As the United States stumbles around the global stage in a state of economic bewilderment of sorts, Southeast Asia finds itself at a crossroads. While American influence has long loomed large across the region, from military alliances to soft power and trade, the growing capriciousness of US politics, especially under Trump’s erratic leadership, compels government across the region to consider a recalibration of global partnerships.

Simply put, Southeast Asia in particular and increasingly so the Northeast part of Asia too, must look more closely to Europe for long-term, stable engagement, and not allow business sectors and markets to be buffeted about by the shifting winds of American domestic turmoil.

This is not a concept being considered purely out if US-targetted criticism, but of the version of the US that has emerged through the lens of Trumpism: one that is increasingly transactional, inward-looking, and disturbingly volatile. Trump’s “America First” foreign policy has already proven damaging to multilateralism and international cooperation. His disdain for regional alliances, his threats to withdraw from long-established security pacts, and his willingness to weaponise tariffs at the drop of a hat all point to a man - and a political movement - whose interests rarely extend beyond his own immediate gain.

Following Trump’s January return to the White House, Southeast Asia has often been treated as a mere pawn in his zero-sum geopolitical game. His confrontational approach to China, while superficially aligned with concerns within ASEAN, is neither strategic nor consultative. It is built more on spectacle than substance, more on division than dialogue.

Under Trump, nowhere in Asia is seen as a partner, but as leverage - a buffer zone in his economic and ideological war with Beijing. And this is dangerous terrain.

Asia is not a battlefield for great powers to clash upon – the ‘Great Game’ ended in 1907. Today Asia is a community of diverse nations with our individual but intertwined aspirations, cultures, and trajectories. To rely on an erratic US administration that openly undermines global institutions is to gamble with economic and geopolitical stability.

Europe, on the other hand, offers a more stable and principled alternative – at least on the surface.

Though not without its own challenges, the European Union has demonstrated a consistent commitment to multilateralism, sustainable development, and constructive diplomacy. The EU’s partnerships with ASEAN have grown steadily, from green investment and digital cooperation to human rights and educational exchange. These are not mere words on a press release, but tangible collaborations that align more closely with Southeast Asia’s long-term development goals.

As a continent-wide experiment of unity and solidarity though, Europe has largely failed and that must be borne in mind.

For now though, where Trump sows division, Europe seeks cooperation. Where he threatens to walk away from climate accords and trade agreements, Europe leans in with frameworks like the Green Deal and Digital Decade, encouraging sustainable partnerships that benefit both sides even if its member nations must abide by EU rulings that are not seen as satisfactory by all.

While the US under Trump may reduce its commitment to regional infrastructure or technology transfer unless immediate political gains are assured, the EU offers mechanisms for predictable and long-term growth.

Importantly, Europe respects identity. Unlike the heavy-handedness often associated with American cultural exports and the tendency to ‘Americanise’ wherever influence is felt, Europe engages with partners without diluting their essence. A prime example would be how EU-supported programmes in Southeast Asia embrace local culture, knowledge systems, and languages, working with rather than over what is already in place. Europe does not arrive with a megaphone or a missionary complex.

This is essential. Southeast Asia is not, and should not become, an extension of any other region’s strategic priorities – and in the case of the US, problems.

Southeast Asia is a region of more than 700mn people, with dynamic economies, ancient civilisations, and fast-evolving democracies. Preserving these unique identities is not a side concern, it is foundational to how the region should engage with the world. A pivot to Europe need not come at the cost of sovereignty or cultural richness.

The EU, for all its imperfections regarding integration, demonstrates in many ways how diverse nations can work together without losing their individual character. Southeast Asia’s own ASEAN project has taken steps in that direction, but more can be done. Deeper ties with Europe can offer institutional support, political inspiration, and policy templates, particularly in areas like cross-border regulation and environmental standards.

The region should, however, always remain open to cooperation with Washington regardless of who occupies the White House when such cooperation is mutually respectful and predictable. But Asia must not become overly reliant on a nation where key foreign policy decisions could once again be dictated by the whims of one man viewed as unstable by billions around the word who views the planet as a business deal, or worse, a television show.

Southeast Asia stands at a moment of opportunity. The region can continue to be shaped by the whims of a volatile superpower headed by a man history will not remember fondly, or we can build a future with partners who respect our autonomy and share our aspirations. In choosing the latter, we are not abandoning the US. Instead, we are asserting our agency in engaging with the world on our own terms, proudly Southeast Asian, confidently global, and no longer beholden to the daily chaos of Trumpism.