The Traditional US Economic Waterfall Model:

• The US served as the upstream source of innovation, funding research, setting regulatory standards, and creating new technologies
• Other countries benefited downstream through technology transfer, manufacturing opportunities, and access to innovations
• This was particularly evident in pharmaceuticals (FDA approvals, biotech funding), semiconductors (chip architecture), and global trade (WTO system)

Signs of Change Under Trump’s Policies:

• Pharmaceuticals: The “most favoured nation” drug pricing policy aims to reduce US costs but may discourage R&D investment globally
• Semiconductors: Moving from broad frameworks to case-by-case negotiations, potentially using chip access as diplomatic leverage
• Trade: Abandoning multilateral approaches for bilateral deals, weakening the WTO system

Implications for Smaller Economies: The author suggests this shift creates opportunities for countries like Singapore to “reset and reposition” themselves. Singapore appears well-positioned because:

• It has strong manufacturing capabilities in both pharma and semiconductors
• It maintains good relationships with both the US and China
• It has shown reliability in enforcing trade regulations
• It’s actively pursuing digital economy initiatives

The Broader Theme: Rather than American decline, this represents a “diffusion” of power—— the US stepping back from its role as global economic underwriter. At the same time, other players gain more influence in shaping economic systems.

The Decline of Pax Americana: Strategic Implications for Singapore, Asia, and ASEAN

Understanding Pax Americana’s Transformation

The concept of Pax Americana—an American-led global peace and economic order—has defined the international system since 1945. However, we’re witnessing not necessarily its collapse but rather its fundamental transformation from a system of benevolent hegemony to one of transactional engagement.

The Traditional Pax Americana Model

For seven decades, the United States maintained global stability through:

Economic Leadership: The US provided global public goods—open markets, stable currency (dollar as reserve currency), technology transfer, and capital flows. American consumers served as the “buyer of last resort” for global exports.

Security Architecture: Bilateral and multilateral defence arrangements (NATO, US-Japan Security Treaty, ANZUS) provided security guarantees that allowed allies to focus on economic development rather than military buildup.

Institutional Framework: The US created and led international institutions (UN Security Council, IMF, World Bank, WTO) that set global rules and norms.

Innovation Ecosystem: American universities, research institutions, and companies drove technological advancement that benefited the world through spillover effects.

The Erosion: From Hegemony to Transactionalism

Structural Factors

Economic Multipolarity: China’s rise as the world’s second-largest economy and manufacturer has created a bipolar economic system. The US share of global GDP has declined from over 50% in 1945 to around 24% today.

Technological Competition: The US no longer enjoys unchallenged technological supremacy. China leads in areas like 5G, electric vehicles, and renewable energy, while Europe dominates in some industrial technologies.

Fiscal Constraints: America’s rising national debt (over $33 trillion) and domestic infrastructure needs limit its capacity to provide global public goods without domestic political backlash.

Policy Shifts Under Trump 2.0

“America First” Redux: The return to explicit transactionalism—demanding that allies pay more for security, renegotiating trade deals, and using economic tools as weapons.

Institutional Scepticism: Weakening multilateral institutions (WTO paralysis, Paris Agreement withdrawal) in favour of bilateral arrangements where US leverage is maximised

Economic Weaponisation: Using dollar dominance, technology controls, and market access as coercive tools rather than sources of global stability.

Regional Implications: Asia in Transition

The China Factor

China’s rise presents both opportunity and challenge for Asian states:

Economic Integration: China is now the largest trading partner for most Asian countries, creating economic interdependence that constrains policy options.

Belt and Road Initiative: Offers alternative infrastructure financing but raises concerns about debt sustainability and political influence.

Military Assertiveness: South China Sea disputes and Taiwan tensions create security dilemmas for regional states.

Strategic Responses

Asian countries are pursuing hedging strategies:

Economic Hedging: Maintaining trade relationships with both the US and China while diversifying supply chains.

Security Hedging: Strengthening indigenous defence capabilities while maintaining US security ties.

Institutional Hedging: Creating alternative multilateral frameworks (RCEP, CPTPP) that don’t depend on US leadership.

ASEAN’s Navigation Strategy

The ASEAN Way Under Pressure

ASEAN’s traditional approach of non-interference, consensus-building, and neutrality faces severe tests:

Great Power Competition: The US-China rivalry forces uncomfortable choices between economic interests (China) and security concerns (US).

Institutional Fragmentation: Different ASEAN members have varying degrees of alignment with either great power, threatening organisational cohesion.

Economic Coercion: Both powers use economic tools to pressure ASEAN states, undermining the group’s autonomy.

ASEAN’s Adaptive Responses

Minilateralism: Pursuing smaller, more focused groupings (QUAD, AUKUS participation by some members) while maintaining ASEAN centrality.

Economic Regionalism: Advancing RCEP and other regional trade agreements to reduce dependence on any single power.

Strategic Autonomy: Developing indigenous capabilities in critical areas like cybersecurity, space technology, and digital infrastructure.

Singapore’s Strategic Calculus

Unique Positioning

Singapore occupies a distinctive position in this transforming order:

Geographic Advantage: Control of the Malacca Straits—a critical chokepoint for global trade—provides strategic leverage.

Economic Sophistication: A developed economy with advanced financial services, technology sectors, and manufacturing capabilities.

Diplomatic Agility: Successful track record of balancing great power relationships while maintaining sovereignty.

Strategic Opportunities

Financial Hub Expansion: As US-China decoupling accelerates, Singapore can serve as a neutral financial intermediary and regional headquarters location.

Technology Bridging: Positioning as a trusted partner for both Western and Chinese technology companies seeking regional expansion.

Supply Chain Resilience: Becoming a key node in diversified supply chains as companies reduce dependence on single countries.

Digital Leadership: Leveraging advanced digital infrastructure to become a regional data hub and digital services centre.

Strategic Challenges

Forced Choices: Increasing pressure to choose sides in technology standards, financial systems, and security arrangements.

Economic Vulnerabilities: Heavy dependence on global trade makes Singapore vulnerable to protectionist trends and supply chain disruptions.

Minor State Limitations: Limited ability to shape global rules despite sophisticated diplomatic capabilities.

Sector-Specific Implications

Pharmaceuticals

Opportunity: Singapore’s established biopharma manufacturing base positions it well as companies diversify away from China-dependent supply chains.

Challenge: US pressure on drug pricing could reduce industry profitability and R&D investment, affecting Singapore’s biopharma sector.

Strategy: Leverage zero-tariff proposals and regulatory excellence to attract more pharmaceutical investment.

Semiconductors

Critical Position: Singapore’s 10% share of global chip supply makes it strategically important to both the US and China.

Technology Controls: Must navigate increasingly complex export control regimes while maintaining market access.

Investment Attraction: Can benefit from supply chain diversification if it maintains technological neutrality.

Financial Services

Dollar Dominance: Singapore’s role as a central USD trading hub could be both an asset and a liability as monetary weaponisation increases.

Digital Currency: Potential to develop alternative payment systems that reduce dependence on the US financial infrastructure.

Regulatory Arbitrage: Opportunity to attract firms seeking alternatives to increasingly restrictive US and European regulations.

Long-term Scenarios and Strategic Implications

Scenario 1: Managed Competition

The US and China establish stable rules of competition, allowing middle powers like Singapore to maintain balanced relationships. ASEAN remains cohesive and central to regional architecture.

Implications: Singapore continues its current hedging strategy, ASEAN maintains institutional relevance, and regional stability is preserved.

Scenario 2: Cold War 2.0

Deepening US-China rivalry forces binary choices across all domains. Regional states must pick sides, potentially fragmenting ASEAN.

Implications: Singapore faces difficult alignment decisions, ASEAN splits into pro-US and pro-China camps, and regional integration stalls.

Scenario 3: Multipolar Fragmentation

Multiple regional powers (India, Japan, Indonesia) emerge as significant players, creating a more complex but potentially more balanced system.

Implications: Singapore has more options for partnerships, ASEAN gains importance as a neutral forum, but coordination becomes more difficult.

Scenario 4: US Withdrawal

Accelerated American retrenchment leaves a power vacuum that China fills, potentially creating a China-centric Asian order.

Implications: Singapore must accommodate Chinese preferences while maintaining economic openness, ASEAN becomes less relevant, and regional autonomy is diminished.

Strategic Recommendations

For Singapore

Diversify Partnerships: Deepen relationships with middle powers (Japan, India, Australia) to reduce dependence on great power patronage.

Invest in Strategic Capabilities: Develop indigenous strengths in cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and advanced manufacturing.

Maintain Financial Neutrality: Preserve Singapore’s role as a neutral financial hub while preparing for potential monetary fragmentation.

Lead Digital Innovation: Spearhead regional digital integration initiatives that create alternative pathways to technological development.

For ASEAN

Strengthen Institutional Resilience: Develop crisis management mechanisms and conflict resolution procedures to manage tremendous power pressure.

Accelerate Economic Integration: Fast-track initiatives like the ASEAN Single Window and Digital Economy Framework to create regional interdependence.

Develop Strategic Autonomy: Build collective capabilities in areas like cybersecurity, space technology, and disaster response.

Maintain Non-Alignment: Resist pressure to align with either great power while maximising benefits from both relationships.

For the Region

Infrastructure Development: Reduce dependence on any single power source for critical infrastructure through diversified financing and technology sources.

Regulatory Harmonisation: Develop common standards and regulations that reduce compliance costs and increase regional competitiveness.

Crisis Preparedness: Establish regional mechanisms for managing supply chain disruptions, financial crises, and security threats.

Conclusion: Navigating Uncertainty

The decline of Pax Americana represents both a challenge and an opportunity for Singapore, ASEAN, and Asia more broadly. While the loss of American hegemonic stability creates uncertainty, it also opens space for regional powers to shape their own destiny.

Success will require sophisticated balancing acts: maintaining relationships with all major powers while preserving strategic autonomy, promoting regional integration while managing internal diversity, and adapting to changing global rules while shaping them where possible.

The countries and institutions that best navigate this transition will be those that combine strategic foresight with tactical flexibility, building resilience while remaining open to opportunity. For Singapore and ASEAN, this means leveraging their geographic advantages, economic sophistication, and diplomatic experience to create a more balanced and stable regional order—one that serves their interests regardless of which great power ultimately dominates the global system.

The Twilight of Pax Americana: A Comprehensive Analysis of Global Transformation and Regional Implications

Executive Summary

The post-World War II international order, characterised by American hegemonic leadership and global public goods provision, is undergoing fundamental transformation. This analysis examines the decline of Pax Americana, its root causes, global implications, and specific impacts on Singapore and ASEAN. The shift from benevolent hegemony to transactional engagement represents one of the most significant geopolitical transitions since 1945, with profound consequences for international trade, security architectures, and regional stability.

Historical Context: The Architecture of American Hegemony

The Golden Age of Pax Americana (1945-2008)

The American-led international order emerged from the ashes of World War II, built on several foundational pillars that distinguished it from previous hegemonic systems. Unlike British imperialism, which relied heavily on direct colonial control, American hegemony operated through a sophisticated network of institutions, alliances, and economic incentives that made cooperation profitable for subordinate states.

---

Economic Foundation: The Bretton Woods system established the US dollar as the global reserve currency, giving America what French Finance Minister Valéry Giscard d’Estaing famously called an “exorbitant privilege.” This monetary dominance allowed the US to finance global operations through seigniorage while providing liquidity for international trade. American consumers became the “buyer of last resort” for global exports, particularly from Asia, creating a virtuous cycle where export-oriented economies proliferated while supporting American consumption.

Institutional Architecture: The United States created and dominated key international institutions—the United Nations Security Council (with veto power), the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and later the World Trade Organisation. These institutions embedded American preferences into global governance structures while providing legitimacy through multilateral processes. The genius of this system was that it appeared consensual even as it served American interests.

Security Umbrella: The US maintained a global military presence through over 800 overseas bases and a network of bilateral and multilateral security agreements. This “empire of bases” provided security guarantees that allowed allies to focus resources on economic development rather than military expenditure, creating what scholars call the “security-prosperity nexus.”

Technological Leadership: American universities, research institutions, and corporations dominated global innovation across multiple sectors. The combination of public research funding (particularly defence-related), venture capital, and entrepreneurial culture created a self-reinforcing ecosystem of technological advancement that benefited the world through spillover effects.

The Social Contract of Hegemony

What made Pax Americana sustainable was an implicit social contract: the US provided global public goods (security, economic stability, technological innovation, crisis management) in exchange for deference to American leadership and participation in American-designed institutions. This arrangement benefited both the hegemon and its subordinates, creating what International Relations scholars call a “benevolent hegemony.”

The system’s legitimacy rested on several key principles:

• Multilateralism: American power was exercised through international institutions rather than unilateral diktat
• Economic Openness: The US maintained relatively open markets despite its dominant position
• Technological Sharing: American innovations diffused globally, raising living standards worldwide
• Crisis Management: The US served as a global crisis manager during financial, political, and natural disasters

The Structural Foundations of Decline

Economic Multipolarity and Relative Decline

The most fundamental driver of change is the shift from American economic dominance to multipolarity. In 1945, the US accounted for approximately 50% of global GDP; today, that figure has declined to around 24%. This isn’t necessarily absolute decline—the American economy remains the world’s most significant—but relative decline that has profound implications for global power dynamics.

China’s Economic Ascent: China’s transformation from a closed, agricultural economy to the world’s manufacturing powerhouse represents perhaps the most dramatic economic development in human history. Since 1978, China’s economy has grown at an average rate of nearly 10% annually, lifting over 800 million people out of poverty and creating the world’s largest middle class. China now accounts for approximately 18% of global GDP and is the largest trading partner for over 120 countries.

The Manufacturing Exodus: Beginning in the 1980s, American manufacturing began migrating to lower-cost locations, particularly in Asia. This process, initially viewed as beneficial economic specialisation, has resulted in the US losing its industrial base in key sectors. Today, China produces over 50% of global steel and 60% of global cement and dominates manufacturing in electronics, textiles, and consumer goods.

Technology Transfer and Innovation Diffusion: The assumption that technological leadership would remain permanently Western has proven false. China has successfully absorbed and improved upon transferred technologies, while also developing indigenous innovation capabilities. Chinese companies now lead in areas like 5G telecommunications, electric vehicles, renewable energy, and digital payments.

Domestic Political Transformation

Elite Consensus Breakdown: The post-war foreign policy establishment, which maintained bipartisan support for international engagement, has fragmented. The end of the Cold War removed the unifying threat that justified global commitments, while economic globalisation created domestic winners and losers that realigned political coalitions.

Populist Backlash: Both left and right populist movements have challenged the internationalist consensus. From different perspectives, they argue that global engagement has benefited elites at the expense of ordinary Americans. This sentiment found expression in both Bernie Sanders’ critique of trade deals and Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda.

Fiscal Constraints: The 2008 financial crisis and subsequent recession highlighted the fiscal costs of global leadership. With national debt exceeding $33 trillion and growing, there’s increasing domestic pressure to prioritise domestic needs over international commitments.

Technological Disruption and Competition

Digital Revolution: The internet and digital technologies have created new forms of power and influence that don’t necessarily favour established hegemonies. Information flows, cyber capabilities, and digital platforms have democratised certain forms of influence while creating new vulnerabilities.

Emerging Technology Competition: Unlike the Cold War, where technological competition was primarily military, today’s competition spans civilian technologies with dual-use applications. Artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and renewable energy are reshaping the global economy in ways that advantage different countries.

Supply Chain Vulnerabilities: The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of globalised supply chains, particularly in critical sectors like pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. This has prompted a reassessment of the trade-offs between efficiency and resilience.

The Trump Era: Accelerating Transformation

From Multilateralism to Bilateralism

The Trump administration’s approach represented a decisive break with post-war American foreign policy traditions. Rather than working through international institutions, the administration pursued bilateral negotiations where American leverage could be maximised. This shift from multilateral to bilateral engagement fundamentally altered the nature of international cooperation.

Trade Policy Revolution: The abandonment of multilateral trade agreements (TPP withdrawal) in favour of bilateral negotiations signalled a rejection of the liberal trade order. The US-China trade war, NAFTA renegotiation, and threats against allies represented the weaponisation of economic interdependence.

Alliance Transformation: Traditional allies were treated as economic competitors who needed to pay more for American security guarantees. This transactional approach undermined the legitimacy that had made American leadership sustainable.

Institutional Withdrawal: From the Paris Climate Agreement to the WHO, the Trump administration demonstrated a willingness to abandon international institutions when they constrained American freedom of action.

The Second Trump Term: Institutionalising Change

The return of Donald Trump to the presidency in 2025 suggests that the first term was not an aberration but the beginning of a fundamental reorientation of American grand strategy. Key policy directions include:

Economic Nationalism: The “most favoured nation” drug pricing policy and renewed tariff threats indicate a systematic effort to extract better terms from international economic relationships.

Technology Sovereignty: The case-by-case approach to chip exports represents a departure from multilateral technology governance toward bilateral arrangements thamaximiseze American leverage.

Alliance Restructuring: Security partnerships are being renegotiated on more explicitly transactional terms, with allies expected to bear greater costs and accept more constraints on their China relationships.

Global Implications: The Unravelling of Liberal Order

Economic Fragmentation

Supply Chain Reorganisation era of globally integrated supply chains optimised for efficiency is giving way to regionalised or “friend-shored” networks prioritising resilience and political reliability. This transformation has profound implications for global productivity and economic growth.

Currency Competition: The weaponisation of the dollar through sanctions and financial restrictions is accelerating efforts to develop alternative payment systems. While the dollar remains dominant, initiatives like China’s digital yuan, European payment systems, and cryptocurrency adoption represent long-term challenges to American monetary hegemony.

Trade Bloc Formation: The collapse of multilateral trade negotiations is leading to the formation of competing regional trade blocs. RCEP in Asia, the African Continental Free Trade Area, and potential European-Latin American partnerships represent attempts to create alternative frameworks for economic integration.

Security Architecture Transformation

Alliance Diversification: Traditional American allies are diversifying their security partnerships to reduce dependence on the US. Examples include growing defence cooperation between European nations, the expansion of the Quad in the Indo-Pacific, and new security partnerships in the Middle East.

Military Technology Proliferation: As American security guarantees become less reliable, more countries are developing indigenous defence capabilities, including nuclear weapons. This trend toward military self-reliance could destabilise regions previously pacified by American hegemony.

Proxy Competition: Rather than direct confrontation, great power competition is increasingly playing out through proxy conflicts and grey-zone operations that blur the lines between peace and war.

Institutional Decay and Innovation

Multilateral Institution Crisis: Key international institutions are experiencing legitimacy crises as their most prominent members withdraw support or funding. The WTO’s paralysed dispute resolution system and the UN Security Council’s deadlock over major issues exemplify this trend.

Alternative Institution Building: Non-Western powers are creating alternative institutions that exclude the US or reduce its influence. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, BRICS expansion, and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation represent efforts to create parallel governance structures.

Minilateral Arrangements: The gap left by weakening multilateral institutions is being filled by smaller, more focused groupings that can achieve consensus more easily but lack universal legitimacy.

Regional Analysis: Asia’s Strategic Transformation

China’s Ascendant Influence

Economic Integration: China has become the largest trading partner for most Asian countries, creating economic dependencies that constrain policy options. The Belt and Road Initiative extends this influence through infrastructure investments that reshape regional connectivity.

Military Modernisation: China’s military buildup, particularly in naval capabilities, is shifting regional power balances. The South China Sea disputes and Taiwan tensions create security dilemmas that force regional states to choose between economic interests and security concerns.

Technological Leadership: China’s advances in 5G, artificial intelligence, and green technology provide alternative sources of innovation and standard-setting that challenge American technological hegemony.

India’s Strategic Autonomy

Multi-Alignment: India pursues relationships with all major powers while avoiding exclusive partnerships. This approach allows India to benefit from competition between the US, China, and Russia while maintaining policy independence.

Regional Leadership: India’s growing economic and military capabilities position it as a potential counterweight to Chinese influence in South Asia. However, border disputes with China and complex relationships with neighbours limit its regional influence.

Technology Ambitions: India’s large domestic market and technological capabilities in software and pharmaceuticals provide opportunities for indigenous innovation that reduces dependence on foreign technology.

Japan’s Strategic Adaptation Defence Normalisation

Defence Normalisation: Japan is expanding its defence capabilities and security partnerships beyond the US alliance. The recent decision to develop counterstrike capabilities represents a significant shift in the Japanese defence posture.

Economic Diversification: While maintaining strong economic ties with China, Japan is leading efforts to create alternative supply chains and technology partnerships that reduce dependence on any single country.

Diplomatic Activism: Japan is taking a more active role in regional diplomacy, particularly in Southeast Asia, where it competes with China for influence through infrastructure investments and development assistance.

ASEAN’s Strategic Dilemma

The Challenge of Great Power Competition

ASEAN faces an existential challenge in managing the intensifying competition between the United States and China. The organisation’s traditional approach of maintaining neutrality and avoiding forced choices becomes increasingly complex when both powers demand exclusive loyalty in critical areas.

Economic Dependencies: Most ASEAN countries depend on China for trade and investment while relying on the US for security and technology. This dual dependency makes them vulnerable to economic coercion from both sides.

Institutional Pressure: The US and China are pressuring ASEAN countries to choose between competing regional architectures. The US promotes the Quad and AUKUS, while China advocates for Asian-only institutions that exclude Western powers.

Internal Divisions: ASEAN member states have different relationships with the great powers, creating internal tensions. Countries like the Philippines and Singapore maintain close US ties, while Cambodia and Laos are more aligned with China.

Adaptive Strategies

Hedging Behaviour ASEAN countries are pursuing sophisticated hedging strategies that attempt to maximise the benefits of both powers while minimising risks. These strategies include economic diversification, security partnerships with multiple countries, and institutional engagement across different forums.

Minilateral Engagement: Unable to achieve consensus on divisive issues, ASEAN countries are increasingly engaging in smaller groupings that can move more quickly. Examples include some members’ participation in the Quad and various subregional initiatives.

Indigenous Capacity Building: Recognising the limitations of external dependence, ASEAN is investing in indigenous capabilities in cybersecurity, space technology, and crisis management.

The ASEAN Way Under Stress

The organisation’s core principles—non-interference, consensus-building, and informality—face severe testing in the current environment:

Non-Interference Principle: Domestic political developments in member states increasingly have regional implications, making non-interference harder to maintain. The Myanmar crisis exemplifies this challenge.

Consensus Requirement: The need for unanimity slows ASEAN’s response to rapid changes and potentially marginalises the organisation in crisis management.

Informality Preference: While flexibility has been an asset, the lack of binding commitments makes ASEAN less effective when member states face intense external pressures to defect.

Singapore: Navigating the Perfect Storm

Strategic Assets and Advantages

Singapore’s unique position in the transforming international order stems from several strategic assets that provide both opportunities and responsibilities:

Geographic Centrality: Control of the Malacca Strait, through which 25% of global trade passes, provides Singapore with strategic leverage that both great powers must respect. This geographic advantage becomes more important as supply chains regionalise.

Financial Hub Status: As one of the world’s leading financial centres, Singapore serves as a crucial node in global capital flows. The country’s political stability, regulatory sophistication, and cultural neutrality make it attractive for both Western and Asian financial institutions.

Technological Capabilities: Singapore’s advanced digital infrastructure, skilled workforce, and government support for innovation position it well in the technology-driven global economy. The country leads in areas like fintech, smart city technology, and biotechnology.

Diplomatic Sophistication: Singapore’s foreign policy establishment has successfully navigated great power relationships for decades, building trust and credibility with all major players. This diplomatic capital becomes increasingly valuable in a multipolar world.

Strategic Challenges and Vulnerabilities

Forced Alignment Pressure: As great power competition intensifies, Singapore faces increasing pressure to choose sides on critical issues like technology standards, financial systems, and security arrangements. The traditional “useful to all, loyal to none” approach becomes harder to maintain.

Economic Dependencies: Singapore’s prosperity depends heavily on international trade, making it vulnerable to protectionist trends and supply chain disruptions. The country’s small domestic market provides a limited buffer against external shocks.

Security Vulnerabilities: As a small state, Singapore cannot ensure its own security in the face of major power confrontations. The country must carefully balance relationships to avoid becoming a target or casualty of great power competition.

Technological Sovereignty: Singapore’s dependence on foreign technology, particularly in critical areas like semiconductors and telecommunications, creates vulnerabilities for competitors to exploit.

Strategic Responses and Adaptations

Multi-Vector Diplomacy: Singapore pursues relationships with all major powers while avoiding exclusive partnerships. This includes maintaining close ties with the US through defence cooperation while deepening economic relationships with China.

Economic Diversification: The country is working to reduce dependence on any single market or sector through initiatives like the Industry Transformation Programme and the Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2030 plan.

Indigenous Capability Development: Singapore is investing heavily in developing indigenous capabilities in critical areas like cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and advanced manufacturing to reduce foreign dependence.

Regional Leadership: Singapore plays an active role in ASEAN and other regional forums, working to maintain regional stability and prevent the fragmentation that would undermine its own prosperity.

Sector-Specific Implications

Financial Services: Singapore’s role as a neutral financial hub provides opportunities as the US-China decoupling creates demand for third-party intermediation. However, the weaponisation of financial systems could force uncomfortable choices about compliance with competing sanctions regimes.

Technology and Innovation: The country’s position as a regional technology hub benefits from supply chain diversification, but export controls and technology restrictions complicate access to cutting-edge technologies.

Trade and Logistics: Singapore’s port and logistics capabilities remain crucial as supply chains reorganise, but trade wars and protectionism threaten the open trading system on which the country depends.

Defence and Security: Singapore must balance participation in US-led security arrangements with the need to maintain workable relationships with China, requiring careful calibration of defence partnerships and arms purchases.

Scenario Analysis: Alternative Futures

Scenario 1: Managed Competition (Probability: 30%)

In this scenario, the US and China establish stable rules of competition that allow for rivalry without complete decoupling. Both powers recognise the costs of excessive confrontation and develop mechanisms for managing competition while maintaining economic relationships.

Characteristics:

• Limited technological decoupling in sensitive sectors
• Continued economic interdependence in most areas
• Institutional competition, but not complete replacement
• Regional states maintain balanced relationships

Implications for Singapore and ASEAN:

• Continued hedging strategies remain viable
• ASEAN maintains institutional relevance as a neutral forum
• Singapore benefits from its role as an intermediary
• Regional integration continues at a measured pace

Scenario 2: Cold War 2.0 (Probability: 35%)

Deepening US-China rivalry creates a bipolar system similar to the Cold War, with competing blocs and limited interaction between them. Regional states face intense pressure to choose sides across multiple domains.

Characteristics:

• Comprehensive decoupling in technology and finance
• Competing alliance systems and institutions
• Economic blocs with limited cross-bloc trade
• Proxy conflicts and grey-zone competition

Implications for Singapore and ASEAN:

• Forced alignment decisions create internal ASEAN tensions
• Singapore faces a difficult choice between economic and security interests
• Regional integration stalls as countries choose different blocs
• Increased military competition and arms races

Scenario 3: Multipolar Fragmentation (Probability: 25%)

The decline of American hegemony leads not to Chinese dominance but to a fragmented system with multiple regional powers. India, Japan, Indonesia, and European powers emerge as significant independent actors.

Characteristics:

• Multiple competing power centres
• Complex, shifting alliance patterns
• Regional spheres of influence
• Reduced global governance capacity

Implications for Singapore and ASEAN:

• More options for partnerships and hedging
• ASEAN gains importance as a regional balancer
• Increased complexity in diplomatic relationships
• Greater autonomy but less stability

Scenario 4: Chinese Hegemony (Probability: 10%)

Accelerated American decline or withdrawal leads to Chinese dominance in Asia, creating a China-centric regional order with limited Western presence.

Characteristics:

• Chinese-led institutions dominate the region
• Yuan becomes regional reserve currency
• US military presence has been significantly reduced
• China sets regional rules and norms

Implications for Singapore and ASEAN:

• Must accommodate Chinese preferences
• ASEAN becomes less relevant as China deals bilaterally
• Singapore’s neutrality becomes less valuable
• Regional autonomy is significantly constrained

Strategic Recommendations

For Singapore

Diversify Strategic Partnerships: Deepen relationships with middle powers (Japan, India, Australia, South Korea) to create alternatives to significant power dependence. This includes expanding defence cooperation, technology partnerships, and economic relationships.

Invest in Strategic Autonomy: Develop indigenous capabilities in critical areas, including cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and financial technology. This will reduce dependence while creating new sources of competitive advantage.

Maintain Financial Neutrality: Preserve Singapore’s role as a neutral financial hub while preparing for potential monetary fragmentation. This includes developing capabilities in digital currencies and alternative payment systems.

Lead Digital Integration: Spearhead regional initiatives in digital economy integration, data governance, and technological standards. Singapore’s advanced digital infrastructure provides natural leadership opportunities.

Strengthen Crisis Management: Develop robust contingency plans for various scenarios, including supply chain disruptions, financial crises, and security conflicts. This includes stockpiling critical supplies and maintaining flexible diplomatic options.

For ASEAN

Institutional Strengthening: Develop more effective crisis management mechanisms and decision-making procedures that can function even when consensus is challenging to achieve. This might include weighted voting systems or opt-out mechanisms for non-participating members.

Economic Integration Acceleration: Fast-track economic integration initiatives, including the ASEAN Single Market, digital economy framework, and financial market integration. Deeper economic ties create resilience against external pressure.

Strategic Autonomy Development: Build collective capabilities in areas like cybersecurity, space technology, disaster response, and crisis management. This reduces dependence on external powers for critical capabilities.

Flexible Engagement: Develop frameworks that allow for different levels of participation in various initiatives, recognising that members have different interests and capabilities.

External Balancing: Maintain engagement with all major powers while resisting pressure for exclusive alignment. This includes developing relationships with middle powers and other regional organisations.

Regional Strategies

Infrastructure Diversification: Reduce dependence on any single power for critical infrastructure through diversified financing and technology sources. This includes developing regional financial institutions and technology partnerships.

Supply Chain Resilience: Create redundant supply chains that can function even if some nodes are disrupted by political or economic conflicts. This requires coordination among multiple countries and companies.

Innovation Ecosystems: Develop regional innovation networks that can compete with both American and Chinese technology ecosystems. This includes university partnerships, research collaboration, and joint development programs.

Crisis Preparedness: Establish regional mechanisms for managing various types of crises, including pandemics, natural disasters, financial disruptions, and security threats.

Conclusion: Navigating Transformation

The decline of Pax Americana represents one of the most significant geopolitical transformations in modern history. For Singapore, ASEAN, and Asia more broadly, this transition creates both unprecedented challenges and unique opportunities.

The key to successful navigation lies in recognising that this is not simply a transition from American to Chinese hegemony, but rather a move toward a more complex, multipolar system where middle powers have greater agency but also greater responsibility for regional stability.

Success will require sophisticated balancing acts: maintaining relationships with all major powers while preserving strategic autonomy, promoting regional integration while managing internal diversity, adapting to changing global rules while shaping them where possible.

The countries and institutions that thrive in this new environment will be those that combine strategic foresight with tactical flexibility, building resilience while remaining open to opportunity. For Singapore and ASEAN, this means leveraging their geographic advantages, economic sophistication, and diplomatic experience to create a more balanced and stable regional order—one that serves their interests regardless of which great power ultimately shapes the global system.

The transformation is already underway, and the window for strategic adaptation is narrowing. The choices made in the next decade will determine whether this transition leads to greater prosperity and stability or to fragmentation and conflict. The stakes could not be higher.

---

A Singaporean’s Journey: Witnessing the Decline from Within

Li Wei’s Story: From the American Dream to American Reckoning

Chapter 1: The Golden Years (2015-2019)

Li Wei arrived in Boston in 2015, fresh from his National University of Singapore degree in biomedical engineering. He carried with him the typical Singaporean reverence for American innovation and opportunity. At 24, he embodied Singapore’s educated, globally mobile elite—fluent in multiple languages, comfortable navigating different cultures, and convinced that America represented the pinnacle of technological and economic achievement.

His first job at a Cambridge biotech startup validated everything he’d been told about American meritocracy. The company, founded by MIT graduates, was developing revolutionary cancer treatments using CRISPR gene editing technology. Venture capital flowed freely, the stock options seemed destined for fortune, and his colleagues spoke confidently about changing the world.

“This is why America leads,” Li Wei would tell his girlfriend Sarah, a fellow Singaporean studying at Harvard Business School. “The ecosystem here—the universities, the capital, the entrepreneurial spirit—Singapore can learn from this.”

Their Boston apartment overlooked the Charles River, and weekend trips to Vermont or Maine felt like scenes from an idealised American narrative. Li Wei joined a Singaporean professional network that met monthly in downtown Boston, where expatriates from his homeland shared stories of American success while maintaining cultural connections over laksa and bak kut teh.

The 2016 2016 Trump election registered as a curiosity rather than a concern. “American politics are always dramatic,” he reasoned, echoing the conventional wisdom among his international peers. But the institutions are strong. The system works.”

Chapter 2: Cracks in the Foundation (2019-2021)

The first signs of trouble emerged not in politics but in the laboratory. By 2019, Li Wei had moved to a larger pharmaceutical company in the Research Triangle of North Carolina, attracted by promises of leading-edge research and career advancement. But the industry was changing in ways that troubled him.

“We’re spending more time on regulatory compliance than actual research,” he complained to Sarah, who had taken a consulting job in New York after graduation. “And the new drug pricing pressures are making everyone nervous about R&D investment.”

The COVID-19 pandemic crystallised deeper problems. While the United States had successfully developed vaccines in record time—a triumph Li Wei celebrated—the broader American response exposed systemic dysfunction that shocked someone raised in Singapore’s efficient governance culture. The politicisation of public health measures, the supply chain failures, the inability to coordinate a coherent national response—all seemed incomprehensible from a Singaporean perspective.

“How can a country that put men on the moon struggle to distribute face masks?” he asked during a video call with his parents in Singapore. His father, a senior civil servant, listened with the polite concern of someone watching a friend’s family dysfunction.

More personally troubling were the changes in his own workplace. The company began restricting collaboration with Chinese researchers, even those at American universities. Li Wei’s own research project—a collaboration with scholars in Shanghai—faced new scrutiny and eventual cancellation. When he asked why, his supervisor’s response chilled him: “Washington doesn’t want us sharing technology with potential competitors.”

This was Li Wei’s first direct encounter with the new American approach to international cooperation. The easy exchange of ideas and people that had made America attractive was giving way to suspicion and restriction.

Chapter 3: The Reckoning Begins (2021-2023)

Sarah’s move to Singapore in 2021 to join a fintech startup marked a turning point in Li Wei’s American experience. For the first time, he found himself alone in a country that felt increasingly unwelcoming to international talent and ideas.

The change was subtle but persistent. At professional conferences, conversations that once ranged freely across international collaborations now carried undercurrents of nationalism and suspicion. A colleague’s casual comment about “foreign competitors” felt personal in ways it hadn’t before. The easy cosmopolitanism that had characterised Boston’s biotech scene was hardening into something more parochial.

Li Wei’s career progression stalled as well. Despite his technical contributions and growing expertise, he found himself passed over for leadership positions that seemed to favour American-born candidates. When he raised this concern with HR, he was told about “national security considerations” in biotechnology leadership—a euphemism that barely concealed the new reality.

The broader political climate was deteriorating, too. The January 6th Capitol riot shocked Li Wei’s parents, who called to ask whether he was safe. “This doesn’t look like the America we know,” his mother said, voicing what many Singaporeans felt watching from afar.

But the economic changes proved most unsettling. The pharmaceutical industry, which had once seemed immune to political interference, found itself increasingly subject to government price controls and regulatory intervention. Li Wei’s company laid off 15% of its workforce in 2022, citing “regulatory uncertainty” and “changing market conditions.”

“Maybe it’s time to consider other options,” Sarah suggested during one of their frequent video calls. She had thrived in Singapore’s fintech scene, working with both Western and Chinese companies in ways that would have been impossible in the increasingly polarised American environment.

Chapter 4: The Decision Point (2023-2024)

The decision to leave America wasn’t sudden but gradual, like watching a relationship slowly deteriorate. Li Wei found himself increasingly isolated professionally and personally, caught between his gratitude for American opportunities and his growing discomfort with American direction.

The final catalyst came in late 2023 when his company announced a major restructuring that would eliminate his research division entirely. “We’re focusing on core domestic markets,” the CEO explained in an all-hands meeting that felt more like a retreat from global ambition than a strategic pivot.

At the same time, Li Wei received an unexpected opportunity: a research position at Singapore’s new National Centre for Biotechnology Excellence, part of the government’s push to reduce dependence on foreign pharmaceutical supply chains. The salary was competitive, the research funding substantial, and the work promised to contribute to Singapore’s strategic autonomy in healthcare.

More importantly, the position offered something America no longer could: a sense of being valued for his contributions rather than viewed as a potential security risk.

“It’s not just about the job,” he explained to his American colleagues at his farewell dinner. “It’s about being part of building something rather than watching something decline.”

Chapter 5: Reverse Migration (2024-2025)

Li Wei’s return to Singapore in early 2024 coincided with a wave of similar reverse migration among Singaporean professionals. The monthly meetings of Singaporean expatriates in Boston, once focused on networking and cultural maintenance, had become informal support groups for people navigating departure from America.

“The American Dream isn’t dead,” reflected Dr. Melissa Tan, a former Harvard Medical School researcher who had returned to Singapore to lead a new precision medicine initiative. “But it’s become much more exclusive, much more inward-looking. For international talent, the opportunities are better elsewhere now.”

Back in Singapore, Li Wei found a country that had changed dramatically during his decade abroad. The gleaming efficiency he remembered was now enhanced by sophisticated digital infrastructure and a thriving innovation ecosystem that rivalled anything he had experienced in America.

His new laboratory at the National Centre was better equipped than his previous workplace in North Carolina, and his colleagues included returnees from MIT, Stanford, and other top American institutions. More surprisingly, the research collaboration network extended across Asia and Europe in ways that would have been impossible in the increasingly isolated American system.

“We’re creating something new here,” explained Dr. James Lim, Li Wei’s new supervisor and a former Genentech executive. “The Americans taught us how to do biotech, but now we’re showing them how to do it in a multipolar world.”

Chapter 6: Reflections on Decline (2025)

Six months after his return, Li Wei found himself in a unique position to observe the transformation of global power dynamics. His former colleagues in America faced increasing restrictions on international collaboration, while his new colleagues in Singapore worked freely with partners across multiple continents.

The contrast was most evident in a joint research project he was leading with teams in Switzerland, Japan, and Australia. This was precisely the kind of multilateral collaboration that had become difficult in the American system. When his former American colleagues expressed interest in participating, the bureaucratic hurdles proved insurmountable.

“It’s sad, really,” Li Wei reflected during a conversation with visiting American investors who were exploring opportunities in Singapore’s biotech sector. America is still incredibly innovative and has amazing talent. But the system is closing itself off from the world that made it great.”

The investors nodded knowingly. They had come to Singapore precisely because the American biotech ecosystem was becoming less hospitable to international collaboration and investment. Singapore offered what America once had: openness, efficiency, and access to global markets and talent.

Li Wei’s personal journey mirrored broader geopolitical shifts. His early reverence for American leadership had given way to recognition that leadership was shifting to countries and regions that remained open to global engagement. Singapore wasn’t trying to replace America as a global hegemon—it was adapting to a world where multiple centres of innovation and capital competed for talent and ideas.

“The American century isn’t ending,” he told his parents during a family dinner in their Tanjong Pagar apartment, with Singapore’s gleaming skyline visible through the windows. “But the American monopoly on the future is over. And maybe that’s not a bad thing.”

Epilogue: The New Normal (2025)

Li Wei’s story illustrates the human dimension of the great power transition. His experience—from admiration for American leadership to disappointment with American insularity—reflects the broader shift in global attitudes toward the United States.

For Singapore, Li Wei’s return represents both a challenge and an opportunity. The country must manage its relationships with a declining but still powerful America while building new partnerships with rising powers. The success of programs like the National Centre for Biotechnology Excellence suggests Singapore is adapting successfully to this transition.

For America, Li Wei’s departure represents a loss that policymakers are only beginning to understand. The country that once attracted the world’s best and brightest through openness and opportunity is now driving them away through suspicion and restriction.

The decline of Pax Americana is not just about military bases or economic statistics—it’s about individual choices by talented people who no longer see America as the land of unlimited possibility. Li Wei’s journey from Boston to Singapore is being repeated thousands of times across multiple countries and industries, creating a reverse brain drain that will shape global power dynamics for decades to come.

In Singapore’s gleaming laboratories and innovation centres, former American expatriates are building the future that America once promised. They carry with them both gratitude for American training and relief at escaping American constraints. Their success or failure will determine whether the transition from American hegemony leads to greater global prosperity or to fragmentation and decline.

For now, Li Wei is optimistic. “Singapore taught me that small countries can have a big impact if they’re smart about partnerships and positioning,” he says. “America taught me how to innovate. Now I’m combining both lessons to build something new.”

He believes the future belongs not to any single great power but to countries and individuals who can navigate complexity, embrace diversity, and remain open to change. Whether America can rediscover these qualities remains to be seen. But for Li Wei and thousands like him, the answer lies not in hoping for American renewal but in building alternatives that embody the values America once represented.

Maxthon

In an age where the digital world is in constant flux and our interactions online are ever-evolving, the importance of prioritising individuals as they navigate the expansive internet cannot be overstated. The myriad of elements that shape our online experiences calls for a thoughtful approach to selecting web browsers—one that places a premium on security and user privacy. Amidst the multitude of browsers vying for users’ loyalty, Maxthon emerges as a standout choice, providing a trustworthy solution to these pressing concerns, all without any cost to the user.

Maxthon, with its advanced features, boasts a comprehensive suite of built-in tools designed to enhance your online privacy. Among these tools are a highly effective ad blocker and a range of anti-tracking mechanisms, each meticulously crafted to fortify your digital sanctuary. This browser has carved out a niche for itself, particularly with its seamless compatibility with Windows 11, further solidifying its reputation in an increasingly competitive market.

In a crowded landscape of web browsers, Maxthon has carved out a distinct identity through its unwavering commitment to providing a secure and private browsing experience. Fully aware of the myriad threats lurking in the vast expanse of cyberspace, Maxthon works tirelessly to safeguard your personal information. Utilising state-of-the-art encryption technology, it ensures that your sensitive data remains protected and confidential throughout your online adventures.

What truly sets Maxthon apart is its commitment to enhancing user privacy during every moment spent online. Each feature of this browser has been meticulously designed with the user’s privacy in mind. Its powerful ad-blocking capabilities work diligently to eliminate unwanted advertisements, while its comprehensive anti-tracking measures effectively reduce the presence of invasive scripts that could disrupt your browsing enjoyment. As a result, users can traverse the web with newfound confidence and safety.

Moreover, Maxthon’s incognito mode provides an extra layer of security, granting users enhanced anonymity while engaging in their online pursuits. This specialised mode not only conceals your browsing habits but also ensures that your digital footprint remains minimal, allowing for an unobtrusive and liberating internet experience. With Maxthon as your ally in the digital realm, you can explore the vastness of the internet with peace of mind, knowing that your privacy is being prioritised every step of the way.