In 2025 and 2026, headline acts such as NCT Dream’s Dream Show 4 tour concluding in Bangkok and Southeast Asia in early 2026, SM Town Live’s anniversary finale in Thailand, and the massive BTS World Tour ‘Arirang’ set to hit Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta this December, are recalibrating how people plan travel and time off.

For Gen Z and millennials, the draw is no longer just the landmarks, as fans are letting performances dictate their destinations.

International artists, regional stars, and devoted fan communities are converging across the region. A weekend getaway to see a dream act now holds more emotional value than souvenirs or even the destination itself.

Fans are no longer asking, “Where should I go?” They are asking, “Who am I seeing next?”

Southeast Asia Leads the Concert-cation Boom

1. Global tours are routing through SEA like never before

Singapore, Bangkok, Jakarta, Manila, and Kuala Lumpur have become essential stops for the world’s biggest tours.

Promoters, governments, and tourism boards are turning infrastructure into economic strategy, from stadium upgrades to streamlined licensing and cross‑border marketing.

These come as the 2026 calendar is stacked with dates that can anchor travel plans including BTS’ tour in Asia, with the longest run of four nights in Singapore while Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta also featured as key stops.

2. Tourism boards and private sectors are co-investing in culture

Governments and destination marketers are actively investing in events and partnerships that position live music as a tourism driver. Singapore’s Tourism Board has partnered with travel platforms and event organisers to promote concerts and experiences, many of which feature Singapore-only stops, generating millions in tourism spend and hotel bookings.

Malaysia’s Concert and Event in Malaysia Incentives (CEMI) programme provides rebates and operational support for large‑scale concerts, creating an ecosystem that encourages local spending and international participation.

3. Accessible, premium, and safe experiences

Visa-friendly travel, low-cost carriers, and intra-SEA connectivity make it easy for fans to follow their favourite artists, while the region offers affordable luxury through premium venues, themed accommodations, curated pop-ups, and exclusive merchandise. Enhanced safety measures and fan-centric services ensure trust and encourage repeat visits.

Singapore: The Gateway to Fandom

If the social explosion around Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour or Coldplay’s APAC dates has not already made it obvious, the show is the destination. Fans travel and book flights to cities across continents because that is where the event is happening. Singapore’s structural advantage is clear: geographically central, well‑connected, and artist‑preferred, it is the gateway into Asia‑Pacific.

Hotels capitalised too. Around Taylor Swift’s shows, room rates surged 20–30% yet occupancy remained strong, showing that these fans were assigning once‑in‑a‑lifetime value to the experience.

Brands that recognise this emotional investment, like Marina Bay Sands with curated Swiftie packages, are setting the baseline expectation.

Malaysia: Concerts as Catalysts for Travel

In Malaysia, concerts have evolved from a “nice-to-have” to a travel anchor. For Gen Zs and millennials with disposable income, live music events have become the reason to plan overdue trips, reconnect with friends, and feed social media storytelling.

Concerts in Malaysia are booming: 450 events in 2025, up from 104 in 2022, featuring global acts from Coldplay to Siti Nurhaliza.

Institutional support, including streamlined approvals (GPP 6.0) and financial incentives (CEMI), shows that Malaysia is actively building a scalable, trusted, and economically meaningful concert ecosystem.

Outbound travel is equally revealing. Malaysian fans increasingly travel to Singapore, Bangkok, or Jakarta to catch concerts, with 66% having planned a vacation around a concert at least once, according to Trip.com.

The next phase in Malaysia is orchestration: transforming standalone concerts into integrated travel experiences that extend into city exploration, F&B, and culture. By designing around fandom, Malaysia can turn concerts from one-night events into repeatable travel drivers.

What Brands Should Do Next?

Concert-cations are more than a trend. They are changing the way people travel.

Brands that want to succeed need to move from simply participating to creating experiences that matter.

1. Design around fandom, not just the concert (Travel, Hospitality, Ticketing, Tourism Boards)

   Brands in Travel, Hospitality, and Ticketing, as well as Tourism Boards will need to consider multi-city travel packages that combine shows with hotels, dining, and local experiences. Offering early access, priority stays, or exclusive merchandise helps fans feel recognised and valued. Hotels, airlines, and travel platforms can use concerts to extend trips, increasing both length of stay and overall spend.

2. Build spaces that encourage connection and sharing (Retail, F&B, Lifestyle, Tech)

   In the Retail, F&B, Lifestyle space, branded fan experiences such as photo studios, get-ready rooms, merch lounges, and content hubs give fans places to meet, create, and share. These physical spaces make the online fan community tangible. Fashion, beauty, cafés, and experiential retail brands can collaborate to deliver immersive pop-ups that appeal to Gen Z and millennials.

3. Make the experience flexible, safe, and regional

   Concert-goers need safe travel options that fit their schedules. Short stays, late checkouts, and curated flight times make it easier to follow tours. Verified transport, multilingual support, and night-time safety measures build trust. Multi-city passes or cross-border itineraries let superfans chase tours across Southeast Asia, giving transport companies, ride-hailing apps, insurers, and security providers opportunities to add value.

Final Thoughts

Cities and brands that orchestrate the full journey, from travel and stay to fan spaces and shareable moments, will be the winners in this new era of travel.

The concert is the destination and the surrounding experience is the currency.

(JUN/QOB)

These shocks do not remain abstract macroeconomic variables; they directly shape the daily realities of citizens.

In such conditions, the most vulnerable groups including persons with disabilities are often the first to be affected and the last to be considered in policy responses.

Global turbulence is frequently discussed in macroeconomic language: growth projections, fiscal stability, supply chains, and energy resilience.

Yet a more fundamental question is rarely asked: how do these crises affect those who already live with limited access to education, employment, healthcare, and public services? This question is not peripheral it is central to understanding whether development is truly just.

In policy practice, persons with disabilities are too often reduced to statistical categories, mentioned in passing without meaningful policy implications.

However, disability is not a marginal phenomenon. It represents a significant demographic and social reality that must be placed at the core of development planning.

Global Scale and the Indonesian Portrait

Globally, disability is far from a minor issue. The World Health Organization (WHO), in its Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities (2023), estimates that approximately 1.3 billion people, nearly 16 percent of the world’s population, live with some form of disability.

This figure underscores that disability is not an exception but a structural component of global society.

In Indonesia, the Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS), through the 2020 Population Census Long Form and its 2022 follow-up publications, reports that around 22–23 million Indonesians live with disabilities, with a significant proportion within productive age groups.

Yet this substantial population is not proportionally reflected in educational attainment, labor force participation, or representation in public decision-making spaces.

Various socio-economic indicators reveal persistent structural inequality.

Persons with disabilities face not only limited access but also systemic barriers embedded in economic and social systems that were never fully designed to accommodate human diversity.

Layered Crises and Structural Vulnerability

International data indicate that global turbulence exacerbates the vulnerability of persons with disabilities in multiple dimensions. The World Bank (2023) reports that persons with disabilities are twice as likely to live in extreme poverty.

Meanwhile, the International Labour Organization (2022) finds that labor force participation rates among persons with disabilities are 20–30 percent lower than those of non-disabled populations across many countries, including Indonesia.

Climate crises and disasters further intensify risks. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (2022) notes that persons with disabilities face mortality risks two to four times higher during disasters due to non-inclusive evacuation systems and limited accessible infrastructure.

Simultaneously, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2021) highlights that more than 60 percent of digital public services in developing countries fail to meet accessibility standards, meaning digital transformation may inadvertently generate new forms of exclusion.

These facts demonstrate that disability is not a matter of charity; it is a measure of development justice.

The marginalization of persons with disabilities reflects systemic design failures. A just society must expand participation opportunities for all its citizens.

In line with Amartya Sen’s capability approach (1999), development should be assessed by the real freedoms people have to lead lives they value.

Strategic Pillars for Inclusive and Just Disability Policy

In times of global crisis, the resilience of a society is reflected in how it protects and empowers its most vulnerable members. Disability inclusion must therefore shift from symbolic recognition to systemic transformation.

• First, disability perspectives must be integrated at the earliest stages of policy design. Development agendas that ignore accessibility risk create new exclusions.

• Second, inclusive employment must become a cornerstone of future economic resilience. Skills development, accessible workplaces, and inclusive entrepreneurship are not social programs; they are economic imperatives.

• Third, social protection systems must be adaptive and sustainable, tailored to the real needs of persons with disabilities as instruments of empowerment rather than dependency.

• Fourth, universal design principles should become binding standards in both physical infrastructure and digital services. Accessibility is not an add-on; it is a prerequisite for equitable participation.

• Fifth, meaningful participation of persons with disabilities in policymaking must be guaranteed. Their lived experiences constitute irreplaceable sources of insight for effective governance.

Toward a Sustainable Disability Future

A sustainable future for persons with disabilities requires a shift in perspective from compassion to justice, from symbolic inclusion to structural reform.

Disability inclusion is not an auxiliary agenda; it is a foundation of social resilience amid global uncertainty.

True sustainability is not measured solely by economic growth or infrastructure strength, but by a nation’s ability to uphold the dignity of every human being.

A society that includes all its citizens is better equipped to withstand shocks and recover with dignity.

In this sense, building an inclusive disability framework is inseparable from Indonesia’s long-term aspiration toward its centennial vision in 2045.

(JUN/QOB)

AI is no longer the bright-eyed new intern who drafts captions and draws cats with laser eyes.

In Malaysia, it now sits quietly behind some of the most consequential brand decisions on pricing, product recommendations, refunds, content moderation, and everyday service touchpoints.

But Malaysian consumers are not rejecting AI outright. As its influence grows, the biggest question for brands is whether people trust how it is being used.

Malaysia’s AI Context Raises the Bar for Brands

Malaysia’s approach to AI has been deliberate rather than reactive, with a clear emphasis on ethical, inclusive, and accountable deployment.

The establishment of the National AI Office in 2024 signalled a coordinated national effort to balance innovation with public trust, supported by governance and ethics guidelines that prioritise fairness, transparency, and human-centric design.

This matters because when responsible AI becomes a baseline at a national level, consumers naturally expect the same discipline from brands.

AI use is no longer judged only by efficiency or novelty, but by whether it aligns with Malaysian values around trust, responsibility and accountability.

The Trust Gap in AI-Powered Brand Experiences

Consumers in the B2C category, in particular, may not consciously think about algorithms or models, but they are quick to sense when something feels artificial or misaligned.

This often shows up when:

• Responses feel overly scripted or emotionally disconnected

• Personalisation feels too precise, poorly timed, or unexplained

• Automation replaces judgment in moments that require empathy

High-involvement categories make this especially clear. Telco brands, for example, operate at the intersection of data, daily usage, and long-term commitment.

The same pattern plays out across B2C sectors, including banking, retail, platforms, and FMCG, where consumers want speed, convenience, and relevance, but not at the expense of transparency, empathy, fairness, or authenticity.

Consumers Push Back When AI Gets It Wrong

AI fails when it signals that efficiency matters more than care, or optimisation matters more than understanding.

In Malaysia’s culturally nuanced and highly social media-driven environment, these missteps travel fast.

The lesson applies particularly so for B2C brands, such as banks, retailers, telcos, platforms, and FMCG that are experimenting with AI-led engagement, with some examples of network disruptions in Malaysia witnessing firsthand how poorly handled interactions spread faster than apologies, with these experiences circulated widely online.

Where AI Needs Boundaries to Earn Malaysian Trust

AI gives brands in Malaysia an opportunity to move beyond personalisation as a marketing tactic and toward participation as a strategy to strengthen relevance, trust, and long-term loyalty.

• Design AI for real Malaysian needs

AI should help consumers understand trade-offs and make better decisions, not simply faster ones. This means reflecting local realities, such as price sensitivity, shared family usage, multi-line accounts, and seasonal behaviour.

In categories like telco, utilities, or subscriptions, AI can move beyond pushing “best” plans and instead help households understand trade-offs by comparing data sharing across family lines, highlighting bill volatility, or flagging when a cheaper option better fits actual usage.

• Turn community behaviour into brand value

Malaysian consumers trust peer opinions, social proof, and shared experiences. AI can be used responsibly to surface reviews, tips, and consumer insights that reflect real use cases, shifting the brand to be the best curator of its community.

In retail or e-commerce, this could mean highlighting reviews from similar household profiles, usage patterns, or locations, rather than generic five-star ratings.

In FMCG, AI can elevate real use cases of how families adapt products for different occasions, or how value packs are stretched across weeks.

• Make personalisation feel collaborative, not extractive

AI-driven personalisation should evolve based on feedback, choice, and consent. Allowing consumers to influence recommendations, pause personalisation, or adjust preferences signals respect.

In banking or retail, this can be as simple as allowing users to adjust recommendation signals, pause personalisation during certain periods, or explicitly state preferences rather than having them inferred.

• Humanise digital care, not just automate it

AI can streamline support, but brands should design clear handoffs to human assistance for emotional, complex, or high-stakes situations.

For example, during service disruptions or billing disputes, Malaysian consumers often want acknowledgment before resolution.

Yet, many encounter chatbots that close tickets automatically once a script is completed, or continue pushing add-ons while the core issue remains unresolved.

A more effective approach is designing AI to support human care by flagging frustration signals, escalating repeated complaints, and handing over full context to a human agent who can respond with empathy, language preference, and situational awareness.

• Use AI to reflect culture, not flatten it

Malaysia’s linguistic diversity, social norms, and cultural sensitivities require more than global templates. For AI to reflect culture rather than flatten it, Malaysian brands need to hard-code context into their systems.

This means setting clear cultural guardrails around when AI should promote, soften its tone, or stay silent altogether; training AI on locally approved language styles; defaulting to a customer’s demonstrated language preference without repeated prompts; and requiring human review for AI generated communications during high-risk moments such as service disruptions, crises, or sensitive national periods.

Just as importantly, brands should design escalation triggers that account for cultural and emotional context, and track signals like complaint recurrence, social backlash, and opt-outs to detect misalignment early.

When these controls are in place, AI stops sounding like a system optimised for efficiency and starts behaving like a brand that understands Malaysians.

The Real Test of AI Is Still Human

The brands that succeed will be those that balance automation with accountability, and efficiency with cultural understanding, using AI to support genuine connection rather than replace it.

(JUN/QOB)

In 2026, Southeast Asia will experience a rare cultural convergence.

While the two occasions are rooted in different traditions, Southeast Asia has long been defined by participation beyond one’s own culture or religion.

In highly urbanised markets with strong institutional support for multiculturalism, public holidays and extended breaks create shared moments for family gatherings, retail activity and seasonal promotions.

In more community-driven markets, cross-cultural participation is deeply personal, shaped by social norms, mutual respect, and long-standing traditions of visiting, sharing meals, and giving.

As a result, this overlapping festive period will become more than a calendar coincidence. It is a moment that reveals how differently, yet intentionally, Southeast Asian consumers navigate meaning, money and modern life.

A New Season of Emotional Spending

Across the region, the convergence of spiritual observance and cultural celebration will reshape how consumers plan, prioritise and justify spending, with occasions tied to family, renewal and gratitude continuing to receive protected budgets.

In Singapore, both Ramadan and Lunar New Year traditionally drive strong retail performance.

Public holidays support family gatherings and social activities, while retailers actively ride festive demand through promotions and seasonal assortments.

Physical stores and e-commerce platforms typically see higher traffic, supported by a highly developed digital retail ecosystem.

However, in line with broader consumption patterns observed over the past year, Singaporean consumers are becoming more discerning. They are more likely to compare prices, seek value, and prioritise quality over quantity, even during festive periods.

In Malaysia, participation across cultures is deeply ingrained. Non-Muslims attend buka puasa, while Muslims visit during the Chinese New Year.

These shared rituals often surface in everyday media habits as well. Every Chinese New Year, Hong Kong kung fu classics become a familiar viewing ritual for Malaysians of all backgrounds.

In 2026, Dentsu Creative Malaysia tapped into this collective nostalgia for Mister Potato’s Chinese New Year campaign, “Bruise Lee”, creating an entertaining content series that leaned into the festive mood while speaking inclusively to a multi-ethnic audience.

Compressed Timelines and Intensified Competition

For brands, this once-in-a-generation overlap comes with opportunity and urgency.

Normally, Lunar New Year lifts begin weeks before the celebration, while Ramadan momentum builds gradually across the fasting month and into Eid.

In 2026, these cycles will run almost concurrently. This will create two peaks within one condensed timeline.

In Singapore, this will intensify competition across media, retail, and e-commerce channels, as brands vie for attention within a shorter timeframe. Consumers are likely to browse earlier, track promotions closely, and act decisively when value is clear. Some brands are already adjusting by initiating planning conversations earlier than usual, recognising that timing and readiness will matter as much as creative execution.

Across the region, this earlier start is increasingly supported by digital touchpoints such as email, apps, and social messaging, allowing brands to signal relevance and availability ahead of the busiest moments of the festive period.

In Malaysia, consumers will also plan earlier, but with a stronger emphasis on timing and appropriateness. They will browse, wait, and then purchase with intention. This leaves brands with little margin for error. Misaligned tone or poor timing will be noticed quickly and remembered.

Which Categories Will Feel the Impact Most

In both Singapore and Malaysia, food and beverage will remain the most resilient category, driven by gatherings, shared meals, and daily rituals. Fashion and beauty will polarise.

In Singapore, festive dressing may continue, but with greater emphasis on versatility and long-term value. In Malaysia, louder festive expressions are likely to soften, with increased demand for modest, reusable, and occasion-spanning designs.

Travel is expected to see a lift in both markets, supported by extended holidays and family reunions. At the same time, prolonged festive periods may disrupt manufacturing and logistics, creating supply challenges just as demand peaks.

Digital, social commerce and quick commerce will play a larger role across both markets, driven by convenience, speed and the ability to compare options easily during a busy season.

What Winning Brands Will Do Differently

Across Southeast Asia, brands that succeed during the overlap of Ramadan and Lunar New Year will recognise that this is not simply a busier festive period, but a more sensitive one.

Consumers are navigating two emotionally significant moments within a compressed timeframe, which raises expectations for relevance, respect, and cultural understanding.

In Singapore, success will be driven by precision and preparedness. Brands must ensure that digital platforms can handle increased traffic, activate search and media early, and use data to personalise outreach in a highly competitive, promotion-led environment.

In Malaysia, cultural fluency will matter most. Chinese New Year invites expression and reinterpretation, while Ramadan demands restraint and focus. Brands that apply a single creative tone across both risk undermining trust. Those who win will know when to celebrate visibly and when to step back.

Final Thought

The 2026 overlap of Ramadan and Lunar New Year is more than a scheduling anomaly. It is a test of how well brands understand Southeast Asia’s cultural complexity.

It calls for work that respects cultural depth, embraces diversity, and delivers genuine value at a time when emotions, expectations, and spending intentions are at their peak.

Festive seasons have always been competitive.

In 2026, the stakes will be even higher. Brands that rise to this moment will not only win the season, they will build deeper and longer-lasting trust in one of the world’s most culturally dynamic regions.

(JUN/QOB)

In Southeast Asia, that framing leaves out an important part of the picture. Technology here does not operate in isolation. It enters societies shaped by belief, cultural memory, and strong social norms. Trust is built over time through familiarity and consistency.

When AI becomes part of everyday life, its success depends not only on performance, but on whether people feel it behaves in ways they can understand and accept.

This is why conversations about responsible and human-centred AI tend to surface earlier, and with greater urgency, in this region, particularly in sectors that operate close to identity and meaning.

Why capability-led AI has clear limits

The global AI market continues to expand rapidly. In 2025, it is estimated at around USD 371 billion, spanning enterprise software, generative models, analytics, automation tools, and consumer-facing applications.

Forecasts suggest this could grow beyond USD 2 trillion over the next decade, according to MarketsandMarkets.

This pace of growth has encouraged a focus on acceleration. This pace of growth has encouraged a mindset that prioritises rapid deployment, with consequences often considered only after systems are already in use. That approach struggles in environments where trust is fragile.

In Southeast Asia, linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity exposes these weaknesses early, with opaque or misaligned AI systems often leading to disengagement, slower adoption, and higher long-term costs to credibility.

In these contexts, the question is not whether AI functions, but whether it can operate with legitimacy. Faith-tech makes this tension visible earlier than most sectors.

When technology operates close to belief

Faith-tech platforms operate close to everyday practice and belief. They support rituals, learning, and reflection that many people experience privately.

In these settings, users rely on the system as part of their daily lives, and trust is assumed from the start. This reliance changes the stakes. Accuracy alone is not enough.

Speed does not compensate for misjudgment.

As a result, a different design mindset becomes necessary. Instead of asking how much can be automated, the more responsible question becomes where automation should stop.

Human judgment is not an inefficiency to remove. It is what allows the system to exist at all.

Across Southeast Asia, this thinking is becoming more visible. Ethical guardrails are increasingly treated as design constraints rather than compliance checks added after deployment. This shift is driven less by regulation than by experience.

What restraint looks like in practice

I see these trade-offs most clearly in my work at Muslim Pro, a faith-tech mobile application serving a global Muslim audience across very different cultural contexts. Operating in this space makes one thing clear.

AI cannot be allowed to assume roles it was never meant to hold.

It is not a substitute for religious authority, nor should it be responsible for interpreting belief, and it must remain accountable to human judgment. In practice, this means AI is positioned as an assistant rather than a decision-maker.

Content creation remains human-led. Religious material is reviewed by qualified experts. Clear boundaries are set around what AI-generated output is acceptable and what is not. Oversight and moderation remain human responsibilities.

These decisions are not always the fastest. They are often more complex to implement. They also prevent errors that would be far more costly to undo. Over time, they preserve trust, which is the reason users continue to return.

Why training data matters more in Southeast Asia

Ethical debates around AI often focus on how systems are deployed. Far less attention is paid to how they are trained. This distinction matters, especially in Southeast Asia.

Many AI models today are trained on datasets that reflect dominant markets and languages. These datasets are often biased, incomplete, or flattened by design. They privilege scale over nuance and uniformity over difference. For a region like Southeast Asia, this creates real problems.

The societies here are not only diverse, they are layered.

Religious practice, social norms, and daily routines vary widely across borders and within the same faith community.

A Singaporean Muslim’s religious lifestyle differs from that of an Indonesian Muslim, shaped by different legal systems, cultural expectations, languages, and public expressions of faith.

When AI systems are trained without accounting for these differences, they risk producing outputs that feel generic or misplaced. Even when outputs are technically accurate, they can still feel disconnected from local realities, which undermines their credibility over time.

This is why responsible AI in Southeast Asia cannot stop at deployment guidelines. It must extend upstream into decisions about data selection, training processes, and whose experiences are represented in the model.

Training data is not neutral. It encodes assumptions about what is normal, visible and worth capturing.

For AI to earn trust in this region, it must be trained with an understanding that difference is not noise to be removed, but context that needs to be respected.

Rethinking how AI shapes behaviour

Another area where current AI deployment deserves scrutiny is the way engagement systems are designed to influence behaviour at scale.

In practice, it can narrow agency, especially when deployed without sufficient restraint. In environments shaped by shared values, this approach carries risk. AI should help people navigate complexity, not quietly steer them toward predetermined choices. A more disciplined model is possible.

AI can reduce friction without shaping decisions. It can make it easier for users to express themselves. It can help maintain respectful spaces by identifying harmful or inappropriate content.

Throughout this process, human oversight remains essential. The goal is not to maximise attention. It is to sustain environments people feel comfortable returning to over time.

A quieter contribution to the global AI debate

Much of the global discussion on ethical AI is shaped by technology hubs and policy centres far removed from the communities most affected by deployment decisions.

Southeast Asia offers a quieter, more grounded perspective. Here, progress is measured less by how quickly systems can be rolled out and more by whether they can be sustained.

Restraint is not viewed as hesitation. It is understood as a responsibility. Across sectors, similar lessons are emerging. Ethical design constraints need to be established early.

Human judgment must remain central where identity and meaning are involved. Access should widen without erasing context.

These lessons extend beyond faith-tech. They apply to finance, healthcare, education, and media, anywhere AI operates close to people’s lives.

(JUN/QOB)

Voter turnout was reportedly low and only held in areas controlled by the Junta, which amounts to less than a quarter of the entire landmass. Despite the limitation from Junta’s capabilities, it just might be successful in gaining the recognition it needs from various states, including its fellow Southeast Asian states.

The Philippine’s foreign secretary and ASEAN’s special envoy to Myanmar, Tess Lazaro publicly stated that ASEAN will not endorse the election results.

However, her and her neighbour’s actions suggest otherwise. Lazaro’s only publicized bilateral meetings were only with the Junta and engagements with the opposition were limited to multilateral meets.

Similar steps were taken by her predecessors and former ASEAN chairs, namely Malaysia and Laos.

The Junta always enjoyed deeper and formal engagements with the ASEAN chair, while meetings with the opposing National Unity Governments (NUG) and Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) were mostly sidelined.

While one might excuse this due to ASEAN chairs’ rotational nature coupled with diverse divisions within the opposition, a number of ASEAN Member States went out of their way indirectly to legitimize the Junta held elections.

Even before the elections began in Myanmar, Indonesia’s president Prabowo urged ASEAN to consider sending observers to ensure “transparency and accountability”.

Brunei, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia supported the elections, with the last 2 sending observers to the war-torn country, signaling willingness to legitimize the election results.

The civil war ending with the Junta on top will usher in better stability, thus bringing in better economic opportunities and credibility for ASEAN as a whole.

Additionally, a consolidated Myanmar under the Junta could also mean normalizing authoritarian/semi-authoritarian regimes in the region, which could serve various Southeast Asian countries in quelling their own domestic grievances.

Even if the Junta's election results are legitimized, the fighting will not stop as long as the NUG and the diverse EAOs, with their own interests, are not addressed.

With China hedging its bet between the Junta and EAOs, EAOs grew fairly powerful and to this day maintains strong positions in Myanmar’s border with China and India.

The influence and demands of these organizations cannot be underestimated, as seen from 2023’s operations 1027.

Although there are still some within ASEAN that refused to support the elections, such as Malaysia and Timor-Leste, this episode in the region revealed where Southeast Asian states' priorities truly lie.

Southeast Asian statesmen are always so quick to declare support for lasting peace in Myanmar through an all-inclusive process.

(JUN/QOB)

Last year, Indonesia experienced one of its worst cyberattacks in recent years, when a ransomware attack on the country’s national data centre took down hundreds of central and local state agencies.

The aviation sector was not spared, as the attack disrupted immigration services and affected operations at Indonesia’s major airports for days.

A week later, reports surfaced that Indonesia’s civil aviation authority also suffered a massive security breach, with a threat actor claiming to have accessed critical data related to the handling of air traffic in the country.

Warning: Cyber Turbulence Ahead

The aviation industry sits on a goldmine of personal data. These include passenger identities, payment information, travel itineraries, and loyalty program records, making it a prime target for bad actors seeking to exploit personal data for financial gain. Yet, many airlines and airports remain surprisingly vulnerable to cyber threats.

A major contributing factor is legacy infrastructure. While airplanes have evolved rapidly, backend IT systems have not.

Many still rely on ageing operational infrastructure that isn’t built to withstand modern threats. These legacy systems remain connected to live networks and third-party platforms for efficiency, which can open digital backdoors for bad actors.

The industry’s heavy reliance on third-party providers, from booking engines to customer service portals, also amplifies the risk. Weaker security controls anywhere in the supply chain can compromise the entire network.

Case in point: A cyberattack on Qantas Airways earlier this year, which exposed sensitive data from over 5.7 million customers, originated from a third-party platform used by its contact centre.

Groups like Scattered Spider, believed to be behind the Qantas breach, are masters of social engineering. They impersonate airline employees or IT contractors to trick help desks into granting them access to the airlines’ networks. Once inside, they can exfiltrate data and deploy ransomware across critical systems.

Flying Smarter with AI

As airlines confront a new era of digital threats, legacy security tools are no longer sufficient to combat the ever-evolving, highly sophisticated threat vectors.

AI-powered cybersecurity solutions are changing the game. For example, User and Entity Behaviour Analytics (UEBA) solutions use machine learning and behavioural analytics to establish a baseline of normal user and entity activity.

By continuously monitoring and comparing real-time behaviour against this baseline, UEBA can detect anomalous activities and instantly escalate the case to the security team before damage is done. This ability to detect and respond faster can mean the difference between a contained incident and a major breach.

Navigating Cyber Turbulence with Confidence

Airlines must adopt a multi-pronged approach to fortify their cyber defences. Security tools aside, this begins with building a strong internal culture of security, where comprehensive cybersecurity awareness training for all employees is not just a policy but a shared responsibility.

A well-informed workforce is a powerful first line of defence, better equipped to protect organisational data and assets and identify vulnerabilities before they escalate into major breaches.

They need to ask critical questions about the vendor’s security controls, policies, and incident response capabilities to ensure that external vendors can keep their customers’ data secure.

These efforts should also be complemented by oversight from the public sector, which recognises the aviation industry as a critical national asset.

Indonesia has taken decisive steps to strengthen its aviation sector in recent years, establishing the Indonesian Aviation Sector Computer Security Incident Response Team (IAS-CSIRT).

This dedicated team reviews incident reports and activities, ensuring a swift, coordinated response to incidents in the aviation sector.

Charting a Safe Flight Path Ahead

Just one cyber incident alone can result in millions lost from flight delays, rebookings, customer churn, and legal costs. Beyond immediate operational disruption, reputational damage can erode hard-won customer trust for years.

(JUN/QOB)

The consequences are starkly visible:

• Shattered hospitals in Gaza,

• Communities trapped in conflict in Sudan, and

• Rohingya families struggling to survive in refugee camps and densely populated urban settings across Myanmar, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Amid these crises, the gap between needs and the world’s capacity to respond has never been wider—or more dangerous.

Even the replenishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria reflects this decline, with pledges falling far short as medicine supplies run low, health workers go unpaid, and preventable deaths continue to rise. Without renewed commitment, decades of hard-won progress are at risk of unraveling.

In this fractured global landscape, ASEAN—and Indonesia in particular—can play a vital role. As a bloc built on principles of cooperation, stability, and mutual support, ASEAN has the potential to help restore the belief that every human life holds equal value, regardless of where it is lived.

Gaza: When a Ceasefire Is Not Enough

Despite the current ceasefire, medical and humanitarian needs in Gaza remain overwhelming. Most hospitals have been destroyed or severely damaged. Doctors Without Borders / Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) teams continue to treat large numbers of casualties, complex surgical cases, and children suffering from profound psychological trauma.

@msf.seasia

Médecins Sans Frontières SEAsia on Instagram: "This is a snapsh…

Children like Omar, a five-year-old evacuated to a Doctors Without Borders reconstructive surgery hospital in Amman, illustrate the collapse of Gaza’s health system. Many pediatric patients arrive malnourished and deeply traumatized, requiring months of surgeries, rehabilitation, and psychological support.

Even as the ceasefire holds, violence continues: Palestinians have reportedly been shot near the “yellow line” while attempting to return to their homes. Israel also continues to impose restrictions that significantly obstruct the entry of medical supplies, fuel, shelter materials, and other essential goods. A ceasefire without unhindered humanitarian access offers only partial relief; civilians remain at extreme risk.

Daily living conditions are dire. Overcrowded displacement sites, lacking adequate access to clean water and sanitation, have fueled a surge in respiratory, gastrointestinal, and skin infections. This is a predictable and preventable public health emergency, one that risks worsening as winter approaches.

Sudan: The World’s Largest and Most Neglected Humanitarian Crisis

Sudan is currently facing the largest and most neglected humanitarian crisis in the world. Doctors Without Borders supports more than 30 health facilities across 10 states, yet the scale of suffering far exceeds global response capacity. Since April 2023, more than 1.7 million people have sought care at MSF-supported clinics—clear evidence of a collapsing health system.

@doctorswithoutborders

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) on Instagram: "We must continue …

In Darfur, violence, starvation, and forced displacement have reached horrific levels. In Tawila, 75 percent of newly arrived children under the age of five suffer from acute malnutrition, with 25 percent experiencing severe acute malnutrition. Many arrive after months of siege and hunger.

In Zamzam Camp, Doctors Without Borders teams have treated hundreds of people for gunshot wounds, fractures, and injuries resulting from attacks targeting specific ethnic groups. Civilians recount being “killed, blocked, and hunted” as they attempted to flee.

Hospitals are frequently targeted. Facilities supported by Doctors Without Borders, including Al Nao Hospital in Omdurman and Kas Hospital in Darfur, have been destroyed, looted, or besieged by armed groups. Legal protections for medical facilities—and for those seeking and providing care—have effectively collapsed.

The indirect impacts of the conflict are no less devastating. Over the past two years, Doctors Without Borders has treated 174,000 cases of malaria, 89,100 cases of diarrhea, and thousands of measles patients. These outbreaks are driven by mass displacement, lack of access to clean water, and the collapse of immunization services.

Rohingya: A Crisis Asia Can No Longer Ignore

Across Southeast Asia, the Rohingya crisis remains one of the most neglected humanitarian emergencies in the region. Nearly one million Rohingya people continue to survive in overcrowded and inadequate refugee camps in Bangladesh, while thousands more are displaced or in transit across Myanmar, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Funding cuts have drastically reduced essential services. Doctors Without Borders teams report rising cases of malnutrition, infectious diseases, anemia, and increasing mental health needs. Survivors of genocide now face worsening humanitarian conditions—not because of a lack of compassion from host communities, but due to declining international commitment.

In the absence of sustainable political solutions, countries in the region are left to shoulder the burden of a crisis that is increasingly ignored by the international community.

@msf.seasia

Médecins Sans Frontières SEAsia on Instagram: "“We mourn the pa…

Why ASEAN’s Voice Matters Now

Amid a fragmented global order, ASEAN—and Indonesia in particular—can emerge as stable, constructive, and principled actors.

ASEAN member states have a long history of responding to displacement, hosting refugees, leading peacebuilding efforts, and supporting regional disaster response.

With diplomatic credibility that spans geopolitical divides, ASEAN occupies a unique position in an emerging multipolar world to advocate for humanitarian access—calling for unconditional and unhindered aid in Gaza, Sudan, Myanmar, and beyond.

ASEAN countries can reaffirm core humanitarian principles: that aid must be based solely on need and free from military or political interests. They can remind the world that no life is worth less simply because of where it is lived.

As 2025 draws to a close, the global humanitarian landscape is defined by record-high needs and record-low funding commitments.

ASEAN states must mobilize greater support wherever possible and, more importantly, use their credibility and political influence to pressure others to reverse this downward trend.

By speaking out firmly and collectively, the region can help restore human values through concrete action at a time when humanity itself appears to be fading.

Their survival depends on action now.

These incidents have raised concerns about the resilience of energy systems in Indonesia, as it pushes for increased renewable integration into existing power grids, through projects such as the Green Enabling Super Grid and the Indonesia Electricity Network Transformation (I-ENET) program.

As a key market in the hyperconnected ASEAN region, Indonesia also grapples with the pressure of climate-driven energy transitions. These disruptions underscore the urgent need to strengthen energy resilience — the only way to secure competitive advantage and future-proof our enterprises.

Growing risks in Indonesia

Indonesia faces a confluence of escalating risks that threaten to unravel business continuity. Record temperatures worldwide, as seen in Asia this May, are dramatically increasing the global use of air conditioning.

Indonesia’s tropical climate and rapid urbanisation make the nation especially susceptible to these risks. Further, Indonesia’s reliance on legacy infrastructure means that extreme weather events directly result in critical network failures.

For instance, heavy wind and rainfall account for over 95% of weather-related power outages in the Java-Bali region, and recent floods in February in South Sulawesi caused more than 450 electricity substations to shut down. Such disruptions carry a great financial toll – high-impact outages in Indonesia can cost between US$1-3 million per hour in lost revenue.

In addition to the heat, there is also the advent of digitalisation. The Indonesian data centre power market is projected to reach US$3.79 billion in 2030, driven by hyperscaler demand and increased adoption of the internet, AI and cloud.

This projected surge in demand, coupled with the already rapid growth of data centre electricity consumption, pushes our power infrastructure to its limits, intensifying Indonesia’s vulnerability to power disruptions.

Although the ASEAN power grid could unlock 25 gigawatts of renewable power and energy storage and boost regional reliability, Indonesia continues to be exposed to its own system vulnerabilities.

Fully realising this cross-border power grid will be a difficult process that requires extensive cooperation and coordination, leaving Indonesia exposed and compromising our energy future.

The cost of downtime to businesses

Indonesian businesses face severe financial losses during downtime — from crippled productivity and damaged infrastructure, to disrupted supply chains, and in some cases, compromised data.

The impact is particularly acute for sectors like data centres, where even momentary power fluctuations can trigger massive data loss and operational downtime.

This year’s power outage in Bali affected over 1.8 million customers of state utility PLN, and also caused power plants to shut down simultaneously, severely disrupting the tourism industry and airport operations.

These widespread failures are a stark reminder of the evolving vulnerabilities in Indonesia’s energy grids, which could introduce new risks.

While PLN is responding through national initiatives like the Just Energy Transition Plan, the pace of grid modernisation remains slow, and businesses cannot afford to be passive.

It is imperative for enterprises to strategically invest in solutions that ensure continuity and protect operations when inevitable disruptions occur.

Safeguarding operations: the role of technology and people

The escalating threat of power disruptions, coupled with increasing demands on modern grids, makes technological safeguards for Indonesian businesses non-negotiable.

A prominent example of such solutions would be Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS), battery-backed power systems that provide immediate backup electricity when the main power fails. Unlike generators, which have a startup delay, a UPS is instantaneous and ensures continuous operation.

These technologies are indispensable to operations in data centres, financial institutions or any business relying on digital operations, as they ensure operational continuity.

However, a singular reliance on UPS is insufficient. Enterprises must adopt a multi-layered approach to resilience. Other power protection technologies, such as battery energy storage systems, could help provide extended backup power that’s independent of the main grid, while microgrids can facilitate continued operations during a power outage.

Investing in new and emerging battery technologies will also be crucial to enhancing grid resilience. For instance, unlike commonly used lithium-ion batteries, initial research has shown that nickel-zinc batteries are non-flammable, and have significant advantages in power density, operating temperature range, cycle life, and environmental friendliness.

Even with the best power systems, enterprises should also consider comprehensive strategies for off-site data backup and swift recovery protocols to safeguard against data loss, regardless of the cause.

This includes prioritising training and collaboration among employees to ensure that they are familiar with such protocols, and are kept updated on the latest developments to help integrate new technologies into existing infrastructure smoothly.

A crucial balancing act

Ultimately, the Indonesian government and businesses both face a complex challenge: meeting ever-increasing energy demands, driven partly by global warming and rapid urbanisation, while simultaneously integrating more renewable energy sources.

This requires significant investment in not just new generation capacity but in modernising existing power infrastructure – building smart grids and developing sophisticated energy storage solutions that can withstand future outages.

The goal is to create a resilient grid that can accommodate the intermittent nature of renewables without compromising reliability. This demands strategic foresight from public and private sectors alike, putting the onus on businesses to fortify their operations proactively.

The recent blackouts serve as wake-up calls for Indonesian businesses. As the ASEAN region transitions to renewables while battling climate-driven energy demand,

Investing in power backup solutions isn’t just about avoiding downtime but maintaining a competitive advantage in an increasingly unstable energy landscape.

(JUN/RHZ/QOB)

Adopting AI is no longer the hard part; turning it into measurable growth is. Efficiency alone will not close the gap.

Businesses now need an integrated approach that uses AI to build trust, personalise interactions, and drive revenue.

The key question is how companies can move from “catching up” to truly “staying competitive.”

The consumer reality: AI shapes every step of the buying process

SEA consumers have quietly become AI-native. In a mobile-first, chat-first region, people embrace any tool that removes friction.

Conversational commerce — buying directly through WhatsApp or social media DMs — has normalised informal, immediate, and highly personalised interactions.

In our recent AI Transformation in SEA whitepaper, based on responses from 1,100 consumers and more than 500 businesses across Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia, over 75% of SEA consumers said they were more likely to purchase when AI assistance was involved.

Consumers now treat AI like a hyper-convenient personal assistant. Younger, digital-native buyers expect instant replies, accurate information, and personalised guidance.

They do not care whether the interaction comes from a human or AI; they care about speed, clarity, and relevance.

In fact, our research shows that 84% of customers expect a response within five minutes or less.

In Southeast Asia, the buying journey isn’t just digital — it’s AI-driven. Speed wins customers now, and AI is the only way to deliver at scale.

AI maturity across SEA businesses

While consumers have adapted quickly, businesses across SEA display wide variation in AI readiness.

Some still view AI as an efficiency tool, while others already treat it as a growth engine.

Small and mid-market companies tend to move fast and experiment often, using AI for messaging, workflow automation, and basic lead qualification. But fragmented systems, unclear ownership, and limited resources prevent them from scaling these experiments into integrated workflows.

Large enterprises typically have the strongest infrastructure but the slowest deployment cycles.

Legacy systems, governance layers, and departmental silos often delay implementation despite strong intent.

Ultimately, maturity is not defined by company size but by integration. Many firms mistake having AI tools for having an AI strategy. Tools alone don’t move metrics.

Real transformation happens when AI is embedded into core business engines — sales, retention, and operations — turning isolated experiments into a cohesive system.

Barriers to effective AI adoption

Despite growing enthusiasm, meaningful AI deployment remains challenging. Security concerns, high costs, and limited AI literacy add friction to adoption.

The biggest obstacle is data fragmentation. Sales records sit in one system, inventory in another, and customer feedback in a third. Without a unified data foundation, AI cannot deliver personalisation or actionable insights. AI is only as powerful as the data behind it.

These challenges align with Boston Consulting Group’s ASPIRE framework, which ranks Indonesia and Malaysia in the top 50% globally for AI readiness.

Ambition is high, but investment and skills are still developing — creating a window for early movers to lead.

The hybrid workforce: Human + AI

Consumers are comfortable with AI for information and quick transactions. But when it comes to financial commitments, medical guidance, or complex complaints, human reassurance still matters.

Scepticism toward full automation remains strong across SEA markets.

The most successful companies don’t choose between AI and humans; they blend both. AI handles the volume — availability checks, updates, and FAQs. Humans provide value — empathy, negotiation, and complex judgment.

This hybrid model consistently lifts conversion and satisfaction because it mirrors real consumer behaviour: they want speed from AI and confidence from a human.

The next frontier is not replacing humans with AI — it is augmenting humans through AI.

The path forward: growth comes from orchestration

Measurable growth does not come from adopting AI tools in isolation.

It comes from orchestrating AI across the entire customer journey — from acquisition to conversion, retention to operations.

This shift has accelerated the rise of unified communication platforms like SleekFlow.

To close the gap between consumer enthusiasm and enterprise maturity, decision-makers should prioritise three actions:

1. Unify the Data Layer

Stop treating data as a departmental asset. For AI to work, sales data, inventory, and customer history must be synchronised. You cannot personalise a sale if your AI doesn’t know what’s in stock.

2. Define Metric-Driven Goals

Shift from vanity metrics like “chats handled” to business outcomes: higher conversion, lower churn, and increased average order value.

3. Empower the Middle Layer

The technology is ready — the people must be too. Upskill managers and frontline teams to work with AI agents, shifting their roles from execution to editing and strategy.

The window for early-mover advantage is closing. Nearly 68% of SEA businesses have already adopted AI agents or chatbots, and budgets for customer experience continue to rise.

(JUN/RHZ/QOB)

However, as adoption increased, various limitations also began to surface:

• Power availability,

• Operational costs,

• Data management maturity, and

• Regulatory alignment.

These realities are now shaping both corporate investment directions and national digital infrastructure policies.

Over the past two years, many organizations viewed AI primarily as a computing challenge. The assumption was that more accelerators would lead to greater capabilities. But what’s surprising is that the limiting factor is no longer the models or the hardware.

The real bottleneck is the ability to move, manage, and secure data at scale. The main constraints lie in the data pipelines, the storage and network architectures supporting them, and the operational discipline required to run these systems reliably.

The next phase of AI will be agentic—systems capable of making decisions and taking actions in sectors such as financial services, healthcare, logistics, and manufacturing.

For governments and highly regulated industries, this raises new questions about accountability, transparency, and security. Such systems require accurate, well-managed data that is available within the right context, as well as infrastructure designed for high-capacity training, low-latency inference, and sustained resilience.

This is where conflicts begin to emerge: regional demand for AI capabilities continues to grow, but the physical capacity to support it remains limited. Energy efficiency is becoming a strategic concern.

The expansion of data centers in ASEAN—particularly in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines—is now constrained by power and land availability. The region cannot continue expanding capacity indefinitely.

Data sovereignty is also rising for similar reasons. Countries are strengthening expectations around data location, operational control, and cybersecurity assurances. The future will not be a binary choice between public cloud infrastructure or on-premises systems but a hybrid model that combines local control with secure data mobility.

What happens in Southeast Asia will have global implications, as the region becomes an example of how economies balance AI growth, sustainability, and sovereignty.

Organizations and countries leading in 2026 will treat data as a strategic asset. They will invest in energy-efficient architectures, resilient data platforms, and ongoing talent development.

(RHZ/QOB)

The Mirage of Engagement

As I explore these discussions more deeply, I see that Indonesia’s Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is still somewhat underrated regarding consistency and understanding. Compared to other regions such as Southeast Asia, Europe, and America, these areas still establish consistency in international relations dialogues.

The issues persist for a few weeks when the Middle East is brought up in Indonesia. Generally, these topics are not addressed in depth or within the institutional framework of the diplomatic process, particularly concerning the Palestinian struggle.

It is recognized that Indonesia’s attributes, particularly when discussing the MENA region, are frequently associated with Islamic connectivity.

Regarding the disclaimer, this approach is not objectionable; however, it is essential to acknowledge that every perspective entails inevitable consequences.

On the other hand, there are still many debates about the definition of the MENA itself regarding history, geography, geopolitics, and social identity, among the biggest challenges of the MENA study in Indonesia.

Indeed, we cannot deny that Indonesia and the MENA region have engaged in extensive cooperation across various sectors and bilateral relations for several decades.

A few months earlier, ASEAN, China, and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) convened a summit to discuss the region’s economic and political issues.

The summit demonstrated multilateral efforts to broaden their influence and interests to other areas, regarding contemporary issues.

Indonesia, of course, demonstrates numerous initiatives aimed at security and humanitarian assistance for several MENA countries, notably in conflict zones such as Lebanon and Palestine, despite the rivalry with Israel.

These findings illustrate the enduring support of the Indonesian public for social, diplomatic, and humanitarian initiatives in the region over many years, at least from a subjective perspective.

Indonesia and the MENA countries have had many historical moments, from pre-independence until now, from diplomatic to economic cooperation, that shape these nations’ relationships.

The 1955 Asia-Africa Conference was one of the most significant moments for strengthening the relationship among the elite. Also, grassroots interactions are powerful regarding identity connections among them, particularly when discussing Palestinian issues.

However, Indonesians’ problem when answering questions about geopolitical issues and institutions, like the Palestinian and the Gulf Cooperation Council, in detail, is the lack of connection between political dynamics and ideology.

From Constructive to Strategy Discussions

This picture shows the gap between the elites and the academics who believe that Indonesia’s position will support the “two-state solution” as a “realistic solution” to support the right and Palestinian independence regarding Indonesia’s diplomatic role capacity.

On the public side, which is the Indonesians, believe that there is no chance for a “two-state solution” as a conclusion for solving the Israel-Palestinian crisis. Mainly from the religious community, which is skeptical about the “realistic solution.”

There is nothing wrong with these clashes; both sides have shown the proof of their argument. The two-state solution has proved that Indonesia’s diplomatic stance agrees with that solution.

The survey results concluded that there is a gap between identity construction and realist political situations. Public will always use identity construction as a strong argument in MENA issues.

However, the consequence is that it is difficult to distinguish between identity strength, diplomacy, or a political actor’s interests when trying to understand and connect with the reality of regional cooperation.

Public schools, universities, and social organizations rarely integrate MENA studies beyond identity and history; even policy discussions are often reactive rather than strategic.

It could start by increasing the literacy aspect through more public discussion about the definition of the MENA region and substantive institution cooperation among the region and sub-region countries.

The other side remains that constructive aspects could be used to maintain motivation and our national interest in the Middle East and North Africa region. These aspects enable the MENA to be consistently discussed, as in other areas, such as ASEAN, East Asia, Europe, and the Americas.

Therefore, this region is too complex to understand when subjectivity is used as an argument. Because of this gap problem, the MENA region discussion in Indonesia is still on the surface and underrated. A regional discussion is a trending topic that could disappear in a second, unlike in other regions.

These surveys should reshape Indonesia’s conversations about the MENA region in public and academic circles. If these gaps can be resolved, Indonesia could implement a regional policy that takes on new aspects of its strategic dimensions in the future.

(RHZ/QOB)

Almost overnight, super apps have not just slotted into daily life, they have rewritten it, turning payments into pixels, errands into ecosystems, and tradition into tap-and-go.

A single app can carry us through the week. We pay, we split, we ride, we eat, we even bank, inside a handful of apps promising a seamless life. What once felt futuristic is stitched into daily life.

For consumers, this has been a revolution in convenience. For marketers, this promised the holy grail of a closed ecosystem where awareness, engagement, and purchase could all happen under one roof, a perfect cure for fragmented consumer journeys.

For a while, that was enough; but convenience ages quickly and perfection always hides a cost. When every app promises the same frictionless life, sameness sets in.

These platforms have mastered the quick fixes of cashback, coupons, gamified nudges, while neglecting meaning and identity. This is where loyalty points dissolve into noise. The platforms sit in every pocket, but not in people’s hearts.

Walled Gardens with Narrow Horizons

Super apps have built advertising machines rivalling social giants, targeting audiences at scale, without ever letting them leave the ecosystem.

Yet, every garden comes with walls. Each platform fences its territory, leaving brands duplicating effort across silos. Budgets thin, data stays locked away, creative is recycled. What was meant to simplify became complexity.

The walls are high, but the horizon is narrowing.

The Festive Spark Is Fading

Digital wallets found their early spark by weaving culture into commerce. When Duit Raya turns transfer into a tradition, suddenly, wallets were festive, personal, Malaysian.

That spark, however, is fading. The same playbook is recycled each festive season. Loyalty programs and bill-splitting features have become commodities.

When every wallet offers the same gimmick, none of them stand out. Here, a cultural anchor risks cliché.

Social Commerce: Where Trust, Not Cashback, Will Decide

With nearly three-quarters of consumers now shop directly from their social feeds, far above global averages, discovery and purchase are collapsing into a single swipe.

Here, digital wallets are the invisible enablers, making payment frictionless. But seamlessness is no longer a differentiator, it is table stakes.

The real question is one of trust. Which platform do Malaysians believe will handle their money, their data, and their attention with care? That answer will decide who wins, long after the cashback offers expire.

In this battlefield, cashback is cheap. Trust is priceless.

Innovation Without Imagination

To call the current wave of campaigns “innovative” is generous. Tiered memberships, flash sales, gamified quizzes, AI-driven bundles, are base-level tweaks to the established formula — of reward, nudge, repeat — not revolution.

AI is not rewriting the playbook; it is automating it. What is missing is imagination and courage to ask what loyalty should mean when every app can already do everything. Until someone reframes the question, Malaysia’s wallet wars will remain a race to the bottom.

Complexity Meets Fatigue

Two forces now define the space:

1. On the backend, every industry wants to be a super app, each building its own silo. Partnerships are fraught, interoperability is slow, and the dream of one seamless app still a fantasy.

2. On the frontend, consumers are exhausted. App fatigue is the hidden tax Malaysians are paying for convenience.

Yet, in this double bind creates the perfect opportunity. The player that can untangle the backend and simplify the frontend will not just win transactions, they will win loyalty.

Culture: The Untapped Currency

Most wallets chase broad universals, competing on speed, savings, and convenience. Few touch on culture and the nuances that make this market distinct.

The campaigns that do, those that reflect the realities of underserved Malaysians, or that speak to rituals and aspirations people genuinely care about, achieve a different kind of cut-through. They build empathy, not just engagement.

Convenience Wins a Tap, Culture Wins a Heart

The next chapter of Malaysia’s digital economy will not be written by the biggest cashback or the flashiest festive tie-in. Discounts can win a click, but they rarely win a heart.

· Cut through complexity - That begins with untangling the clutter because Malaysians are exhausted by overlapping apps and offers. They need brands that speak in the language of culture, not code. Above all, they need to know that their trust is valued as much as their transactions.

· Create genuine difference - For brands, this means daring to stand apart. When every wallet mirrors the next, it takes imagination to create something that feels fresh. Loyalty won’t come from the repetition of features, but from moments that surprise, delight, and remind people why a brand exists in the first place.

· Anchoring in culture - Malaysians are not faceless “users.” They are people with rituals, histories, and aspirations that run deeper than any promo code. A campaign that speaks to that truth, can lift a platform from utility to icon.

· Elevate trust - Above all, trust is the ground. Convenience can get people in, but integrity keeps them inside. The platforms that treat data and attention as sacred, not expendable, will be the ones Malaysians choose to carry with them for the long run.

Malaysia’s super apps rewired how we live and spend. But convenience has a ceiling. To break through it, platforms must stop competing on sameness and start competing on significance. Otherwise, they will rack up usage while running into loyalty debt.

(RHZ/QOB)

For Malaysia’s thriving landscape of family enterprises, these lessons resonate deeply. Family businesses—long the backbone of national development—are being called to embrace a future where succession is more than ownership transfer, it is about stewardship of purpose, people, and planet.

Stewardship and Social Innovation: A New Lens for Legacy

A key learning from the exchange was the need to embed sustainability into leadership DNA.

At the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), delegates were reminded that the world is far from achieving its 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

For Malaysia—whose Twelfth and Thirteenth Malaysia Plans are aligned with these goals—this is a rallying call for young family business successors.

The UN’s call to “leave no one behind” mirrors the inclusive ethos that defines strong family enterprises. Delegates saw that leadership today must go beyond the boardroom, tapping into social innovation—such as converting food waste into products or building digital mental health platforms—not for profit alone, but to preserve community, resilience, and dignity.

These changemakers reflect the spirit of Malaysia’s Social Enterprise Accreditation (SE.A) framework and the growing wave of impact-led family ventures.

For next-gen leaders, the message is clear, family legacy is not static—it evolves when purpose leads.

Green Economy: When Tradition Powers Innovation

The Thai business landscape gave Malaysian delegates a window into how legacy businesses are spearheading green innovation.

From solar energy to plastic recycling, Thai family-owned companies are proving that sustainability and profitability can coexist without sacrificing generational values.

This model is highly relevant to Malaysia, where family firms drive a significant share of the nation’s gross domestic product. Our local champions are already investing in renewable energy, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) commitments, and sustainable supply chains.

What’s emerging is a powerful narrative that tradition and transformation go hand-in-hand.

For young Malaysians from family business backgrounds, this is an invitation not just to inherit, but to innovate.

By anchoring innovation in family values, the next generation can future-proof their enterprises while honouring the vision of their founders.

Culture and Legacy: The ASEAN Advantage

Throughout the exchange, cultural immersion offered more than inspiration, it provided a blueprint for resilient leadership.

Visits to Thai heritage sites reinforced the belief that identity is not an obstacle to progress, but its foundation.

For Malaysia’s multicultural society, this rings especially true. From traditional crafts to community festivals, culture is a driver of both social unity and entrepreneurial opportunity. In family businesses, heritage is not just preserved, it is lived, and in times of global uncertainty, it becomes a competitive advantage.

Just as family businesses pass down stories, recipes, and rituals, they also pass down the duty to protect what matters—people, culture, and integrity.

Turning Inspiration into Intergenerational Action

The real value of the AYE 2025 experience lies in what comes next. Delegates return not just with knowledge, but with a sense of intergenerational duty.

Whether launching green startups, revitalising traditional businesses, or engaging in national policy forums, their leadership will be measured by how they translate legacy into action.

The future of Malaysia’s economy will not be built by legacy alone, but by those willing to carry it forward with courage, empathy, and a vision that leaves no one behind.

---

(RHZ/QOB)

The core dilemma lies in ASEAN’s governing philosophy. Regional integration efforts have historically been characterized by an elitist approach, being overly reliant on the central government, which significantly reduces the necessary participation of subnational actors (cities and provinces).

To overcome this “capital consensus” and achieve genuine regional integration, ASEAN must strategically embrace “local paradiplomacy”, shifting governance power downwards to empower subnational actors who can drive grassroots economic and social coherence.

The Constraints of the Centralized “ASEAN Way”

ASEAN’s integration ethos, often referred to as the “ASEAN Way,” is fundamentally built on principles of consensus and non-interference, which creates a predominantly intergovernmental framework. This centralized, state-centric approach grants national governments significant control over policies, constraining the ability of subnational actors to influence market integration or international engagement.

This centralized model generates critical structural challenges:

1. Bureaucratic Hurdles: Structural challenges, such as unfriendly bureaucratic, actively hinder regional governments from participating effectively in international relations. Bureaucratic and complex governance structures impede communication and resource reporting necessary for collaboration.

2. Implementation Gaps: Agreements and initiatives established at the regional level, when implemented nationally, often fail at execution to the local government level due to the deeply centralized government structures in place in many ASEAN Member States (AMS).

3. Elite Reliance: The focus on macro-level national interests means subnational engagement is often minimized. This centralized governance poses a challenge for local actors to go beyond national cooperation, even when promoting financial interests on the global stage.

Therefore, while the political will for integration exists at the centre, the mechanisms for implementation at the periphery are weak, creating a disconnected interlink between regional and central government when implementing regulations and policies.

The Paradiplomacy Bridge: Decentralization through Local Action

Paradiplomacy defined as subnational actors (at the province or municipal level) engaging in international relations offers a potent solution by creating new organizational forms like micro-regionalism and micro-diplomacy.

This approach can be analyzed through two crucial dimensions of paradiplomacy:

1. Intergovernmental Dimension: This assesses the often disconnected interlink between regional and central governments, especially in ASEAN Member States (AMS) where federalism and decentralization remain complex challenges. Strengthening these intergovernmental relations is crucial because they facilitate capacity building, friendly cross-border cooperation, and policy coherence among subnational actors.

2. Global Economy Dimension: This focuses on how subnational actors impact international trade and foreign trade policy dynamics. It acknowledges that the economic incentives of paradiplomacy can promote the political willingness of regional governments and help regions pursue their financial interests on the global stage.

Historically, Southeast Asia provides a strong precedent for this approach. In the pre-colonial era, many coastal and port cities operated as centres for trade, allowing local merchants to connect different regions without strong attachment to a central government.

Post-colonial nation-building shifted control to the central governments, but the potential for subnational cooperation persists as a vehicle for economic integration and developing more rural regions.

ASEAN has attempted to promote subnational collaboration through several initiatives, but many have produced unsatisfactory results, indicating critical gaps in structure and commitment such as Meeting of Governors and Mayors of ASEAN Capitals (MGMAC), Sister Cities and The ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN)

The Limitations of the MGMAC

The Meeting of Governors and Mayors of ASEAN Capitals (MGMAC) was initiated in 2013 to promote subnational involvement in ASEAN agreements. Since its establishment, MGMAC has addressed vital agendas, including public safety, health, education, and culture.

However, the substantive results of these annual meetings have been limited. A critical flaw is that MGMAC is not an official, integrated initiative but rather an independent forum outside the regional body.

The lack of institutionalization hinders top-down implementation. Furthermore, the outputs of the forum are non-binding, which creates a loophole for actors to avoid commitments.

Sister City Agreements: Symbolic over Substantive

Sister City agreements involve formal arrangements to promote cultural and economic ties, often utilizing a grassroots approach through citizen and cultural exchange. Examples include partnerships between Jakarta and Bangkok (focusing on tourism and trade) and Jakarta and Hanoi (focusing on infrastructure development and knowledge transfer).

While these agreements can substantially benefit tourism-reliant economies like Thailand, Singapore, and Indonesia, they often prioritize cultural exchange and non-economic collaboration. Consequently, sister city relationships are frequently regarded as symbolic relations, lacking success in realising economic efforts and undermining the potential benefits subnational actors might derive.

The ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN) Disparity

The ASCN, established to promote sustainable urbanisation, is a comprehensive platform involving both central and local governments. Despite its detailed framework, its success rate remains minimal.

The mechanism suffers from a lack of sufficient capacity and a knowledge gap among local governments, often leading to inconsistent participation. There is a pronounced disparity in development progress and technological readiness across AMS cities; for instance, Singapore takes the lead, while developing economies like Cambodia and Laos lag behind.

The Grassroots Template: Success of Micro-Regionalism

In stark contrast to the symbolic or constrained top-down efforts, genuine, decentralized cooperation has proven highly effective. The historical success of micro-regionalism, particularly between geographically close subnational governments, provides a necessary template.

The Singapore-Johor Bahru-Riau (SIJORI) growth triangle, which evolved into the Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore Growth Triangle (IMS-GT), is often cited as one of the most successful cross-border cooperations in ASEAN. Crucially, the factors leading to its success include its reliance on a bottom-up approach and informality in cooperation.

The use of private actors as proxies for international cooperation allows local governments to circumvent the central government’s influence in their projects. This strategy has led to tangible outcomes, such as significant contributions to industrial development (e.g., Batam’s 62.9% contribution) and increases in international visitors and revenue for the region.

These micro-regional examples show that delegating the role of trade project development to subnational actors can be a major boost to economic integration, particularly by acknowledging the disparity of economic and infrastructure development between member states.

Decentralizing the ASEAN Way: Strategic Pathways Forward

To transition from the limitations of the “capital consensus” to tangible grassroots impact, ASEAN must adopt strategies that institutionalise paradiplomacy and empower local actors:

1. Institutionalise Local Forums: The most significant step is the institutionalisation of MGMAC into the official ASEAN framework. This effort would solidify intergovernmental relations between central and local governments and facilitate interactions among business actors and local government.

2. Focus on Capacity and Competence: Capacity building for local governments must be heavily promoted to increase the viability of trade and competence. Maximizing the utilisation of platforms like ASCN for resource, technology, and knowledge transfer is crucial to narrow the knowledge and competence gap between local and central government.

3. Promote Complementary Micro-Trade: Subnational trade should be amplified by establishing smaller-scale trade agreements between cities. This requires decentralized communication between governments to ensure that economic activity is complementary rather than competitive, mimicking the successful approach of the golden triangles. This shift encourages economic relations that diversify focus industries and strengthen local government budgets.

By fostering wider community involvement and strengthening the capacity of subnational actors through structured platforms, ASEAN can effectively move beyond symbolic diplomacy and central reliance.

(RHZ/QOB)

The answer, increasingly, lies in governance models built on openness, collaboration, and accountability—principles that are being operationalised through open digital ecosystems.

Creating the connected foundation

Building a smarter city starts with creating a strong technological foundation.

Modern infrastructure brings together an extensive network of sensors, cameras, and control systems working in concert to enhance city operations.

This integrated network combines advanced wireless technology with traditional wired connections, ensuring comprehensive coverage and reliable communication across all city systems.

Edge computing has revolutionised how cities process and act on information. By analysing data at its source rather than sending everything to a central location, cities can make faster, smarter decisions.

This distributed approach significantly improves response times for critical services while optimising network resources and ensuring system resilience.

For example, traffic management systems can instantly adjust signals based on real-time conditions, or safety systems can automatically alert first responders to emerging situations.

The rise of open ecosystems in governance

In many Asian cities, the digital transformation journey began with the deployment of stand-alone systems such as CCTV networks for surveillance, separate command centres for transport, and distinct databases for citizen services.

While these systems have delivered clear benefits, they often operate in isolation, creating data silos and inefficiencies that slow response times and limit visibility.

Open ecosystems offer a fundamentally different approach.

They bring together data, devices, and applications from multiple vendors through interoperable, vendor-agnostic platforms.

This approach allows governments to scale innovation without being locked into proprietary technologies.

By creating common standards for data exchange and collaboration, cities can integrate new technologies such as AI analytics, IoT sensors, or drone systems, without overhauling existing infrastructure.

A case in point is in Singapore, smart surveillance is not only enhancing traffic management but also supporting efforts to enforce public safety regulations.

Indonesian government’s usage of a fleet management system has drastically improved the problem of traffic congestion in Makassar City.

Using an open platform, data is collected to detect the best routes, unsafe driving and driver behaviours, improving traffic safety, efficiency and operational performance.

AI, analytics and cross-agency collaboration

The convergence of AI and video analytics is transforming how cities address complex urban challenges from crowd management to emergency response.

Predictive analytics can detect anomalies in traffic patterns, while AI-enabled sensors can monitor environmental quality and trigger alerts before thresholds are breached.

Yet, the true potential of these tools is unlocked only when they are combined with cross-agency collaboration.

When data from transport, law enforcement, healthcare, and utilities are integrated through an open platform, cities gain a holistic understanding of urban dynamics.

Decision-making becomes more data-driven and proactive, enabling authorities to anticipate risks rather than simply react to them.

Ethical and responsible AI in public safety

As the use of AI in public governance expands, ethics and transparency must take centre stage. Citizens’ trust in digital systems is built on confidence that their data is secure, their privacy respected, and that technology is being used for the public good.

Responsible AI frameworks should include clear principles for data governance, bias mitigation, and accountability. Algorithms that support decision-making in public safety, for instance, must be explainable and auditable.

The deployment of surveillance or analytics technologies should comply with local regulations and international best practices, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of individual rights.

Accelerating innovation and citizen participation

A university might analyse traffic data to ease congestion, while a social enterprise could build an app that helps persons with disabilities navigate public spaces.

Built on interoperable platforms, such innovations can scale seamlessly across a city.

This approach fosters citizen-centric governance, where technology empowers rather than controls, and citizens become active partners in shaping the future of their cities.

Building digitally resilient, citizen-centric cities

Ultimately, the smart cities of tomorrow will not be defined by the sophistication of their technology, but by the strength of their governance and inclusivity of their design. Cities that adopt open, interoperable platforms are better equipped to evolve, respond to crises, and serve their citizens with agility and fairness.

Public- private partnerships will continue to play a critical role in this transformation.

Technology providers, government agencies, and civil society must collaborate to establish standards, ensure interoperability, and uphold ethical norms in AI use.

(RHZ/QOB)

President Trump, visited the three Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates on May 13 to May 16. The leaders of these countries agreed on economic cooperation in infrastructure investment and security.

The United States did this to restore China’s total dominance, which had been slowly displaced. China also has a large share of influence and material power in the Middle East region.

Meanwhile, the organisation of Southeast Asian countries, or ASEAN, has a cooperative relationship with the institutions of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and China itself. Then ASEAN, GCC, and China held a high-level meeting on 27th May 2025, in Kuala Lumpur.

Trump Will Retake the Gulf

The visit to Saudi Arabia marked Trump’s role in the Middle East for his second term. The value of investment, which reached $600 billion, was the highest US achievement in its dealings with the Saudis.

Qatar also agreed on the value of investments, specifically in aviation. Qatar Airways purchased $200 billion worth of Boeing aircraft, the most significant purchase in the company’s history.

Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates is ambitious about generating $1.4 trillion worth of investment with the United States. Therefore, it is not wrong for the United States, mainly from Trump himself, to send an ambitious message to restore glory in the Middle East.

With China’s significant role in trade through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) program and the most considerable contribution to the diplomatic side, the United States’ position has begun to fade out in recent years.

Furthermore, China’s role in diplomatic positions to mediate the resolution of conflicts such as Saudi Arabia and Iran in 2023, and the reconciliation of Fatah and Hamas in 2024, makes the United States very threatened.

Therefore, Trump’s arrival in the Gulf region will likely impact several countries, particularly other Gulf countries and China.

On the other hand, in addition to China’s relations with the GCC countries, ASEAN is an essential partner in terms of trade and investment. The GCC also has significant ties with Southeast Asian countries in many sectors.

GCC Potential Offers to ASEAN

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is a regional organisation in the Gulf, similar to ASEAN but with significantly greater economic potential. Both organisations aim to enhance economic and political security cooperation.

In general, the six GCC member states are promoting non-oil economic growth as their bargaining power in their foreign policies instead of relying on oil anymore. This change has occurred due to concerns about limited natural resources in the future.

Saudi Arabia’s popular program through Saudi Vision 2030 is an example of one of the main focuses of tourism and global investment (in the context of activism in foreign economic policy). The United Arab Emirates has a financial program similar to Saudi Arabia’s and intends to play a role in its sustainable development.

Qatar emphasises its foreign policy through formal diplomacy, concentrating on regional security concerns and positioning itself as a principal conflict resolution gateway, rather than expanding soft power.

For context, the GCC was established in 1981 in response to the Iraq-Iran conflict in the 1980 Gulf War. The organisation is considered quite fragile regarding security issues due to the instability of interests among its member states.

The GCC formally intended to increase awareness of security issues in December 2023, with the Vision for Regional Security declaration. The main point is deterring terrorism through financial and logistical support to terrorist groups.

Regarding GCC-ASEAN relations, the security issue only focuses on communications and cooperation meetings through annual meetings and countering radicalism and extremism. GCCPOL and ASEANAPOL would technically discuss this issue further.

Therefore, with its global investment policy, economic strength is a strong starting advantage in meeting ASEAN’s needs in cooperation. As a context, ASEAN itself expects the GCC to be actively involved in the sustainable development of ASEAN Connectivity 2025.

Given its reputation for political diplomacy in reconciling regional conflicts such as Saudi-Iran and Hamas-Fatah, it is essential to capitalise on China’s momentum in the Middle East.

Furthermore, the GCC, with its economic bargaining power over ASEAN, could be a bridge between China’s mission to strengthen the BRI and the financial interests of the Gulf. It can be an asset for an alternative market alliance when dealing with the issue of American tariffs restricting the economic circulation of both regions.

Gulf Region’s Future in Post-Summit

As mentioned, the economic sector will assume a predominantly significant role in free trade and market opportunities, especially in response to the recent American tariffs implemented a few months prior.

The GCC considers this summit a means to utilise ASEAN as a vehicle for expanding economic cooperation with China, broadening markets and supply chains in Southeast Asia that benefit the Gulf.

However, the GCC’s position in this summit is particularly questionable to ASEAN. The main issue is the Gulf’s commitment to every cooperation declaration and its translation into strategic implementation.

Many observers view the Gulf’s cooperation with ASEAN and China as primarily rhetorical, lacking a clear roadmap for implementing economic and diplomatic initiatives within regional institutions.

The Gulf’s future post-summit with ASEAN and China may vary. While short-term commitments persist, ASEAN and China are considered long-term partners for trade and strategic ties.

This offers the GCC a chance to develop a comprehensive trade and integration roadmap with China and ASEAN, focusing on financing, exports, and energy, through a strategic supply chain plan.

The biggest obstacle for the GCC in collaborating with these parties is the complex geopolitical landscape of the Gulf and the Middle East. In addition, the Palestine-Israel conflict adds another layer of complexity to the region, making it a “multitasking” environment.

Therefore, the GCC advanced its efforts to diversify strategic cooperation on economic objectives, primarily to lessen oil dependency concerning resource capacity and negotiating regional influence.

GCC needs consistency and cohesion to turn strategic interests into effective regional policy; However, it faces ongoing challenges in geopolitical stabilisation.

(RHZ/QOB)

Southeast Asia’s luxury scene is entering a defining moment: the market is projected to reach nearly US$2 billion by 2025, over 100 million consumers expected to join its ranks in the next few years.

Its relationship with luxury is undergoing a quiet but confident transformation.

While big-name maisons still hold cultural cachet, younger consumers are increasingly drawn to brands that reflect their local identity, heritage and values.

The era of head-to-toe global branding is giving way to something more grounded: A celebration of homegrown excellence.

Consumers here are rejecting the idea that true luxury must be imported. They are turning away from logos and monograms, and toward identity, craft, and cultural pride.

The New Luxury Consumer

Traditional luxury thrived on scarcity, status, and European heritage. But Southeast Asian consumers, especially Millennials and Gen Zs, are no longer satisfied with borrowing someone else’s story.

The Southeast Asian consumers want luxury that speaks to their culture, their lineage, their values. They seek cultural identity, experiential engagement, and meaningful self-reward.

Today’s luxury buyers are also both highly brand-aware and highly intentional. They care about quality, exclusivity, and sustainability, and they expect personalisation and value-driven storytelling.

That is why a monogrammed bag no longer says “success”, instead, increasingly, it says “conformity.” The new signal of taste is intentionality: who made this, how was it crafted, and why does it matter to me?

In luxury watches, for instance, mesmerizing horological pieces from MING by Ming Thein and the one-of-a-kind designs of Singapore-founded, Swiss-made Azimuth have earned global recognition for their craftsmanship and creativity.

Their rise has been fueled by sophisticated younger buyers and affluent collectors across the region who value both artistry and authenticity.

Similarly, in Indonesia, the luxury mood is shifting from loud labels to living heritage. Status is no longer stamped on a monogram; it is woven into craft, provenance, and cultural meaning.

The new signal of taste is local mastery. What many call Vastra (wastra): the breadth of Indonesian textiles and dress traditions that go far beyond batik - tenun ikat (West Nusa Tenggara), songket (Sumatera), endek (Bali), lurik (Yogjakarta & Central Java), ulos (North Sumatera), sasirangan (South Kalimantan), and more, each rooted in its own geography, technique, and ritual. See: Ikat Kelana Wastra 2024 by Didiet Maulana

In this landscape, the new status language whispers time, touch, and lineage. Local luxury is reviving because it feels more authentic.

The Forces Redefining the New Luxury Order in Southeast Asia?

1. Personal Over Prestigious

The story behind a piece—who made it, how, and where—outweighs a visible brand stamp. The prestige once stamped on a brand name is now stitched into provenance and craft as consumers want to be seen as thoughtful curators of culture.

From Jakarta’s revival of wastra in streetwear to Singaporean designers blending traditional craftsmanship with modern cuts, consumers are choosing pieces that resonate personally.

Nowhere else is this more evident than in jewelry, where the rising value of gold has reinforced traditional interest in the allure of traditional metal.

But rather than defaulting to the large symbolic pieces that see the light of day only on special occasions, jewelry brands have shifted to designs with a more contemporary sensibility and emotional resonance.

Singaporean brand Truly Madly, for instance, crafts custom pieces woven with personal stories while Hong Kong’s Qeelin reinterprets auspicious symbols into modern, whimsical designs.

2. Legacy Dressing Is Back (And It’s Cool Again)

With over 60% of Gen Zs in Southeast Asia choosing brands that reflect their culture or values, what is considered “premium” is no longer imported, but meaningful.

The brands winning today are those that treat culture as craft, not as costume. They do not simply slap a batik print on a runway piece, they collaborate with artisans and communities to bring living traditions into modern relevance.

Indonesia illustrates this powerfully with the new status symbol being not just a monogram but mastery of wastra. Each textile carries lineage, geography, and ritual.

Consumers now prize the density of a weave, the use of natural dyes, or a maker’s signature.

Heritage silhouettes like kebaya or kain are being reimagined in contemporary tailoring—not as nostalgia but as coded elegance that is both modern and unmistakably local.

This enables them to hero respect for the craft and sustainable practices alongside modern styling trends as they create the aura of exclusivity around their brands.

3. Hyper-Local Creators as Tastemakers

Luxury today is shaped not only by what is bought, but how it is styled, shared, and narrated.

Across Southeast Asia, fashion and lifestyle creators are blending global aesthetics with local nuance, pairing batik with Balenciaga, kebaya with Comme des Garçons, or styling sarongs for Soho House.

Their eclectic personal brands on social media are pushing hybrid expressions of luxury from niche communities into the mainstream, and in the process, rewriting what “aspirational” looks like.

This has opened space for platforms that champion regional talent.

Dover Street Market Singapore now showcases emerging Asian designers alongside global names, while Thai label Stolen Stores builds its “It Girl” identity through capsule collections that have caught the attention of Ariana Grande, Lalisa, and Sabrina Carpenter.

In horology, The Hour Glass’s “IAMWATCH” event gives independent watchmakers a stage to connect with collectors.

These tastemakers amplify regional pride and give lesser-known brands global visibility.

The Future of Luxury Speaks in Our Own Tongue

Luxury has always thrived on aspiration.

The question is: aspiration to what? Luxury in Southeast Asia is evolving from logos to lineage, prestige to pride.

Desire for status now coexists with a deeper desire for identity, heritage, and self-expression.

The next chapter will not only be written in the ateliers of Paris or Milan, instead, it will be shaped on the streets of Penang, in the boutiques of Jogja, and in the creativity of a new generation proudly turning inward for inspiration.

(RHZ/QOB)

On the evening of October 20, 2024, Indonesia's newly inaugurated President, Prabowo Subianto, announced that the Ministry for the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers had been officially listed as a new ministry in his cabinet.

This is a new phase for Indonesian migrant workers' protection, which was previously taken care of under the names of the Indonesian Migrant Workers Protection Agency (BP2MI), Indonesian Migrant Workers Protection and Placement Agency (BNP2TKI), and the Ministry of Manpower, which also carries some functions on Indonesian Migrant Workers' affairs.

The Two Focuses

Minister for the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers/Head of BP2MI, Abdul Kadir Karding, shared that President Prabowo outlined two key focuses on protecting Indonesian migrant workers.

• Eliminating exploitation at all stages, from pre-departure to reintegration. ✊

• Expanding placement opportunities abroad. 🌏

President Prabowo emphasized the importance of increasing foreign exchange earnings from migrant workers, with remittances being the second-largest contributor after oil and gas. 💸🌍

The Institutional Structure

Deputy Minister Christina Aryani highlighted the institutional structure of the newly established Ministry for the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers/BP2MI, which is modeled after agencies such as BKKBN and BAPPENAS.

It will have four directorates:

1. Promotion and Utilization of Overseas Employment Opportunities 🌐

2. Placement 📍

3. Protection 🛡️

4. Empowerment 💪

Additionally, Nanik Murwati of KemenPAN-RB noted the transfer of responsibilities, such as job training and recruitment, from the Ministry of Manpower to the BP2MI as a natural progression of its establishment (BP2MI, 2024).

The 100-Day Program Plan

In the 100-day program plan of the ministry, several points were listed, including:

• The expansion and improvement of the job market for prospective Indonesian Migrant Workers (CPMI) in the United States, Canada, and Germany; 🌎🇺🇸🇨🇦🇩🇪

• Preparation of the workforce insurance (BPJS Tenaga Kerja) program for Indonesian migrant workers; 🛡️

• Expansion of the People's Business Credit (KUR) program for financing CPMI programs with KUR for capital and mortgages; 💳🏠

• Simplification and integration of one-stop services for processing CPMI documents in the Public Service Mall; 🏢

• Improving governance of registration, supervision & guidance of Indonesian Migrant Worker Placement Companies (P3MI); 📑

• The establishment of a rapid reaction team for handling problems of Indonesian migrant workers; 🚨

For these protection efforts to be carried out domestically and abroad, KP2MI will establish a Rapid Response Team to address the issues faced by Indonesian migrant workers.

At the central and regional levels involving elements of the Regency/City Government, Immigration, Law Enforcement Officials, and Migrant Worker Activists (BP2MI, 2024).

Mirroring the Philippines?

This transformation in migrant workers' protection institutions can also be observed through the Philippines' experience, where, previously, the labor migration of Filipino nationals was heavily regulated by the Philippine government through three major institutions.

• The first institution is the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), which regulates the overseas recruitment and employment industry.

• The second institution is the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA), the lead agency that seeks to promote the well-being and welfare of member migrants and their families. 🤝

• Finally, there are labor attaches sanctioned at embassies, consulates, and satellite Philippine Overseas Labour Offices (POLOs) abroad to aid migrants in host countries. 🌍

The newly established DMW now assumes and performs all the powers and functions of the seven merged agencies, namely:

• The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA);

• The Office of the Undersecretary for Migrant Workers' Affairs (OUMWA) of the DFA;

• The International Labor Affairs Bureau (ILAB) and all Philippine Overseas Labor Offices (POLO) under DOLE;

• The National Maritime Polytechnic (NMP);

• The National Reintegration Center for OFWs (NRC) under the OWWA;

• The Office of the Social Welfare Attaché (OSWA) under the DSWD.

It is also tasked to promote the empowerment and protection of OFWs through continuous training and knowledge development (The Philippines Department of Migrant Workers, 2024).

Lessons Learned from The Transformation

The transformation of Indonesia's Ministry for the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers and its comparison to the Philippines' Department of Migrant Workers reveal similarities in institutional restructuring aimed at enhancing protection for migrant workers.

Indonesia's approach, which centralizes various agencies into a new ministry, mirrors the Philippines' 2022 formation of the Department of Migrant Workers, which absorbed seven agencies.

However, Indonesia's model integrates programs with other ministries, emphasizing community empowerment, whereas the Philippines focuses on reintegration and aligning national development.

Both frameworks emphasize protecting migrants at all stages and promoting overseas employment, reflecting their reliance on migrant remittances for economic benefits.

---

---

Mochamad Alvin Dwiana Qobulsyah is a lecturer and faculty member of the Department of International Relations at Bina Nusantara (BINUS) University, Jakarta. He also served as a Subject Content Specialist in Media and International Politics, and as a Research Fellow at the Centre for Business and Diplomatic Studies (CBDS) at the same institution.

He completed his master's degree (with high honours) in international studies, majoring in international cooperation at the Graduate School of International Studies, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Previously, he earned his bachelor's degree in political science, with a concentration in comparative politics and Indonesian political studies, from Universitas Indonesia in Depok, Indonesia. His research interests are focused on migration studies, global media studies, urban studies, and area studies related to Southeast Asia and East Asia.

Currently, he also works as managing editor for The Southeast Asia Desk, a Jakarta-based regional news lab that covers Indonesia and ASEAN-related issues.

He will serve as a Regional Pundit for The Southeast Asia Desk, focusing on issues related to international migration, global civil society, and East Asia-Southeast Asia area studies.

Disclaimer: This article was previously published in BINUS University Center for Business and Diplomatic Studies (CBDS) Commentaries No.5/2024, in November 2024. The re-publication is under the author’s consent. All Rights Reserved.

(QOB)