Mr. Lorenz Wang, Prime Minister of the host country Singapore,
Mr. Dr. Bas-ti-an Ghi-gơ-rích, Director General of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS),
Ladies and gentlemen.
First of all, I sincerely thank the Government of Singapore and the International Institute for Strategic Studies for giving me the honor of speaking at the opening session of this important forum. Over the past two decades, the Shangri-La Dialogue has become a leading dialogue space on regional security, where countries share opinions, listen seriously and seek responsible approaches to peace, stability and development.
We meet at a time when the world is facing many risks and uncertainties: wider connections but more vulnerable; more advanced technology but greater abuse risks; deeper interdependence but also more easily turned into tools of pressure. While countries are all talking about peace, stability and cooperation, the strategic environment is increasingly suspicious, fragmented and uncontrolled competition. Therefore, what we need is to unify and deploy a common, minimum and essential vision to ensure peace, trust and development for humanity in the 21st century. At the same time, improve crisis prevention capacity early and remotely; because reality shows that many major crises often begin from unresolved misunderstandings, uncorrect signals and preventive mechanisms that are not triggered in time.
In that spirit, I want to share the theme: Proactively building peace - stability - development in a volatile world.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Change is the constant state of the world. But for change to lead to conflict or become a driving force towards peace is a strategic choice of nations and the international community. Looking at today's world, I believe that the current instability reflects three fundamental crises happening simultaneously and affecting each other. These are: the crisis of international order, the crisis of development model, and the crisis of strategic trust.
First of all, the international order crisis. International order is not immutable. A fair order can be adjusted to reflect world changes. But all adjustments need to take place by law, dialogue, sharing and self-restraint; not by coercion, imposition, threat of force or creating "precedentedness".
The international order crisis begins when laws are still mentioned, but binding power is reduced; when commitments are still declared, but practical actions erode those commitments; when the basic principles of international law are interpreted in a subjectively imposed direction, implemented inconsistently, or placed behind the mindset of prioritizing the use of force, "big fish eat small fish". In such an environment, countries, especially small and medium-sized countries, face factional pressure, economic, technological, financial and security coercion; at the same time, connecting spaces such as the sea and ocean, cyberspace, supply chains, digital infrastructure, and data cables are at risk of becoming competitive spaces. Recent tensions on strategic maritime routes in the Middle East show that conflict at a hotspot can quickly affect trade, energy, logistics and socio-economic life of many different regions globally.
Two is the development model crisis. For decades, globalization, trade, investment, technology and supply chain connectivity have created huge development opportunities for many countries, including developing countries. But it is also these drivers that are facing new pressures. Slow growth. Increased public debt and cost of capital. Climate change threatens the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people. New technology opens up great opportunities but also creates new gaps. Trade, finance, tariffs, energy, food, data and technology are at risk of being used as tools of pressure.
For many countries, development is not a secondary option to security. Development is the foundation of sustainable security. If the development process is interrupted, if developing countries' opportunities to rise are narrowed, then economic "overflow" can easily turn into social, political instability and even strategic instability.
Three is a strategic trust crisis. This is a silent but dangerous crisis, because it makes it easy for countries to see each other's actions through the lens of suspicion and insecurity. When trust declines, a defensive move can be interpreted as provocation, a difference of interest can be pushed into confrontation, a minor incident can trigger a reactionary spiral if there is no dialogue, communication, and self-restraint. Strategic trust is not about eliminating differences or denying competition. The core is differentiated governance within the framework of rules, making competition limited, responsible, and predictable. A sustainable regional order cannot be built on constant fear and mutual distrust.
New technology is making this challenge more complex. Big data, artificial intelligence, cyberspace, quantum technology, automation systems and digital infrastructure both expand higher development capabilities, and can amplify suspicion, manipulate information, shorten decision-making time and increase the risk of miscalculation. When technology exceeds the speed of law and human control, strategic stability becomes more fragile. Therefore, overcoming a crisis of trust requires a strategic framework to build strategic trust, including fast communication channels in case of incidents, transparency, dialogue, and substantive information sharing to reduce misunderstandings, clear rules of conduct to prevent collisions, and strong enough technological standards to ensure that people always hold ultimate responsibility in decisions with serious security consequences.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The three crises mentioned above are clearly converging in the Asia-Pacific. This is the dynamic growth center of the world, but also a place of fierce strategic competition; it is the space of vital maritime routes, but also contains many risks at sea; it is a region that deeply benefits from globalization, but is under direct pressure from fragmentation of supply chains, climate change, technological transformation and new geo-economic competition. Precisely because it is a place of convergence of challenges, the Asia-Pacific must also be the starting point for solutions. This region has common interests in peace, connectivity and development; has multi-level cooperation experience; has ASEAN as a dialogue and balance structure; has enough motivation and determination not to let competition slip into confrontation, not to let connecting routes become dividing lines, not to let the security of one country become insecurity of another.
From that perspective, I would like to share some orientations to jointly build a peaceful, stable, developed, resilient Asia-Pacific with the ability to reduce risks early and remotely.
First, it is necessary to make rules and dialogue effective means of minimizing real risks. Shangri-La Dialogue is a place where countries listen to each other, clarify intentions, seek common ground and control differences, but dialogue should not stop at statements of position. Dialogue must help identify risks early, share information, maintain communication channels in times of tension and prevent differences from sliding into crisis. Rule-based order does not belong to just one group of countries, but is a common foundation for large, medium and small countries to coexist peacefully on the basis of international law, the United Nations Charter, respect for independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, not to use or threaten to use force, and resolve disputes by peaceful and equal means between nations. Rules only have vitality when they are consistently implemented and transformed into specific mechanisms such as early warning, emergency communication, incident handling, self-restraint and verifiable cooperation.
This is especially important for the sea and oceans. The sea and oceans are resources, a common connecting space, and the lifeblood of global trade, energy, food and supply chains. No country benefits if those connecting routes become places of power display, coercion or confrontation.
Regarding the East Sea, Vietnam's position is consistent, clear and principled. Vietnam supports resolving all disputes and disagreements by peaceful means, on the basis of international law, especially the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Vietnam respects the legitimate and lawful rights and interests of other countries; and resolutely and persistently protects its independence, sovereignty, sovereign rights and legitimate jurisdiction in accordance with international law.
Second, it is necessary to build an open, inclusive regional structure and take ASEAN as the center. In the context of many new mechanisms and initiatives appearing, we need to build a structure capable of connecting interests, reducing suspicion and complementing existing mechanisms. All initiatives contributing to peace, stability and development are commendable if they are transparent, respect international law, complementary to each other and do not weaken ASEAN's central role and do not turn Southeast Asia into a space for confrontation between blocs. ASEAN's central role is not natural and does not maintain itself. ASEAN can only maintain that role by solidarity, strategic autonomy and the ability to build a common agenda. Comprehensiveness must be associated with efficiency, dialogue must create action, consensus must help the region respond promptly to common issues. Vietnam supports and is ready to cooperate closely with the Philippines in its capacity as ASEAN Chair in 2026, together with member countries to consolidate peace and security, expand prosperity corridors, promote connectivity, inclusive and sustainable development, and put ASEAN people at the center.
Third, it is necessary to put human security and social resilience at the center of sustainable security. Today's instability comes not only from military conflicts but also from breakdowns in development life. Therefore, strengthening national defense is a legitimate need, but sustainable security cannot be based solely on military strength, and certainly cannot be built by arms race or by increasing development insecurity for other countries. What we need is a development platform that is highly resilient to shocks, open and diverse supply chains, smooth infrastructure connections, cooperation in finance, technology and human resources; and at the same time promote practical cooperation in disaster relief, health, water security, food, energy, cybersecurity, protection of key infrastructure and search and rescue. Once cooperation brings safety, livelihoods and improves people's lives, strategic trust will be strengthened and fostered.
Fourth, it is necessary to create standards of responsibility for new technologies and the defense industry. Artificial intelligence, big data, quantum technology, automation systems, space technology, cybersecurity and high-tech supply chains are reshaping international security. These technologies can expand development capabilities, risk forecasting and governance, but can also be abused for cyberattacks, information manipulation, conflict automation, illegal surveillance or creating new forms of coercion. In defense - security, the important question is not how strong the technology is, but how much the human can control that technology. Therefore, we need to promote dialogue on AI in defense - security, ensuring ultimate human responsibility in decisions with serious consequences, codes of conduct in cyberspace, protecting submarine cables, critical data infrastructure, and transparency for technologies that affect strategic stability. The defense industry needs to serve legitimate self-defense and regional stability, not become a driving force for the arms race.
Fifth, it is necessary to strengthen social foundations and resilience; protect information space and raise awareness. In a deeply connected digital world, instability not only comes from military conflicts, supply chain breakdowns or cyberattacks, but can also start from the erosion of trust in society. Fake news, information manipulation, extremist incitement, social polarization and deliberate influence campaigns can weaken national consensus, distort public perception, deepen divisions and make crises spread faster. Therefore, protecting peace in the new era also requires protecting the truth, strengthening social trust, improving strategic communication capacity, educating digital citizens, promoting the responsibility of technology platforms and international cooperation in combating misinformation. A society capable of distinguishing right from wrong, maintaining consensus in the face of fluctuations and not being led by fear, hatred or manipulation will be an important foundation for sustainable security.
Sixth, it is necessary to improve the capacity of preventive diplomacy, reconciliation and mediation in the region. Many crises do not break out just because of differences in interests but because the parties lack reliable channels of exchange, lack space to de-escalate and lack mechanisms to help shift confrontation back to dialogue. Therefore, Asia-Pacific needs to consider preventive diplomacy as a strategic capacity, not a temporary measure after the crisis has occurred. We need more different consultation channels, flexible intermediary mechanisms, incident contact groups, semi-official forums and confidence-building initiatives between the military, security, law enforcement, scholars, businesses and social organizations. The goal is to create "diplomatic escape routes" before the parties are caught up in the spiral of escalation leading to the risk of conflict.
With influential partners inside and outside the region, Vietnam wishes to send a sincere message: Asia-Pacific is an open space, all countries with legitimate interests can contribute to peace, stability and development. The region welcomes a transparent, responsible presence, respect for international law, supports ASEAN's central role and contributes to reducing tensions. What the region desires is not the pure presence or absence of any major country, but a responsible commitment. We see competition as inevitable, but competition must be placed within the limits of law, transparency and self-restraint.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Today's three world crises are not inevitable that we must accept. It is important to look straight at the crisis, but not let the crisis obscure the opportunity to act. The crisis of international order shows that international law and self-restraint need to be strengthened. The development model crisis shows that it is necessary to renew growth drivers in a inclusive, sustainable and human-centered direction. The crisis of strategic trust requires dialogue, transparency, responsibility and more substantive cooperation mechanisms.
Those answers will not form on their own. They can only become a reality if countries jointly maintain and build laws, connect interests, strengthen trust and build effective risk reduction mechanisms in practice. In a volatile world, challenges come not only from external instability, but also from our lack of good preparation for risk management. It is important to shift from passive response to proactive construction; from reiterating principles to operating mechanisms; from crisis management after occurrence to risk reduction before crisis breaks out.
Therefore, Asia-Pacific's choice today is not between competition or non-competition, because competition is a reality of international relations. The more important choice is between uncontrolled competition and responsible coexistence; between division and dialogue; between suspicion, coercion and an order based on rules and trust. Vietnam believes that our region has enough bravery and common interests to choose the path of peace, cooperation and prosperity.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Vietnam understands the value of peace through its own history, understands the value of development through its own journey of Doi Moi and integration. From that experience, Vietnam deeply realizes that our national interests are closely linked to peace, stability and prosperity of the region. Contributing to regional peace is also protecting Vietnam's long-term interests. Expanding cooperation, minimizing risks and connecting legitimate interests is also how Vietnam fulfills its responsibilities to the international community.
Peace, stability and development are common denominators of all nations and peoples. But they are only meaningful when transformed into concrete actions, restraining disagreements, dialogue when differences increase, cooperation when challenges cross borders, and building risk-reducing mechanisms that can work in practice.
With that spirit, Vietnam is ready to work with countries inside and outside the region to strengthen laws, build trust, promote dialogue, strengthen cooperation, minimize risks and jointly build a safer, more resilient and more prosperous Asia-Pacific.
Thank you very much!
