The first-person plural pronoun “we” is a flexible linguistic resource in diplomatic discourse because it can represent collective actors at various scales. Although previous research has discussed political “we”, modality, solidarity, and identity in United Nations discourse, there is still limited understanding of how referential scale and modal meaning interact in constructing collective agency in individual ASEAN member states. This study uses Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS) to analyze 92 United Nations General Debate statements from ten ASEAN member states during the period 2015–2024. The corpus consists of 159,857 word tokens and yields 2,361 attributable occurrences of “we”, 738 validated modalized-“we“constructions, and 643 actionive agency-core constructions. Referential scope is classified as national, regional, coalitional, global, generic, or ambiguous, while contextual modal meanings are classified as obligation/necessity, capacity/ability, commitment/volition, and epistemic/prediction. The results show that national and global “we” dominate resolved references, while explicitly regional ASEAN “we” is very rare. Obligation/necessity comprises 60.84% ​​of modalized constructions. Global “we” is highly concentrated on obligation (73.28%), while national “we” shows a much greater commitment orientation (29.52% compared to 6.34% for global “we”). The association between national/global reference and modal function is significant, χ²(3) = 73.27, p < .001, Cramér's V = .325. These findings suggest that collective agency is scalar: global collectivities are primarily constructed as actors bearing shared obligations, while national collectivities are more readily constructed as actors making commitments to their own actions.