Whatever might have been the ideological justifications for European encroachments in Asia during the 16th century, commerce became the first motivation from the 17th century up to the 20th. To borrow the formula from the Peterson Institute, “how much has the rise of trade and the modern global economy helped or hurted” Asian economies in the long run? At the opposite, were colonial ventures sustainable beyond a duration of half a century without support from their European metropoles and at which cost? The cases of 17th century’s VOC and 20th century’s Brunei can provide some elements of answer. Due to the distance and other logistic constrains, such as securing major stopovers with forts and garrisons all along the itinerary to the Netherlands, the VOC’s operating costs were such that the most profitable exchanges were those of the Chinese privateers. Some two centuries later, the implementation of a British protectorate in Brunei seems at first a non-profit endeavour. Though from 1917 to 1926 Brunei seemed to generate budgetary surplus, it was only because the resident’s salary remained paid by London. More, the Sultanate was heavily indebted towards the Federated Malay States. From 1927, i.e. five years before the payment of the first oil royalties, the resident’s salary was charged to Brunei, as thanks to the introduction of taxes, Brunei registered its first true budgetary surplus and was able to progressively pay back its debt.