Beijing is angry that the first in-person Quad summit among the leaders of India, United States, Japan and Australia is taking place this week in Washington, on 24 September, Friday. Beijing is unnerved at the possibility of the Quad taking a formal shape and is calling it a grouping based on Cold War ideology and thus “detrimental to the international order”. Ahead of the meeting, a significant defence and intelligence sharing pact was announced among the US, UK and Australia. Clearly directed at countering People’s Republic of China, AUKUS introduces an element of security in the Indo-Pacific construct, where Australia is provided with nuclear submarine technology by the US. AUKUS, being described as one of the biggest defence pacts for Australia, also covers AI and other technologies—all of which will likely go a long way in countering China. It goes without saying that China is livid at this latest development and has described AUKUS as a reflection of a “Cold War mentality and ideological prejudice” apart from being “extremely irresponsible”. Almost in the same breath Chinese commentators are describing AUKUS as a case of US snubbing India and Japan by selecting Australia to be its “watchdog”—a term used by the PRC propaganda rag, Global Times—in the Indo-Pacific. Also according to GT, AUKUS has inflicted a “psychological blow on Japan and India” (as Quad members), which “will last for a period of time”. In fact, much of the Chinese commentary is now revolving around how Quad has lost relevance because of AUKUS and why India has taken a hit.
This is indicative of the focus that the Chinese are devoting to Quad, while simultaneously trying to run it down. In this is hidden PRC’s fear of Quad’s potential—the fear of Quad metamorphosing into a formal alliance of like-minded democracies that are not willing to see the world fall prey to PRC’s cannibalism.
However, will the Quad ever reach its potential? It is ironic that this question is being asked in the week when the first meeting of the Quad leaders is taking place. But there is reason to be sceptical about the summit, given the Quad’s currently diffused focus. It is almost certain that the summit will speak of issues such as vaccine manufacturing and climate change, supply chain resilience and free and open Indo-Pacific, but there is no indication that the Quad, even if it is formalized, will take the dragon by its tail by metamorphosing into a security alliance. And that is the only way to contain China—forming a security alliance. AUKUS came into existence with lightning speed. The Quad has been dragging on for years. How much longer will this continue?
There is no reason to believe that AUKUS makes Quad irrelevant or that it is a snub to India and Japan. Rather, AUKUS ought to be seen as a force multiplier for the democracies, and as some analysts have been saying, it can also be regarded as an extension of the Quad, where there is a convergence of interests, with countering China being the focus. Also, India’s relevance for any anti-China grouping can never diminish, courtesy it being China’s immediate neighbour, sharing a land border of 3,000 kilometres, apart from its economic and military might. No one understands this better than China, whatever be the public posturing by Chinese analysts.
But all that talk about the Quad developing into a Nato-like security alliance prevalent during Donald Trump’s presidency somehow has fizzled out. So much so that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made it clear during his visit to India in July that the Quad was not a security alliance, but a means “to advance cooperation on regional challenges while reinforcing international rules and values that we believe together underpin peace, prosperity, stability in the region”. Although he did not explain what all those military exercises among the Quad countries are about.
So what is the Quad? An alliance of do-gooders? A pressure group? But when the power to be contained is China, a country that has made grabbing a neighbour’s territory its state policy, and which is trying to overthrow the established order by trying to Sinicise the world in a toxic manner, can pressure groups without a formal security pact deliver the desired results? There is a view that India’s insistence on multilaterism—the latest avatar of the old and discarded nonalignment—is preventing the Quad from becoming a “sword arm” of the free world. India is good at fence-sitting in the name of multilateralism and strategic autonomy, although these two aspects need not be in conflict with any security alliance that may come into existence. India will have to shed its reticence and factor in the security aspect in the Quad construct, as else the Quad is not going anywhere.