Indonesia appears to have ceded its position as Asean’s natural leader to Singapore in a new survey of regional opinion leaders, with analysts pinning the shift on President Prabowo Subianto’s preference for pursuing Jakarta’s ambitions outside the regional bloc.
More than 2,000 policymakers, researchers and business figures from across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations were polled by the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute for its latest annual State of Southeast Asia survey.
When asked which member state had contributed most to addressing key regional challenges, 31.3 per cent of respondents chose Singapore, ahead of Indonesia on 22.2 per cent and Malaysia on 21.3 per cent. Collectively, the three countries accounted for nearly three-quarters of responses.
Those who chose Singapore cited the city state’s economic leadership in shaping regional discussions, while those who chose Indonesia pointed to Jakarta’s ability to build consensus within the bloc.
Both countries also topped the rankings in the previous two editions of the survey, though the question then asked which members had contributed most to Asean’s long-term development, rather than this year’s framing around regional leadership.
Indonesia has long been regarded as Asean’s de facto leader by virtue of its sheer size – accounting for more than 40 per cent of the bloc’s population and land mass and over one-third of its gross domestic product.
Jakarta has been home to the Asean Secretariat since 1976 and Indonesian leaders were instrumental in creating key regional mechanisms, including the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and the Asean Regional Forum.
The shift in perception stems from the impression that Prabowo is more interested in establishing Indonesia as an “international actor of consequence on its own terms” rather than through Asean, according to Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore.
“The Prabowo administration’s policies are also highly varied, some say unpredictable,” he said. “Compared with Singapore’s consistency, perhaps that led to a discount of Indonesia’s role among respondents.”
The Prabowo administration’s policies are also highly varied, some say unpredictable
Chong Ja Ian, political scientist
Dinna Prapto Raharja, co-founder of consulting firm Synergy Policies, said Prabowo had continued the approach adopted by his predecessor Joko Widodo in his second term – namely, “to participate procedurally in Asean rather than substantially, thinking that Indonesia’s interests would better be served through non-Asean means”.
Since winning the last election in 2024, Prabowo has favoured direct bilateral agreements with major powers and others to secure Indonesia’s economic and security interests. His early post-election visits to China, the United States and Russia were read by analysts as signalling a multi-alignment strategy rather than one channelled through Asean.
Singapore and Indonesia had traditionally been the most vocal in proposing ideas for addressing regional challenges, Chong said, adding that successive Singaporean governments had warned about “changes to the international system” while also championing international law, economic liberalisation and regional integration.
Indonesia, for its part, was the leading proponent of concepts such as the Asean Outlook on the Indo-Pacific – which focuses on maritime cooperation, connectivity, sustainable development and economic cooperation – and the Asean Political-Security Community, aimed at ensuring regional peace and stability.
Jakarta also championed the idea of making Asean the “Epicentrum of Growth”, positioning the region as a hub for global economic activity.
But Indonesia’s handling of key regional issues may have dented its reputation as Asean’s leading contributor, according to Juhn Chris Espia, an associate professor of political science at the University of the Philippines Visayas.
He cited its joint statement on maritime cooperation with China in 2024, which was “criticised for going against the position of Asean states and of Indonesia itself.”
The statement included language on “overlapping claims” in the South China Sea widely interpreted as tacitly recognising China’s nine-dash line claim to much of the disputed waterway – a position Indonesia’s foreign ministry later walked back.
Espia also pointed to Jakarta’s “quiet diplomatic approach” towards the Myanmar conflict during its chairmanship of Asean in 2023, which he said was broadly viewed as “ineffectual”.
Even so, Indonesia was the region’s “natural leader and will remain so in the years to come”, Espia said, noting that the country has had to contend with a number of major domestic issues in recent years – from corruption cases to weakened democratic institutions and mounting financial pressure – that had diverted its attention from regional affairs.
Singapore, meanwhile, had burnished its reputation as a “safe hand” on regional stability, Espia said, citing its “strong and open relationship” with both Washington and Beijing.
“This has allowed it to act as a trusted go-between between these two competing powers, as well as a link between Asean and the European Union,” he said.
The city state has also championed regional integration frameworks such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Analysts urged caution in interpreting the survey’s findings, however.
Chong noted that the study measured opinions and perceptions, not actual outcomes. “Impressions and opinions may also reflect media visibility more than action and consequence,” he said.
Dinna further suggested that the results partly reflected the survey’s composition – Singapore had the highest number of respondents at 246 (12.3 per cent), followed by Indonesia at 236 (11.8 per cent) and the Philippines at 211 (10.5 per cent).
With economic challenges dominating respondents’ concerns, she said Singapore’s status as the region’s wealthiest economy “unsurprisingly” boosted its standing in the results.
The survey, which drew on responses from 2,008 policymakers, academics, business representatives, civil society figures and officials from regional and international organisations across Asean, was released on April 7.