South-East Asian countries are broadly siding with Iran in its conflict with Israel. This isn't surprising
While some western leaders have been shredding what little remains of the rules-based international order by bizarrely insisting that the appropriate way to respond to Israel's illegal attacks on Iran is to state that 'Israel does have the right to defend itself', there is a different view in South-East Asia. The leaders of Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei have all condemned the aggression of the Israeli government, while Singapore has called for an immediate ceasefire.
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was typically straightforward. 'We must stand up for the rights of our friends, including Iran, which has been wronged,' he said on Sunday. 'We defend Iran's right to retaliate in order to uphold its national dignity.' Referring to that retaliation, he said: 'Many European nations criticised and express outrage against Iran. But when Israel launched its attacks, they remained silent. I do not share that view.' His government would continue 'to uphold the principle of defending the rights and sovereignty of all nations,' he added.
Brunei is a signatory – as is the UAE - to the joint statement by 21 Arab and Islamic countries which states their 'categorical rejection and condemnation of Israel's recent attacks on the Islamic Republic of Iran since the 13th of June 2025 … while emphasising the necessity of respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, adhering to the principles of good neighbourliness, and the peaceful settlement of disputes'.
Asked about the Israel-Iran conflict on Monday, the head of Indonesia's Presidential Communication Office said: 'In every conflict, Indonesia's stance is always the same: condemning military aggression, encouraging de-escalation and ceasefire, and calling for a resolution through diplomacy and international law.'
The stance in Jakarta is unsurprising. Iran's late president Ebrahim Raisi paid a state visit to Indonesia in 2023, and earlier this week local media quoted the Iranian ambassador as saying that a reciprocal invitation was being issued to President Prabowo Subianto. 'If Prabowo accepts [Iranian] President Masoud Pezeshkian's invitation, we can arrange the perfect time for their meeting,' he told them, a little precipitously, some may think, given the current circumstances.
Mr Prabowo also appeared to speak for Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong on Tuesday, when the two appeared before reporters at Parliament House, Singapore, after a bilateral meeting this week, and said: 'We emphasise the importance of peaceful solution negotiations, and we call for an immediate ceasefire.'
If the Israeli government wasn't a pariah before, it is now
Only last month Mr Prabowo said that: "Indonesia has stated that once Israel recognises Palestine, Indonesia is ready to recognise Israel and open the diplomatic relationship." Don't expect much more of that kind of talk in the region for now. The words 'valid for all countries except Israel' are unlikely to disappear from Malaysian passports any time soon.
As it is, international sporting events have already been stripped from Malaysia and Indonesia over the past few years after prominent politicians objected to Israelis taking part. Singapore's leadership probably keeps as quiet as possible about the city-state's long and close ties to Israel, which have caused protests this year and last.
In fact, all countries in the region with significant Muslim minorities, and that includes Singapore, Thailand, Myanmar and the Philippines, need to tread carefully on the Israel-Iran conflict – which may be why their governments appear to have said or done little or nothing thus far.
The reason for that is opinion among the region's about 250 million Muslims is, broadly speaking, pretty black and white: the government of Israel is – yet again – the aggressor, and Iran has the right to fight back. From my own experiences at conferences involving South-East Asian countries, I would suggest, however, it's important to note that the friendliness is with Iran as a state and as a fellow Muslim country.
It's not about approval of the Islamic Republic per se, nor its activities interfering in other states in the Middle East. First of all, distance matters. Iran's support of the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon is in a faraway neighbourhood.
Second, the South-East Asian view would be that all of that, including Iran's domestic political set-up, is none of their business. The principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states applies, and Iran does not seek to intervene in South-East Asian states.
This is also why the fact that Iran is Shiite, a form of Islam that is a tiny minority and not exactly encouraged in the overwhelmingly Sunni region, is not an issue. That is seen as an internal matter for Iran, and doesn't need to affect relations between states.
Seen from South-East Asia, Iran is a state which has for centuries been an important part of the Islamic world. There is no reason at all why it should not be treated warmly as part of the 'friends with all' approach common in the region.
The US and its allies may regard it as 'the principal source of regional instability and terror', as the recent G7 statement put it, but that doesn't persuade people in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta or Mindanao. After all, even if Tehran managed to achieve the nuclear bomb that it has always denied trying to build, it is highly unlikely that it would ever be pointed towards South-East Asia.
And, in any case, I have heard pointed out many times: Israel has a nuclear bomb – why shouldn't Iran? The latter is simply not viewed as any kind of threat at all.
Support for Israel, on the other hand, has always been low to the point of unmeasurable among the Muslim masses in South-East Asia, even if some elites were open to co-operation on security matters, for instance. Now it is hard to find anyone who isn't troubled by Israel's constant flouting of international law and complete disregard for civilian life.
Iran has sometimes been said in the last few days to have 'no friends'. But if Tehran looks east, it will find hundreds of millions who are, at the least, well-disposed towards them. And in the current conflict, there's little doubt about whose side they are on.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
11 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel lashes out over Iran's UN speech ahead of Geneva talks
Israel's ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva has strongly objected to Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi addressing the UN Human Rights Council, just hours before key diplomatic talks with European leaders aimed at calming the Israel-Iran conflict. In a letter seen by Reuters, Israeli envoy Daniel Meron criticised the council's decision, writing: 'Affording the Iranian foreign minister the floor before this body continues to undermine the council's credibility and constitutes a blatant betrayal of the many victims of this regime worldwide.' Meron accused Tehran of using the platform to 'promote the regime's despotic campaign,' calling the move a blow to the Council's integrity. Despite Israel's protest, the Council confirmed Araghchi would speak, followed by talks with the EU's foreign policy chief and officials from the UK, France, and Germany. Earlier in the week, Iran's UN ambassador described Israel's military strikes as a 'war against humanity.' Israel launched the attacks last Friday, saying it intended to block Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons—claims Tehran denies, insisting its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.
Zawya
34 minutes ago
- Zawya
National Human Rights Institution receives Chairman of the Arab Charter on Human Rights Committee
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: As part of its ongoing efforts to strengthen institutional collaboration and promote the exchange of expertise with regional and international entities, the National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) welcomed His Excellency Counselor Mohammed Saeed Al Shehhi, Chairman of the Arab Charter on Human Rights Committee, to its headquarters in Abu Dhabi. He was accompanied by Mr. Osama Al Wakeel, Secretary of the Committee. The delegation was received by His Excellency Maqsoud Kruse, Chairperson of the NHRI; Dr. Abdul Aziz Al Noman and Ms. Ameirah Al Seraidi, Members of the NHRI Board of Trustees; His Excellency Dr. Saeed Al Ghfeli, Secretary-General of the NHRI; and Ms. Fajer Al Haidan, Head of Agreements and Reports Section. During the visit, the delegation was briefed on the NHRI's mandate and functions as an independent national institution, and its central role in supporting and advancing the human rights agenda in the United Arab Emirates. Discussions highlighted the NHRI's alignment with international, regional, and national human rights frameworks. The meeting also served as a platform to explore opportunities for enhancing joint cooperation and coordination in the implementation of the Arab Charter on Human Rights. Both sides expressed their commitment to advancing institutional efforts to adopt best practices in promoting and protecting fundamental rights and freedoms. H.E. Maqsoud Kruse congratulated H.E. Counselor Mohammed Saeed Al Shehhi on his recent appointment as Chairman of the Committee, and praised the visit as a testament to the Committee's commitment to constructive engagement and regional dialogue. He emphasized the importance of such exchanges in reinforcing a shared culture of human rights and strengthening broader Arab cooperation. About the National Human Rights Institution: The National Human Rights Institution was established under Federal Law No. (12) of 2021 as an independent entity with financial and administrative autonomy in carrying out its functions, activities, and mandates. The NHRI aims to promote and protect human rights and freedoms in accordance with the provisions of the UAE Constitution, applicable laws and legislations, as well as relevant international conventions, treaties, and agreements.
Zawya
35 minutes ago
- Zawya
Gold poised for worst week in a month as US rate cut expectations ease
Gold prices fell on Friday and were poised for their worst weekly performance in more than a month after the Federal Reserve tempered expectations for rate cuts and on a temporary easing of concerns about an imminent U.S. attack on Iran. Spot gold slipped 0.4% to $3,355.97 an ounce, as of 1029 GMT, and was down 2.2% for the week so far. U.S. gold futures shed 1% to $3,372.20. The dollar was up 0.4% so far this week and poised for its biggest weekly gain in over a month, making gold more expensive for holders of other currencies. President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the U.S. will get involved in the Israel-Iran air war, the White House said on Thursday. Israel and Iran's air war entered a second week on Friday. Trump's two-week deadline "indicates that things could have a little bit more hope to cool down before the U.S. involvement in that military strike. And I think that's easing some of the anxiety in markets, allowing gold prices to deflate a little", said Nitesh Shah, commodities strategist at WisdomTree. Gold, a safe-haven asset during times of political and economic uncertainty, also tends to thrive in a low interest rate environment. On Wednesday, the Fed held interest rates in the central bank's current 4.25%-4.50% range, but slowed its overall outlook for rate cuts in response to a more challenging economic outlook. Trump reiterated his calls for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, saying on Thursday the rates should be 2.5 percentage points lower. "Gold, silver, and platinum all suffered setbacks as traders booked profits after Wednesday's FOMC meeting," said Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank. "Gold is likely to extend its current consolidation phase with support around $3,320 followed by $3,245." Elsewhere, spot silver slipped 0.7% to $36.12 per ounce, while palladium lost 0.3% to $1,047.43. Platinum fell 1.4% to $1,289.78, after hitting its highest level in over 10 years in the previous session.
