Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, had derisively dismissed Quad as akin to foam in sea which would soon be dissolved. But, the foam in question continues to persist, while making its presence more clear and expansive in the sea.
Deliberations in the Quad summit at Tokyo have confirmed that this entity would reinforce its presence in the foreseeable future. It is slowly but surely taking shape as a tangible entity. It comprises four major political jurisdictions: the US, India, Japan, and Australia. The summit concluded with optimism.
There are many permutations and combinations at play within the Quad. It seeks to stem Chinese high-handedness in the Asia-Pacific region. Nevertheless, bilateral, symbiotic relations with China are not ruled out. The Quad attempts to accomplish accurate coordination and harmony among the countries which constitute it. Hopefully, a potential strong bloc would emerge where respect for democratic traditions and rules-based order would be emphasized. It could also act as a requisite deterrent to potential Chinese aggressiveness. Any difference of interest among Quad constituents has been tempered and relegated to the backburner; the emphasis and endeavours towards a strong alliance are explicit.
As the Quad’s attributes crystallize, it is perceptible that the concept of “Collective Security” is put to effect in the Asia-Pacific zone. It entails that when any country, as a rising power, appears to threaten established rules and norms, several powerful countries band together to prevent the challenger and its allies from achieving undue sway. The aggressive challenger would discern that the combination of countries against its own bloc is stronger.
In this scenario, China is trying to challenge the current structure of the international system through its rising economic clout and military build-up. Therefore, a collective coalition of countries has gotten together to prevent Chinese aggressiveness and arbitrariness. In particular, the presence of the US and India add heft; Japan is an economic powerhouse, while Australia has the geographic spread and economic resourcefulness.
The international system is turbulent and replete with uncertainties. Each nation is an entity, trying for respective utility maximization. Therefore, within Quad, this aspect is also at work. But, for the sake of larger security interests the constituent countries have decided not to allow other discords to overwhelm their cooperation against a major challenger to the established status quo. Nevertheless, an auxiliary aspect is the future trajectory of diplomacy of India and the US.
Would relations between India and the US be a compatible subset within the larger set of the Quad? That is unlikely. Both realms have certain similarities and differences. The purpose of the Quad is to act as a collective deterrent to China. Moreover, Indo-US bilateral relations are strengthening and continuing to widen its ambit. But, in areas such as tariffs, intellectual property rights, trade preferences, and outsourcing, friction between India and the US is present and is likely to persist for some time.
In a quirk of irony, any particular member of the concerned grouping could be adhering to China in certain matters, arousing discomfiture to others. This aberration is often visible because countries, like individuals, usually seek to maximize benefits. Sometimes, any particular country might try to skirt its way around a set of established rules and regulations for its own advantage. A mélange of negotiations, persuasions, and threats is required for a way out of such quandaries.
Announcements from the Tokyo Summit attest to a palpable measure of camaraderie. Possibly the most notable in it is the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). Its purported objective is to check Chinese influence in the region; the constituent members have committed $50 billion for sustainable and demand-driven infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific. “Maritime Domain Awareness” surveillance has been initiated, to thwart illegal fishing by the Chinese in East China and South China seas. Another key take away from the Summit are urges for creating demand-driven infrastructure. Even then, the forces of necessary demand and requisite supply require proper equilibrium to enable successful progress.
If the goal is to avoid being cornered by commodities from Chinese supply chains, then relative improvement in production, quality, and management methods would have to be initiated across industries in other concerned countries. Only then will producers and consumers of any country be able to take constructive advantage of international trade relations with other countries.
Alongside IPEF, India should aim for a result-oriented balance among other Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). It should properly manage and accrue and for itself the probable gains from other trade accords. Desired gains would multiply; undue economic disadvantages would be diluted.
There has been a cursory mention regarding Russian aggression in Ukraine. Still, the statement was without vitriol and acrimony. It was possibly articulated in this manner to prevent further antagonizing of Russia; moreover, that could have enabled China to exploit the situation to its advantage and coax Russia to be more supportive of it than at present. The credit for that is due to India. The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, and his advisors have skillfully prevented the Quad forum from being used to excessive censuring of Russia. Although that has become an American bugbear, its excessive emphasis could have impelled Russia to become contrarian towards any alliance with an American presence.
The verve from Tokyo is characterized by positivity, resolve, and bonhomie. Whether this form of “Collective Security” would fulfill its desired objectives would inevitably be testified by subsequent actions.
- The writer is an analyst, writes on International Affairs, Economy, and South Asian Politics and can be reached at ranajoysen2009@gmail.com
