How tariffs shrink democratic space

Jakarta—Tariffs are no longer just about trade. Nor are they isolated policy tools deployed to correct economic imbalances. Tariffs are now being weaponized to reshape global geopolitics and coerce smaller economies into compliance. And Southeast Asia stands on the frontline of this coercive transformation.

The United States’ recent move to escalate tariffs on products from Asean member states is not merely a shift in trade policy, but a strategic recalibration of power. The reality is stark: trade has become a tool of geopolitical allegiance, and economic interdependence is being repurposed as a lever of control.

Multinational corporations and domestic exporters must now navigate an opaque labyrinth of lobbying, diplomacy, and shifting foreign policy expectations, balancing profitability against the risk of exclusion. Those that fail to align with Washington’s strategic priorities, whether it is technological decoupling from China or compliance with human rights standards interpreted through selective lenses, face punitive costs or irrelevance.

This creates a dangerously unequal system, one that privileges those with the capacity to influence policy and punishes countries that lack bargaining power. It is economic narcissism dressed up as liberal trade reform. It is a system that expects obedience rather than partnership.

The damage includes grave consequences for human rights, labor protections, and democratic space across Southeast Asia. Trade, once seen as a means of fostering development and lifting people out of poverty, is now becoming a wedge that can drive inequality, deepen authoritarianism, and weaken accountability.

When smaller economies are subjected to external pressure from powerful trading partners, there is often a reflexive response: centralize decision-making, suppress dissent, and eliminate checks and balances in the name of national interest and economic “stability.” Civil society voices, already constrained in many parts of Asean, are sidelined further as governments move swiftly to appease external actors and secure trade access.

Authoritarian-leaning governments are likely to use these trade pressures to justify greater repression. Civil liberties contract, space for opposition shrinks, and transparency in public policy evaporates. Trade becomes an elite game, disconnected from the rights and needs of ordinary people.

On the ground, the economic costs of this trade war fall squarely on the shoulders of workers, especially those in precarious and informal sectors. As corporations scramble to avoid tariffs by relocating operations or cutting costs, labor protections are often the first to go.

Oversight mechanisms fray. Labor abuses, including excessive working hours, union-busting, and even forced labor, become harder to track and more tempting to exploit. In some cases, illicit alternatives flourish: trafficking, smuggling and black-market labor networks feed on the gaps created by formal trade restrictions.

Plainly, the weaponization of trade undermines not only economic sovereignty but also the human dignity of millions in Southeast Asia. It risks deepening structural inequalities between the Global North and the Global South, reinforcing exploitative dependencies that leave no room for the political or economic empowerment of marginalized communities.

It also erodes the credibility of international trade institutions. If the world’s most powerful economy can selectively rewrite the rules of engagement to serve its geopolitical aims, what message does that send to other countries? What incentives exist for respecting human rights treaties or upholding international labor standards when economic survival hinges on alignment with great-power politics?

This predicament should serve as a wake-up call. We cannot rely on the goodwill of powerful trading partners to protect our sovereignty, our rights, or our democratic institutions. We must diversify our economic partnerships, invest in sustainable domestic industries, and build regional resilience through stronger Asean economic integration.

We must also resist the narrative that trade and human rights are separate arenas. Trade agreements must be shaped not only by economic logic but by moral and political responsibility.

This is a moment of reckoning for Asean. We must not respond to these coercive tactics with fragmentation or silence. We must stand in solidarity, regionally and globally, to push back against the erosion of our autonomy. That means crafting trade policies that put people first, strengthening protections for civil society, and reclaiming democratic space from the grip of elite negotiations.

This is not just about economics. It is about who gets to shape the future of our region, and whether that future will be just, democratic and dignified.

—————-

Charles Santiago is co-chair of Asean Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).

—————-

The Philippine Daily Inquirer is a member of the Asia News Network, an alliance of 22 media titles in the region.