EDITORIAL – Oct & Nov 2025- Adopting an Asian mindset

By the time you read this, the Gaza ceasefire may have broken down completely.

Let us hope not.

Despite its fragility, the end to fighting on that narrow strip of Mediterranean coastline came as unquestionable relief for those trapped civilians who have borne the brunt of the violence, with tens of thousands killed and injured.

Yet the real test is how to move on from a malignant stalemate and find a peace that works.

For that, a change of mindset is needed, one that swings away from long-standing formulae stamped with famous Western names from Henry Kissinger to Tony Blair,and their failures.

At this precarious moment, the most astute mentors of national-building and conflict avoidance come from the Global South and, specifically, the Asia-Pacific.

In this region, ideological alignment and historical grievances are mostly put aside in favour of stability, pragmatic engagement and trade.

The peace plan, as it stands, calls for the withdrawal of both Israel and Hamas. If the administrative and security vacuum is not filled swiftly and robustly there will be little incentive on either side to prevent a return to violence.

There lies the conundrum that has flummoxed the West since Israel’s 1948 creation, but one with which Asian nations routinely have to deal.

The closest comparison to the long-standing Israel-Palestine conflict would be India and Pakistan. Both fought their first wars in 1947.

Between Delhi and Islamabad, India, the stronger player, is prevailing, much as Israel is against Hamas. Pakistan, the weaker player, uses perceptions of historical and religious glory to prioritise war,damaging both its economy and the security of its people.

But Asia-Pacific flare-ups are short-lived.

The most recent India-Pakistan one, in May, ended within a week, as did the July conflict between Thailand and Cambodia. The latest skirmish across the disputed India-China borderwas three years ago and lasted less than a day.

Only in Myanmar does war prevail and, like Pakistan, that military-controlled nation is badly falling behind the rest of the region.

Singapore is an outstanding example of the pragmatic Asian mindset. After it was expelled from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965, this island of mangrove swamps, jungle and wetlands buckled down and built theworld’s most successful city trading state.

There was no thought of suicide vests and car bombs and, today, Singapore acts as an intellectual anchor between Western and Asian mindsets.

Taiwan handles China with similar hard-headed realism. Because it could not win a full-scale war, it decided to maintain peace through trade, deftly planting its economic foot in China’s camp and its political one in America’s.

The Taiwan war rhetoric favoured by Western media is largely unconnected with what is happening on the ground.

Countries across Asia orientate their foreign policy around trade, investment and connectivity rather than ideological blocs.This outlook gives them a unique credibility in the Israel‐Palestine arena. They are distanced from religious and tribal faultlines that dominate Middle East tensions. They bring to the table commercial acumen and a long-term, forward-looking horizon.

Asian technocrats are well-placed to mentor Palestinian administrators, bring in municipal reform and help train a civil service. More than their Western counterparts, they understand how to manage corruption, unaccountability, vested interests and, crucially, are experienced in the time it takes to build institutions.

Because they are less tied to the Israel‐Palestine narratives, Asian states should be able to work quietly to build trust on both sides.

To work, the ceasefire needs to be anchored with credible governance and there should be no rush.

In Asia, two ceasefires have been in place for more than half a century: Japan-Russia since 1945 and North-South Korea since 1953. In both cases, these nations are technically still at war.

Yet the absence of fighting has allowed South Korea and Japan to build fully developed economies, giving their citizens high standards of living and security.

An Asian mindset could lead Israelis and Palestinians on a similar path.

It could show how trust and investment can be tied to accountability and fair treatment of citizens without using the now polarising Western slogans of human rights and democracy.

The key element is moderation, pragmatism and a vision for a stable future. Central to that is the ability to trade and create wealth.

Israelis and Palestinians should reach out to Asia for guidance. Far more than the West, here are the people with real experience of stopping war and ending poverty.

Unless Gaza is given space and time for stability to take hold, the ceasefire will not be a stepping-stone towards peace but merely a pause in the slaughter.