’s intensifying response to a series of deadly attacks blamed on Uighur separatists in Xinjiang and other places in China, including Beijing’s Tiananmen Square and a train station in Kunming. Bonus: China says “House of Cards” is an accurate illustration of corruption, calls the United States “the Matrix.” On Tuesday, China’s Discipline Inspection Commission published an article linking the abuse of power seen on television to reality. The author said that corruption in shows like “House of Cards” and “American Gangster,” is real and widespread in Western societies like the United States. Some netizens criticized the article, saying that corruption in the West is only seen on television, while most Chinese “feel corruption in real time every day of [their] lives.” The pop culture references continued when, in unrelated news, a spokesperson from the Chinese foreign ministry called the United States "the Matrix," in response to U.S. Department of Justice indictment of five alleged Chinese hackers and in reference to the NSA’s Internet surveillance programs.
  • China
    Sour Notes from China on the U.S. Rebalance to Asia
    I spent a week in China early this month on the heels of the Shangri-La Dialogue and amidst rising tensions in the South China Sea following China’s placement of an oil rig in disputed waters near Vietnam. Instead of spending time “inside the ring roads” of Beijing with America-handlers practiced at making careful judgments about the China-U.S. relationship, I visited a few regional cities where the Chinese views of the U.S. rebalancing policy that I heard were harsh and unvarnished. This mood parallels Liz Economy’s assessment last month of the growing misconnect in U.S.-China relations. At an academic workshop, I listened to a presentation by a Chinese colleague on how the U.S. grand strategy of the rebalance, and especially American efforts to reassure allies, were really about the “construction of threats,” designed to make China into the enemy. In this scholar’s narrative, the Obama administration’s “Return to Asia” was responsible for promoting regional instability, especially by backing allies, thereby creating instability and a demand among allies for greater security measures. President Obama’s promise in April to defend the Senkakus was a primary case in point. The economic component of the U.S. rebalancing strategy through establishment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) drew an equally skeptical analysis from this scholar, who concluded that the U.S. design is to create an unstable atmosphere in Asia so that Asian countries continue to accept a U.S. presence in the region. I found that hearing this presentation was useful preparation for a set of questions I received in advance of an interview with a Chinese provincial television station. A number of the questions I was asked provide insights on what the Chinese public may be hearing—either as a result of intentional or accidental distortion—when the United States talks about the rebalance to Asia. What kind of equilibrium situation would the U.S. want to achieve though its rebalancing to Asia and Pacific? Which nations’ engaging power does the U.S. want to balance? We never heard of any Chinese experts talking about any balancing strategy to North America, to keep the needed equilibrium among Canada, America, and Mexico. Why is the U.S. dominance in the North America accepted by China like this, while China’s strength advantage in Asia cannot be accepted by the U.S.? Why does the U.S. regard China’s regional upper hand as something needing to be balanced? What does the U.S. think about the Japanese military force development in its strategy of rebalancing Asia and Pacific? Does America consider the Chinese public’s worry about Japan strengthening its self-defense forces? Most of the Chinese public dislike so many American military bases existing close totheir nation. They think that the Untied States never allows its rivals’ military bases—such as Cuba’s—near its territory but puts so many bases around China. What do you think about these perspectives? Despite the manifest weaknesses of the “pivot” terminology that drove the administration to adopt the term “rebalance” to Asia, these questions from Chinese colleagues suggest that the term “rebalance” also has its shortcomings, especially given its propensity to be misinterpreted as referring to realist international relations theory concepts surrounding “balancing.” As the questions above reveal, many Chinese can easily interpret this “rebalancing” as a form of U.S. containment. But my more lasting impression from this trip to China is that the broader Chinese psychology associated with its rise has moved well past Hu Jintao’s focus on “peaceful development” to a mindset in which, as part of Xi Jinping’s “Chinese dream,” China’s ability to exert its own sphere of influence in Asia is regarded as an expected benefit that will naturally accrue, regardless of the impact on the neighborhood.  And this is why, regardless of what it is called, the United States must make the task of preserving East Asian stability a top priority not only for the Obama administration, but also for the long-term.
  • Thailand
    What Will Thailand’s Post-Coup “Democracy” Look Like?
    As an excellent piece in the Associated Press notes this week, Thailand’s junta appears to be entrenching itself for the long haul. Junta leader Prayuth Chan-ocha has named himself to Thailand’s Board of Investment. The junta is putting other cronies at the heads of major state-controlled companies, Prayuth has left the timetable for a total return to civilian rule purposefully vague, and the coup leaders also have refused to say exactly what that civil government will look like, or what Thailand’s next constitution will look like either. (The generals essentially ripped up the previous constitution after launching the coup in May.) However, you can bet that the “democracy” Thais inherit some time after the junta steps down is going to bear little resemblance to the political system in Thailand of the past fifteen years–or to internationally accepted norms of what constitutes democracy. Having learned from Thailand’s 2006 coup, when the army failed to totally undermine the power of rural voters, the junta likely will push through new legislation that will never allow Thailand’s numerical majority to prevail over other power centers again. Instead, expect the post-coup “democratic” government to look like this: 1.  Appointed members of parliament or those selected from Hong Kong-style “functional constituencies” will have immense power in the next civilian government. The People’s Democratic Reform Committee protestors, who paralyzed Bangkok for months in late 2013 and early 2014 and helped trigger the coup, often pushed for such a scheme. A scheme in which appointed members of parliament constitute a large percentage of the chambers would dilute the rural majority’s power and keep Bangkok effectively in control of the legislature, which is especially important during a monarchical succession. (This idea of non-elected MPs has a long history, and dates back to previous elite protests in Thailand in the late 2000s.) The army leaders have said that they want to cool political temperatures and do not favor any side of Thailand’s poisonous color-coded politics, but that vow of neutrality already has been proven completely false. Expect the military to push through an appointed/functional constituencies scheme in which at least half of parliament’s upper and lower house (the Senate previously had non-elected members) is selected this way. 2.  Prominent members of Thaksinite parties will be banned from politics for life, unless they have already turned tail and totally given into the junta, like former Thaksin ally and former Minister of Agriculture Sudarat Keyuraphan. Since Thaksin first won the prime ministership in 2001, the judiciary, the palace, and the military have used five-year bans to keep pro-Thaksin politicians out of office, but the elites underestimated the staying power of Thaksin and of rural voters. Indeed, many politicians who were banned, like former minister Chaturon Chaiseng, were able to come back after five years and again lead Thaksinite parties and serve in ministerial positions. Expect the army and its selected constitution drafters (all of whom will be appointed and not elected) to find a way to keep the most important pro-Thaksin politicians out of politics for the rest of their lives. It used to be said that, in Thailand, everyone in politics always gets a chance to come back, no matter what they have done in the past…but that was then, and this is a different time in the kingdom. 3.  The judiciary and other institutions will be made even stronger. Since 2006, the judiciary and other bureaucratic institutions have been key weapons in the Bangkok elites and middle classes’ battle to maintain control of politics, but at times Thaksinite parties have managed to put some of their own allies in key judicial and bureaucratic posts. No more. The junta will leave a constitution and legislation that both makes the judiciary and other institutions stronger and insulates these institutions from any control at all by an elected prime minister. 4. The army’s constitution drafters will figure out a way to provide an amnesty for the 2014 coup-makers who, after all, broke the law by seizing power. Amnesty for the coup-makers? That’s one Thai tradition that isn’t going out of style.