Malaysia, explained.
Malaysia's Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim (Hasnoor Hussain/AFP via Getty Images)
Southeast Asian governments treat their Taiwan statements as mere moments – only China is keeping score.
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.
Malaysia’s full stop and ASEAN’s creeping Taiwan consensusMalaysia’s full stop and ASEAN’s creeping Taiwan consensus
In an interview with Al Jazeera released on 16 August (Opens in new window), Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said he sees Taiwan as part of China, “period” (Opens in new window). Asked whether he would condemn Beijing if peaceful reunification failed and force followed, he replied that he would defend Malaysian territorial integrity against any state attempting to secede, and confirmed that he meant force.
China’s foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian said Beijing (Opens in new window) appreciated the remarks, while Taiwan’s foreign ministry (Opens in new window) said Anwar had publicly rationalised the use of force against Taiwan.
The interview has been read as a prime minister straying beyond the boundaries set by his officials. The paperwork suggests Anwar was on script, saying nothing that hadn’t already been set out.
Paragraph 8 of the joint statement (Opens in new window) signed during Xi Jinping’s state visit in April 2025 commits Malaysia to recognising the PRC as the sole legal government of China, to treating Taiwan as inalienable PRC territory, and to withholding support for Taiwanese independence “in order for China to achieve national reunification”. The clause attaches Malaysian policy to reunification as an objective rather than to the status quo, and it says nothing about peaceful means.
ASEAN has no common position on Taiwan and no procedure for comparing what its members have signed bilaterally.
Ambiguity is what Southeast Asian governments are protecting when they say they refuse to choose sides. Malaysia gave up most of its ambiguity on Taiwan in April 2025, in wording that read as boilerplate and passed without a parliamentary question.
In March 2024, Anwar had co-signed a statement with Anthony Albanese (Opens in new window) acknowledging the importance of peace and stability across the Strait, which Taipei welcomed (Opens in new window) at the time. The qualifier disappeared between the text with Australia and then the statement with China. Nobody in Kuala Lumpur was asked to account for it.
Indonesia did the same thing in a different medium. On the morning of 12 August this year, the frigate KRI I Gusti Ngurah Rai spent three hours with the PLA Navy frigate Honghe (Opens in new window) in waters east of Taiwan, running communications and replenishment drills. It was the first exercise Beijing has held there with any foreign navy.
The Indonesian navy said the ship was on its way home from Vladivostok (Opens in new window) and had conducted routine passing exercises with navies along its route, and it did not name China. The military analyst Zhang Junshe (Opens in new window) described the same drill in Global Times as extending Chinese sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the exclusive economic zone east of Taiwan, and as an answer to Japanese and Philippine boundary talks in those waters.
Neither government believed it was saying anything about Taiwan. Jakarta says passing exercise, Beijing says jurisdiction, and both are describing the same Wednesday morning.
Taiwan President Lai Ching-te at an event for war veterans and their families on 23 August 2026 (Lin Yen Ting/Office of the President)
The obvious objection is that words are reversible. Malaysia can restore the peaceful-means language in its next communiqué, Indonesia can decline the next invitation, and no future government is bound by either. This is correct about intentions and wrong about consequences, because only one party keeps the record. Chinese officials will quote the words contained in paragraph 8 back to Kuala Lumpur for years, and Chinese commentary has already described the August drill as precedent for foreign navies operating east of Taiwan on Beijing’s terms. Southeast Asian capitals treat the same texts and gestures as expiring at the ceremony but precedent accumulates on the side that is counting.
Trade does not correct this, and Malaysia’s own figures show why. Taiwan became Malaysia’s fourth-largest trading partner in 2025, (Opens in new window) worth US$54.5 billion on Malaysian (Opens in new window) government figures, or 7.6% of national trade (Opens in new window), with a further US$37.1 billion in the first half of 2026. Taipei has warned (Opens in new window) that Anwar’s stance could unsettle Taiwanese investors. It will not. Foxconn (Opens in new window) and ASE Technology are in Malaysia for cost and tariff-exposure reasons, and siting decisions of that magnitude do not respond to a television interview. Taiwan trades heavily with Malaysia and sits in none of the places where Malaysian sentences about Taiwan are drafted.
ASEAN has no common position on Taiwan and no procedure for comparing what its members have signed bilaterally. Each government negotiates its own formulation with Beijing, leaving the region without a common floor or even a record of its cumulative concessions.
More joint statements are due this year, around China’s APEC hosting and the ASEAN-China trade upgrade. Whether the peaceful-means qualifier returns will tell us more about Malaysian policy than the interview did. The wording will be settled by officials, routinely signed by leaders, and noticed only when one of them is asked to defend it.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Thursday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
