Indecision by Washington and its allies over how to counter China’s growing Pacific influence was sharply illustrated by their failure to again reach a consensus at the latest Quad security dialogue.
Discussions between the US, Japan, India and Australia on the sidelines of the East Asia Summit meetings held in Singapore were unable to produce a joint communique, probably because the allies don’t have a common agenda and are struggling to even define the parameters of their security domain.
Tellingly, political leaders play no direct role in the informal talks, which involve only senior officials. The fact that they are still meeting at all is promising for future cooperation, but the momentum has been shifting to bilateral arrangements.
Analysts say the main sticking point is India’s ambivalent stance toward the arrangement, which started out in 2007 as an initiative to coordinate disaster responses following the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. Formally known as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, it was revived a year ago with the unstated objective of containing China.
India, which arguably has the most to gain from casting its lot with the other three key Indo-Pacific maritime powers, is reluctant to elevate the discussion forum into a full-blown military alliance for fear of upsetting China, even as Beijing steadily encroaches on its sphere of influence.
New Delhi’s Singapore communique said India wanted to “partner with other countries and forums in the region to promote a free, open, rules-based and inclusive order in the Indo-Pacific that fosters trust and confidence.”
This is well short of what Washington has in mind for its new Indo-Pacific strategy. In 2017, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson famously described the US and India as the regional “bookends” for maintaining security.
“In concrete terms, it will lead to great coordination between the Indian, Japanese and American militaries, including maritime domain awareness, anti-submarine warfare, amphibious warfare, and humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and search and rescue,” Tillerson predicted.
One problem with such sweeping ambitions is that there is no consensus on the boundaries of the amorphous Indo-Pacific “region.” While the US vision extends only as far as western India, Japan and India have strategic interests in monitoring Eurasia, the western Pacific and even southern Africa.
Another issue is how it should fit with other regional security initiatives sponsored by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) — which is itself now split into camps loosely allied with China and the US. Significantly, all Quad countries emphasized the “centrality” of Asean in their Singapore communiques, but the bloc still fears that its role could be diluted.
Echoing Asean’s hostility toward the Quad arrangement, Vietnam’s new ambassador in New Delhi, Pham Sanh Chau, said his country opposed any “military alliances.” He added: “If any country wants to gang up, use force or trying to use force, then it goes against the position of Vietnam.”
India’s biggest fear is encirclement by China, which has been stepping up its naval presence in the Bay of Bengal and makes periodic incursions on their contested border in the Himalayas. New Delhi also says that it can see Beijing’s influence behind tensions with Pakistan on the Kashmir heights.
If Delhi doesn’t make a commitment soon, it could find itself outside a forum that at least offers a political buffer against Chinese expansionism. While the Indians are keen to participate in development programs that will counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative, that may not be enough.
The US, Japan and Australia already have close security cooperation and a high level of compatibility between combat and communication systems that could become the basis for a tripartite arrangement.
India, which procured most of its ships from Russia, signed a Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement with the US in September that will allow for the exchange of encrypted messages, though no-one is sure whether it will be used.
While India dithers, the US and Australia have agreed to jointly develop a naval base in Papua New Guinea that could change the security dynamics in East Asia. Japan’s leader Shinzo Abe flew to Darwin just before the Quad talks to finalize a delayed Reciprocal Access Agreement that could lead to more frequent military exercises between those two countries.
Darwin is also the base for a rotational force of 1,600 US Marines who are training with Australian military units for six months at a time. Japan has regular exercises with the US and both countries train with India, though New Delhi pointedly refuses to invite Australia to avoid any “Quad” inferences.
Lavina Lee, a lecturer at Sydney’s Macquarie University, said India’s security strategy was driven by its need to control the Bay of Bengal, as it realized that China was a greater threat to Indian interests than Pakistan. She felt that Delhi might eventually choose “self-help over self-harm.”
“If India can persuade the US, Japan and Australia to support New Delhi’s desire to emerge as the preeminent security provider in the Bay of Bengal within a Quad structure, then that’s something every Indian government would support in a post-Modi era,” Lee recently wrote in The Strategist.
Exactly. What brings US consternation is that India is not totally frothing at the mouth to start a war with China, quite the opposite of peace and security.
Exactly. What brings US consternation is that India is not totally frothing at the mouth to start a war with China, quite the opposite of peace and security.
Tarun Kumar keep dreaming
Tarun Kumar keep dreaming
Tarun Kumar ‘We are making progress with Tejas (which IS far superior that your JF17s). We wil catch up with you soon’
I suggest India to fix toilet manufacturing facilities to millions of Indians who need it desperately.
Tarun Kumar ‘We are making progress with Tejas (which IS far superior that your JF17s). We wil catch up with you soon’
I suggest India to fix toilet manufacturing facilities to millions of Indians who need it desperately.
Indian and Chinese relationship is improving this yr in big part due to closer ties and cooperation in real time weather warning system and Chinese were able to warn Indians of the incoming big storms saving lives and property. Indian and China have complementary industries, mentioned many times, software vs hardware, share an agricultural culture that values security, peace and harmony, hard work, cooperation, all needed for a good harvest. The biggest Asian tragedy would be if we continued to be used as pawns by foreign powers. India got her hands full of headaches including internal ethnic strife, cast system, poor and over populations, etc. So Indian is no threat to China except by hosting foreign army or agents, eg CIA and the Tibet fiasco. So India must refrain from doing this as well any Asian country. To make Indians feel secure, China must show sincerity in action and selfless in cooperation. As I’ve mentioned the weather warning systems is a good start. Think of the good future and we will think of many others!
Indian and Chinese relationship is improving this yr in big part due to closer ties and cooperation in real time weather warning system and Chinese were able to warn Indians of the incoming big storms saving lives and property. Indian and China have complementary industries, mentioned many times, software vs hardware, share an agricultural culture that values security, peace and harmony, hard work, cooperation, all needed for a good harvest. The biggest Asian tragedy would be if we continued to be used as pawns by foreign powers. India got her hands full of headaches including internal ethnic strife, cast system, poor and over populations, etc. So Indian is no threat to China except by hosting foreign army or agents, eg CIA and the Tibet fiasco. So India must refrain from doing this as well any Asian country. To make Indians feel secure, China must show sincerity in action and selfless in cooperation. As I’ve mentioned the weather warning systems is a good start. Think of the good future and we will think of many others!
So many factual wrongs! India has never been in any military alliance in its history. Not even in Warsaw, even though we loved Russia.
1> "Could not defeat pakistan" – Dude India cut your dear brother into 2 peices in 1971. Where did Bangladesh came from? Nobody wants to defeat any country? What will you do with refugees later on?
2> "cant even manufacture its own fighter jets" – We are making progress with Tejas (which IS far superior that your JF17s). We wil catch up with you soon.
3> Just last year, we sat on your tibet for full 70 odd days? What could you do except running long boring programs in CGTN or Global Times?
India wants to have best of both worlds – chinese and anti-chinese world – for the betterment of its people.
You leader is a wise man. We see chinese as wise folks. Please please dont prove me wrong. So chill-out, go get some life away from computer.
So many factual wrongs! India has never been in any military alliance in its history. Not even in Warsaw, even though we loved Russia.
1> "Could not defeat pakistan" – Dude India cut your dear brother into 2 peices in 1971. Where did Bangladesh came from? Nobody wants to defeat any country? What will you do with refugees later on?
2> "cant even manufacture its own fighter jets" – We are making progress with Tejas (which IS far superior that your JF17s). We wil catch up with you soon.
3> Just last year, we sat on your tibet for full 70 odd days? What could you do except running long boring programs in CGTN or Global Times?
India wants to have best of both worlds – chinese and anti-chinese world – for the betterment of its people.
You leader is a wise man. We see chinese as wise folks. Please please dont prove me wrong. So chill-out, go get some life away from computer.
William Hunter Yankee cu…t !
William Hunter Yankee cu…t !
If US influence supposedly brings peace and security to regions then why everywhere US have heavy influence are all on fire? Eastern Europe? On Fire.with Russia. Middle East? On Fire. Saudi, Iran, Palestin Isreal and radical Islam. North Africa? On Fire. Iraq-Afghan-Pakistan triangle? On Fire. East Asia? Half lit and looks as if about to go on fire too. South Asia India probably have this feeling deep down that if wholesale invite Uncle Sam in fire probably going to start just like every other region US touches. Certainly it could be said its debatable if the results will be better if they spend the time just manage it directly among themselves rather than invite in a self righteous Uncle Sam, end up adding fuel to existing fires and light up more instead. Current samples certainly are not looking promising.
I am seriously contemplating whether such bad results are incompetence thats borderline criminal, by actual malign design, or its really because the local actors themselves are just that bad?
One thing have to be said though, US more often then not tend to pick sides either overtly or subtly than to genuinly help by diplomatically work out problems between nations. In fact, since WWII, has US ever managed to help resolve a serious international dispute via genuine peace making diplomacy rather than bombs and weapon sales?
If US influence supposedly brings peace and security to regions then why everywhere US have heavy influence are all on fire? Eastern Europe? On Fire.with Russia. Middle East? On Fire. Saudi, Iran, Palestin Isreal and radical Islam. North Africa? On Fire. Iraq-Afghan-Pakistan triangle? On Fire. East Asia? Half lit and looks as if about to go on fire too. South Asia India probably have this feeling deep down that if wholesale invite Uncle Sam in fire probably going to start just like every other region US touches. Certainly it could be said its debatable if the results will be better if they spend the time just manage it directly among themselves rather than invite in a self righteous Uncle Sam, end up adding fuel to existing fires and light up more instead. Current samples certainly are not looking promising.
I am seriously contemplating whether such bad results are incompetence thats borderline criminal, by actual malign design, or its really because the local actors themselves are just that bad?
One thing have to be said though, US more often then not tend to pick sides either overtly or subtly than to genuinly help by diplomatically work out problems between nations. In fact, since WWII, has US ever managed to help resolve a serious international dispute via genuine peace making diplomacy rather than bombs and weapon sales?
You wumao scum.
You wumao scum.
Sure blame India when one is bankrupted, one is crippled, one is a kangaroo, just looking for Indians to be cannon fodders when actual hot spots breaks out.
Sure blame India when one is bankrupted, one is crippled, one is a kangaroo, just looking for Indians to be cannon fodders when actual hot spots breaks out.