By Tariq Ismail Mustafa

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia--The Pejuang International Affairs Bureau notes with interest Malaysia’s pending participation in the US sponsored Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) following the PM’s visit to the White House recently.


KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia--The Pejuang International Affairs Bureau notes with interest Malaysia’s pending participation in the US sponsored Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) following the PM’s visit to the White House recently.

Whilst Pejuang notes that the IPEF is couched as economic in nature, with circumstances being what they are currently wherein economic means are used to fight wars and influence foreign policies, any such participation must of necessity be a consideration of our sovereignty and involve not only the Ministry of International Trade (MITI) but also of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and to a certain extent, those involved in maintaining our national security and sovereignty.  

This is not an unreasonable consideration given that the US itself has been trending towards nationalistic rules of engagement i.e. rules of commercial engagement which protect industries and supplies which are of national interest or in other words, sectors which are crucial for their own sovereignty.  

Pejuang would like to remind the respective Ministers, that aside from the post-Covid supply-side economic challenges which jeopardise the strength of industrial nations, it is also imperative to remember that economic tools are used to manipulate foreign policies.

And that the rules which trigger these economic repercussions are nowadays more often than not linked to non-economic or humanitarian issues (as defined by US domestic policies) under the guise of the ESG agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals.

Whilst no one has been able to adequately assess and ponder over the terms under IPEF, it is not a stretch to imagine that the US will continue to use every tool available economically and socially to pressure Malaysia and other ASEAN countries to support their foreign policy.  

A codified framework such as the IPEF will simply and is likely to formalize those pressure points to the US’ favour and this is likely to include social and humanitarian causes as defined by US laws and policies.

Whilst Pejuang is not anti-American, it is however in favour of a world where no one nation holds a hegemony.  Particularly where the hegemony is held by a violent bully as the US.

It is to this end that Pejuang urges the Ministers involved to scrutinize the IPEF to its minutest details and identify whether the laws and rules would essentially mean de-facto adoption of US laws and regulations in order to comply with IPEF.  

Pejuang would in such cases take a stand of at most, meeting the Americans halfway on the applicability of American laws and regulations, in order to better gauge the implications of any non-compliances or breaches and avoid Malaysia being indirectly manipulated through these tools including through trade sanctions.  

With this in mind, Pejuang urges the Ministers in question to have a special Parliamentary session to outline the details of the IPEF and consider the broader foreign policy implications of IPEF.  

Pejuang would also like to see Malaysia lead the charge in the possible ratification of IPEF for ASEAN considering ASEAN intra-trade itself has not managed to comprehensively establish common trade standards, let alone common standards for IPEF trade.

Whilst we understand the desperation for foreign investments, international trade and economic growth during this recovery period, hastily signing on to IPEF may not be the answer.