Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Wednesday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
Asia, explained.
HMAS Anzac joined to HMNZ Aotearoa and Te Kaha for a dual replenishment at sea off the east coast of Malaysia during an exercise under the Five Power Defence Arrangements (Christopher Szumlanski/Defence Department)
The Five Power Defence Arrangements makes for a case in point.
Asia without America? History shows Australia can be confident shaping regional securityAsia without America? History shows Australia can be confident shaping regional security
About the author
Rahman Yaacob
Dr Abdul Rahman Yaacob was a Research Fellow in the Southeast Asia Program at the Lowy Institute.
Whether a long-discussed “pivot” or a new-found competition, there are arguments that the Trump administration is shifting the US focus from Europe to Asia. The reality on the ground contradicts this argument. Recent developments suggest that the Trump administration is focused on the Middle East, where there is currently an American military build-up against Yemen and potentially Iran.
Advanced PAC-3 missile batteries are moving from South Korea to the Middle East. More F-35 stealth combat aircraft, half of operational American B-2 stealth bombers, and two carrier groups are now deployed for a potential military campaign. Nearly $1 billion worth of ammunition – long-range cruise missiles, GPS-guided glide bombs and Tomahawk missiles – have been expended against the Yemen-based Houthis.
This focus needs to be understood. America is diverting limited military resources away from the Indo-Pacific. Critical ammunition, such as long-range missiles, is being depleted at a faster pace than it can be replenished. Therefore, Trump’s focus on the Middle East could impact Washington’s ability to respond to any China-related contingency across this part of the world.
But Australia, rather than endlessly debate the US commitment to the region, should recognise that it is a country with the resources, expertise, and geographic advantage to shape a region favourable to its interests. It has done so before.
Canberra’s efforts in revitalising the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) in the early 1980s stands as a prime example.
The FPDA was formed in 1971 and involves Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom. The primary function of the arrangement is for members to consult each other in the event of an armed attack against Malaysia and Singapore.
Australia’s involvement in FPDA helped to settle Malaysia-Singapore relations, which were described as the most unstable in Southeast Asia
Declassified documents from the British archives show that Australia led efforts in the 1980s and 1990s to revitalise the FPDA into a structure that contributes to regional order.
Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia in December 1978, followed by the Soviet Union’s occupation of Afghanistan in 1979, set off alarms in Canberra and Southeast Asia. In response to the emerging threats from the Soviet Union and Vietnam, then-Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser initiated a plan in 1980 to institutionalise further defence relations with Malaysia and Singapore and to strengthen their defence capabilities through FPDA.
Fraser assessed that institutionalised FPDA exercises could demonstrate Western partners’ support for Malaysia’s and Singapore’s security while also enhancing the two Southeast Asian states’ defence capabilities. These factors could serve as a deterrent against hostile actors from undermining Southeast Asia’s stability.
There was an initial lack of enthusiasm from London to Fraser’s plan. The British prioritised the security of Europe, not Southeast Asia. This position was laid out in a British cable in November 1980: “The bulk of our defence resources must remain committed for the foreseeable future to the NATO area,”
Despite the initial cool reception from London, Fraser pushed for FPDA exercises, which previously focused only on air defence, to include the land and maritime domains. He persuaded the Malaysian and Singaporean leaders to agree to his plan. He urged British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to change her mind, writing to her that:
“I understand the difficulties that the United Kingdom might have in making a commitment of forces to participation in the exercises, but I should also say that any substantive support you might be able to provide would be warmly appreciated.”
Fraser’s effort bore fruit as subsequent FPDA military exercises included British forces and expanded to cover a broader scope, including anti-submarine warfare.
Malcolm Fraser and Margaret Thatcher in 1980 at 10 Downing St, London (Steve Burton via Getty Images)
Fraser’s successors, Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, continued to invest heavily in FPDA. Australia provided logistical support for the further expansion of FPDA exercises, and by the 1990s, these exercises had become increasingly complex, reflecting the realistic nature of modern warfare.
Australia’s involvement in FPDA helped to settle Malaysia-Singapore relations, which were described as the most unstable in Southeast Asia. The FPDA provides a platform for the Malaysian and Singaporean militaries to interact and cooperate, serving as a confidence-building mechanism between the two states and thereby enhancing regional stability.
The FPDA remains a vital component for Canberra. Australia has close defence relations with Malaysia and Singapore, two states bordering critical waterways in Southeast Asia. Furthermore, Australia’s only external military base is located in Malaysia, providing Canberra with a military foothold in Southeast Asia.
It’s an example of the kind of creative security approach Australia can pursue to shape its security environment.
