The Shangri-La Dialogue, which has been suspended for two years due to the pandemic, is on the stage again this year. Compared with the Shangri-La Dialogue three years ago or earlier, what remains unchanged is that China is still the target of being "besieged" by the United States and the West. What has changed is that we heard more Asian voices this year.

Many people think that the event held at Shangri-La Hotel, Singapore is naturally hosted by Singapore. But the real sponsor of the Shangri-La Dialogue is the British Institute for International Strategic Studies, a well-known think tank from the United Kingdom.

The Shangri-La Dialogue used to be called the "Asian Security Summit", focusing on Asian security issues. Its agenda arrangement and topic setting are mainly handled by the British Institute for International Strategic Studies, which naturally highlights the views and needs of the United States and the West. In their view, the biggest security problem in Asia is China's threat to the international order and neighboring countries. Therefore, it is not surprising that China has always felt "besieged" at the conference.

The opening ceremony of the Shangri-La Dialogue always features a keynote speech by a head of state. This time it was Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. But his speech was designed out of sinister motives ; as an ally of the United States, Kishida's remarks on issues such as the East China Sea and the South China Sea, as well as "promoting a free and open Indo-Pacific", "strengthening the rules-based international order", obviously resemble the remarks of the United States and its allies "besieging" China.

Kishida's speech does not represent the voice of Asia. On the contrary, at a subsequent plenary meeting, Indonesian Defense Minister Prabowo's speech really made an "Asian voice" different from that of the West.

Prabowo proposed that differences between countries should be resolved in an "Asian way". He said Indonesia refused to "pick sides" and would not join any military-political alliance. When answering questions on the spot, he bluntly stated that he did not agree with the "block-oriented organization" initiated by the United States in the Asia-Pacific region. He also elaborated, "China has always been a great civilization. As the leader of Asia for thousands of years, China's influence has spread throughout Southeast Asia. Therefore, we urge all countries to respect China's legitimate rise as a great civilization."

He also said that China was at the vanguard of the anti-colonial movement. China has always been a good friend of Indonesia. However, Asian countries have shared experiences of being dominated, enslaved and exploited by major powers, forcing regional countries to devote themselves to creating a peaceful and friendly environment to resolve differences and challenges in an "Asian way". Asia has proven to the world that conflicts can be resolved between former adversaries to achieve nearly 50 years of peace, friendship, cooperation and prosperity.

Although Prabowo spoke with an Indonesian accent, his speech received the most applause. The applause reflected their recognition of Prabowo's speech and their support for his "Asian voice".

There was a scene at the Shangri-La Dialogue, where Zelensky was specially invited to give a speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue through a video. He quoted the words of the founding Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, "If there is no international law, the big fish will eat the small fish, and the small fish will eat shrimp. All of us will no longer exist." Such citations seemed very helpful in his request for more support and assistance from the international community. Moreover, the sentence he quoted has sparked discussions in Singapore and accidentally amplified the "voice of Asia" represented by Lee Kuan Yew.

A local scholar reminded that while emphasizing international law, Lee Kuan Yew also produced the "poisonous shrimp" theory of strengthening comprehensive defense, and had the wisdom of establishing friendly relations with all countries, especially the recently emphasized idea of "not taking sides".

For small countries, "choosing sides" means getting involved in the confrontation between big countries, which is impossible to bring about security. On the other hand, Ukraine is precisely "choosing sides". Before the outbreak of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, NATO provided it with a large amount of weapons and held joint military exercises. Ukraine has long been a "poisonous shrimp", but this did not prevent war. The obvious difference is that it does not have Singapore's wisdom of "not choosing sides".

At this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue, Indonesian Defense Minister Prabowo bluntly said in his speech that his country won't choose a side. Obviously, this stance has almost become the unanimous choice of ASEAN countries.

When answering questions from the media outside the event, Singapore's Defense Minister Huang Yonghong said that both China and the United States stated this time that "there is no need to choose a side, and you are not required to choose a side." Southeast Asian countries will feel at ease it. However, he also added, "Whether this is the case or not, only the facts can prove it." This seemed to hint at his concerns.

Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Huang Yonghong said that we are at a potentially dangerous moment in history. To change this trajectory and avoid catastrophe, it is necessary to prevent events from escalating and avoid new conflicts in Asia.

He pointed out that the core issue in Asia is not the struggle between autocracy and democracy. He believes that the interdependence of Asian countries is far more mature, effective and mutually beneficial than the relationship between Russia and Europe. For example, China is the number one trading partner of almost all Asian countries.

Huang Yonghong also pointed out that to stay away from conflict, trust must be built, which shall take time. He believes that this period of peace in Asia must be used to build strategic trust and confidence.

Therefore, Huang Yonghong repeatedly stressed the importance of strengthening communication and dialogue. As for some people, the Shangri-La Dialogue will be regarded as an ambush against China. He said that it is better to answer a series of tricky questions and explain his position on an open platform than to avoid these questions. He emphasized that the Chinese delegation's participation in the Shangri-La Dialogue for many years can help other countries concerned about China to better understand China.

Obviously, continuous exchanges and dialogues have deepened Asian countries' understanding and trust in China. This is the reason why we can hear more "Asian voices" this year. Southeast Asian countries have made it clear that they will not "choose sides" in the Sino-US game. But that doesn't mean they don't have independent opinions and don’t have their own voice. In this regard, this Shangri-La Dialogue has indeed created a gratifying situation.

(Author: Li Yeming, Singapore current affairs commentator)