AUGUST 22 — The war in Gaza is no longer just a Middle Eastern tragedy. It has become a global cautionary tale — one that Asean can ill afford to ignore.

The statistics emerging from Israeli military intelligence itself paint a stark picture of a war that has tilted almost entirely against civilians.

Nineteen months into the conflict, Israel’s own classified assessments reveal that just 17 percent of those killed were identified anti-Israeli resistance fighters, normally defined as Hamas or Islamic Jihad.

The remaining 83 percent — five out of six deaths — were civilians.

In numerical terms, out of more than 53,000 Palestinians killed, only about 8,900 were combatants.

The rest were ordinary men, women, and children who happened to live in Gaza, caught in the path of relentless bombardment.

This ratio of civilian casualties stands as one of the most extreme in recent decades of warfare, raising urgent questions about proportionality, accountability, and the erosion of international humanitarian laws.

At first glance, the Gaza war might seem distant from Southeast Asia. Yet the principles at stake cut to the very core of Asean’s own security and diplomatic architecture.

The Association has long championed the sanctity of civilian life and the peaceful resolution of disputes — values enshrined in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) and reiterated in countless Asean declarations.

If civilian slaughter on such a scale is normalised in one part of the world, it lowers the threshold for violence everywhere, including our own region.

Southeast Asia is no stranger to conflicts where combatants blend into the civilian population, from southern Thailand to Mindanao in the Philippines.

If Asean states ever adopt the logic that heavy civilian casualties are acceptable collateral in counterinsurgency or counterterrorism operations, the region could quickly descend into cycles of repression and radicalisation. Gaza’s tragedy is a warning of what happens when restraint collapses.

Asean leaders cannot ignore the humanitarian catastrophe either. Malaysia and Indonesia, with their strong civil society movements and Muslim majorities, are already under domestic pressure to respond. The widespread perception across the region is that the Palestinians are being collectively punished. If Asean remains silent, it risks eroding its credibility as a moral and political actor in global affairs.

Moreover, Asean has consistently presented itself as a champion of multilateralism and a bridge between civilisations. The Gaza war has become a civilisational wound, fuelling Islamophobia in the West and anti-Western sentiment in the Global South.

If Asean aspires to a larger global role — through platforms like the East Asia Summit or the Asean-Gulf Cooperation Council Dialogue — it must show that it has the moral clarity to speak out on issues that transcend borders.

The Gaza conflict also carries strategic lessons that Asean cannot afford to overlook. First, the reliance on overwhelming military force without a political strategy is a recipe for perpetual insecurity. Israel’s campaign may weaken Gazans and Palestinians temporarily, but it has radicalised an entire generation of them.

Asean states facing separatist or insurgent challenges should heed this lesson: security cannot be achieved by firepower alone; it requires inclusive political settlements.

Second, the role of external powers in enabling or constraining conflicts is a reminder of Asean’s own vulnerability.

The United States’ continued supply of weapons to Israel, despite global condemnation, underscores how great powers will often prioritise their alliances over international law. Asean, situated at the heart of the US-China rivalry, must prepare for a world where the rules are bent by those powerful enough to do so. Neutrality and balance will not be enough; Asean must strengthen its own institutions and norms to shield the region from being trampled by larger geopolitical struggles.

Third, the Gaza war demonstrates the power of information.

The revelation that Israel’s own intelligence database confirms the overwhelming civilian toll was not meant for public view. Yet once exposed, it reframes global discourse and challenges official narratives.

For Asean, where control of information remains sensitive in many member states, the lesson is clear: truth has a way of surfacing, and when it does, governments must be prepared to face the moral and political consequences.

The Gaza war demands that Asean find its voice. As the chair rotates annually, each host country must use the Asean platform to advocate for adherence to humanitarian principles in all conflicts, not just those close to home.

Malaysia’s chairmanship in 2025-2026, with its theme of “Sustainability and Innovation,” presents an opportunity to anchor Asean’s moral compass in a turbulent world.

Asean’s silence risks being interpreted as acquiescence to the erosion of humanitarian norms.

Its strength has always been in offering a middle path — quiet diplomacy, consensus, and bridge-building.

These qualities are urgently needed not just in Southeast Asia, but also in reminding the world that indiscriminate slaughter must never be normalised, even in wars waged against terrorism.

The war in Gaza is more than a conflict between Israel and Hamas. It is a brutal demonstration of how quickly the laws of war can be abandoned, how readily civilian life can be discounted, and how fragile international norms truly are.

For Asean, it is not enough to watch from the sidelines. To remain relevant in global affairs, the region must take note of Gaza — not as a distant tragedy, but as a living warning of what happens when restraint gives way to retribution.

Asean must remember: silence in the face of such devastation is not neutrality — it is abdication.

* Phar Kim Beng is a professor of Asean Studies and Director of the Institute of Internationalization and Asean Studies at the International Islamic University of Malaysia.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.