State of Southeast Asia Survey 2024: Taking the Region’s Pulse on the Israel-Hamas Conflict

The Israel-Hamas conflict, despite its geographical distance from Southeast Asia, has become the region’s foremost geopolitical concern, surpassing even the South China Sea disputes, according to the State of Southeast 2024 Survey (SSEA 2024). Unlike the Russia-Ukraine war, which ranked as respondents’ third most pressing concern, the situation in Gaza resonates deeply (Figure 1).

This heightened concern is understandable, given that over 40 per cent of Southeast Asia’s population are Muslim, with the majority residing in Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia. Additionally, countries like Singapore, where approximately 15 per cent of its population are Muslims, prioritised this conflict as the top concern for their governments.

The conflict has not only significantly influenced the domestic politics of Muslim-majority countries in Southeast Asia but also sparked divisive views within the region. In the initial stages of the conflict after the Hamas attacks on 7 October 2023, Southeast Asian countries displayed a range of positions. Countries like Singapore and the Philippines quickly condemned Hamas’ attacks on Israel, whereas others like Indonesia and Malaysia expressed solidarity with the Palestinians. This divergence was evidenced in the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Statement, which referenced the varied national stances on the conflict.

As the conflict continues past the six-month mark, marked by evolving developments and escalating casualties, including of aid workers, and a worsening humanitarian situation, multiple perspectives have emerged and are still evolving. The SSEA 2024 was conducted in January and February 2024; even at that point of time, a large segment of regional respondents (41.8 per cent) voiced concerns that Israel’s attack on Gaza had gone too far. This sentiment prevailed among most ASEAN countries, with the three Muslim-majority ones taking the lead: Brunei (79.2 per cent), Indonesia (77.7 per cent), Malaysia (64.4 per cent). Respondents from Singapore who felt the same stood at 46.2 per cent. These Singaporeans’ views echo Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan’s strong statements made on multiple occasions, urging Israel to prioritise the safety and security of civilians, especially during his latest visit to the Middle East.

In contrast, the largest group of respondents from the Philippines maintained that Israel has the right to retaliate within the bounds of international law, a position endorsed by the Philippine government. Notably, 17.7 per cent of Filipino respondents — the highest among all countries surveyed — felt that Hamas’ attack on Israel cannot be justified. Apart from identifying Israel as the “promised land” due to its Catholic/Christian-majority population, Filipinos’ economic considerations also drive their support for Israel, with the country providing employment for over 30,000 Filipino workers, mostly as caregivers.  

As the Israel-Hamas conflict worsens and remains high on the agenda of Southeast Asians, their governments are grappling with the potential impact of the seeming growing divergence of views. Beyond the palpable emotions of regional populations, it is evident that the repercussions of this crisis will be significant, especially if it escalates into a wider conflict involving more Middle Eastern countries. The largest group of respondents (29.7 per cent) in the SSEA 2024 expressed concern over the potential rise of extremist activities, which could significantly affect domestic and regional security. This apprehension was particularly pronounced in countries like Singapore, Cambodia, and the Philippines — which perceive Hamas as a terrorist group. Experts have cautioned that a prolonged Israel-Hamas conflict could be exploited by terrorist organisations to radicalise individuals. Likewise, the erosion of domestic social cohesion due to potential religious divisions was a pressing concern for countries like Thailand (ranking at the top of its concerns, with 31.8 per cent choosing this answer). This issue also weighs heavily on Myanmar and Singapore, given the spectrum of political ideologies within these countries.

In the Muslim-majority countries – Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei – and for Myanmar and Vietnam respondents, the predominant concern was the diminished trust in international law and the rules-based order. Malaysia and Indonesia have for decades stridently and vocally opposed Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories, with formal denunciations most recently expressed at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) proceedings. Malaysia has additionally supported South Africa’s recent case brought to the ICJ, alleging Israel’s waging of genocide against Palestinians.

The importance of upholding international law, particularly international humanitarian law — a key principle of ASEAN — resonates deeply with Southeast Asians. As such, most respondents believe that the international community should prioritise supporting a ceasefire and facilitating the provision of humanitarian aid (41.3 per cent), a top choice for most ASEAN countries. A significant proportion of respondents from Brunei, Indonesia, and Malaysia advocated supporting Palestinian self-determination, as the second most favoured option (17.5 per cent). The largest number of respondents endorsing the advocacy for a two-state solution as the only solution for Israel and Palestine hailed from Singapore (24.9 per cent), and this was the region’s third most prevalent option (16.2 per cent). This was ASEAN’s common position in a joint Foreign Ministers’ Statement released in October 2023.

Singapore’s principled stand in international affairs is evident in its consistent advocacy for a humanitarian truce in Gaza and its balanced engagement with both Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and other key stakeholders in the Middle East. Foreign Minister Balakrishnan has emphasised that a negotiated two-state solution remains the sole viable path towards achieving a comprehensive, just, and durable peace in the Middle East. Despite this, Singapore’s adherence to its principles has led to a noticeable divergence of views with its close diplomatic partner Israel. A clear majority of Singaporean elites (57.2 per cent) support their government’s position. The unwavering support for the Palestinian cause from governments in Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia has garnered strong approval from their respective citizens who participated in the SSEA 2024 (Figure 5).

The domestic sentiments in support of the Palestinians in the three Muslim-majority countries have correspondingly resulted in their rating for the US’ leadership in maintaining the rules-based order and upholding international law at the lowest levels compared to other countries in the region. This noticeable decrease in support for the US was also evident in these countries’ preferred alignment choice and the perception of the US as a strategic partner and provider of regional security, where ratings have similarly declined from 2023 to 2024. Analysts have attributed the region’s diminished confidence in the US to the Israel-Hamas conflict, citing the US’ staunch pro-Israel stance, which many perceive as contradictory to the principles of a rules-based order (Figures 6 and 7).

The questions in the SSEA 2024 on the Israel-Hamas war have brought to light the wide array of perspectives within the region, highlighting its potential vulnerability to religious polarisation. Despite similarly controversial violations of international law by Russia when it attacked Ukraine in 2022, and the looming threat of nuclear war – intended or accidental – on the European continent, Southeast Asia is understandably more fixated on current events in the Middle East. Bridging the divides among religious communities within the region concerning the Israel-Hamas conflict presents a formidable challenge. ASEAN and individual governments must navigate this terrain carefully, fostering domestic cohesion and regional unity amidst diverse viewpoints. ASEAN should maintain its focus on rules-based approaches and encourage diplomacy and cooperation to counter any potential rise in violent extremisms or radicalisation as the war drags on. 

2024/100