A plan for Asia

A plan for Asia

Context:

• Senior officials from the United States, Japan, India, and Australia met on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and East Asia Summits to discuss regional and global cooperation.
• The meeting brought forward the fact that without a plan to advance economic integration with East Asia, the gap between India’s strategic promise and its performance will continue to grow and undermine Delhi’s political credibility.

What is the purpose of the meeting?

• The objective of the meeting has been covered under “free and open Indo-Pacific”.
• The meeting addressed seven core themes: the rules-based order in Asia, freedom of navigation and overflight in the maritime commons, respect for international law, enhancing connectivity, maritime security, the North Korean threat and nonproliferation, and terrorism.

What were the national statements issued by the four governments?

• Following the meeting, the U.S. Department of State, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs each released statements outlining what was discussed.
• All four statements emphasized that the convergence of visions and shared interests underpinned the quadrilateral.
• The statements, however, were far from identical and a close reading reveals varying priorities within the quadrilateral.
• The Australian and the U.S. statements touched on all seven of the issues highlighted under the aegis of a “free and open Indo-Pacific.”
• Japan’s statement omitted any mention of enhancing “connectivity,” which, for India and the United States, has come to mean offering an alternative vision to China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative.

China as a hurdle for “free and open Indo-Pacific”:

• The rise of China, the expansion of its military capabilities and Beijing’s assertiveness on territorial disputes has ended the prolonged tranquility in the region.
• China’s pressure on its neighbours is weakening the unity of the ASEAN.
• The country is also limiting the options of most countries in the region.

What is the way forward?

• The Indian Ministry of Defence neither has the time nor inclination to think positively about military diplomacy in East Asia.
• Without a plan to advance economic integration with East Asia, the gap between India’s strategic promise and its performance will continue to grow and undermine Delhi’s political credibility.
• Succeeding in the sustainment of a “free and open Indo-Pacific” will require much work and coordination among these four countries.
• The Quad needs to  offer smaller states in the region an attractive set of reasons to value the status quo regional architecture and a rules-based order compared to China’s competing vision