Introduction

The recent virtual meeting of the QUAD nations on March 12^th organized by the US President Joe Biden brings a new hope to the Indo-Pacific Community. For geo-politics watchers the original Quad in 1990s meant a trade block of US, Canada, European Union and Japan. However, with China’s entry into the WTO in 2001, the Quad trade block lost its relevance. Following the Boxing day Tsunami in the Indian Ocean, several countries tried rescue and recovery work as the littoral states were ravaged and over-whelmed with the death toll and massive destruction. Indian Navy and the Coast Guards started the humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR) work on their own. Similar initiatives were taken by Japan and Australia and finally the US Navy also joined in the effort. Out of this disaster relief was born the Tsunami Core Group in December 2004 and 2005. This core group did invite China’s PLA Navy (PLAN) to join in the HA/DR work but the request was declined. 

QUAD 1.0

After working together, this Tsunami Core Group naturally evolved into the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue in 2005-2008 years. India invited Japan and Australia in the bilateral India-US Malabar naval training exercises in 2007. Singapore Navy also joined in the Malabar exercises of 2007. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was the conceptual spirit behind the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. During a speech in Indian Parliament in 2007 he talked about the “Confluence of the Two Oceans” and “The Arc of Democracies”. Abe was clear in his mind when he characterized the Quad as “Democratic Security Diamond”.

Unfortunately, Shinzo Abe resigned in September 2007 owing to severe medical problems. Australian Prime Minister John Howard was also a very enthusiastic supporter of the Quad but his Liberal party lost the elections. He was replaced by Labor Party’s Kevin Rudd, a Mandarin speaking Sinophile who was not eager to continue in the Quad owing to his pro-China leanings. Meanwhile, a miffed communist China sent demarches to all the QUAD countries in 2007 claiming that the QUAD was an instrument to contain China. There was pressure on the Indian PM Man Mohan Singh from China to dissociate from the QUAD. The Malabar naval exercises became bilateral again in 2008. Kevin Rudd observed about his fears regarding the QUAD: “Australia could find itself home alone at the Quad party, jilted by Japan and India and at the mercy of a Capricious US President”. Finally, in February 2008, Kevin Rudd decided to pull the plug and end Australia’s participation in the QUAD. Australian Foreign Minister declared in a press conference in Beijing that Australia will never participate in the QUAD in future. In December 2008, the US President George W. Bush completed his second term. The incoming administration of Barack Obama in January 2009 was besieged with a massive financial crisis domestically. The new US President Obama was more interested in “leading from behind” in resolving various global problems. The US under Obama was reluctant to pursue the QUAD out of fear of Chinese adverse reaction. Owing to Obama’s strategic passivity, the US was perceived as a financially and militarily weak nation by China during the Obama years. Towards the end of his second term, Obama was more focused on the “Pivot to Asia” initiative instead of resurrecting the QUAD.

QUAD 2.0

Shinzo Abe came back for the second time as the Prime Minister of Japan on December 26^th 2012 and started pursuing the cause of the Quad again with renewed vigor. After departure of the Obama in 2016, the US under Trump started to take interest in the QUAD and QUAD 2.0 was born in 2017. There were various working groups that met finally resulting in a Foreign Minister level meeting in Tokyo, Japan on October 6^th 2020 spearheaded by Mike Pompeo, the US Secretary of State. However, at the end of the meeting there was no joint communique issued and each country issued its own statement. These country-specific statements provide an idea of the agenda and candid discussions on various issues despite lack of consensus. The separate statements also give some additional details; the Australian and Indian statements highlighted the delivery of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines. The Australian document mentioned the subject of rare earths and critical minerals. The Japanese statement mentioned that North Korea and the South China Sea came up for discussion.  Shinzo Abe again resigned as the Prime Minister of Japan on 16^th September 2020 depriving the QUAD 2.0 of its strongest patron. The phase of 2017 to 2020 can be logically called QUAD 2.0. Some analysts have characterized the post-2016 QUAD as 2.0; however, there are nuances. The phase 2017-2020 is both qualitatively and conceptually different from the post-2020 version of the QUAD.

QUAD 3.0

There was much apprehension if the new US administration under Joe Biden would pursue the QUAD as a legitimate institution since ideologically and temperamentally Donald Trump and Joe Biden are poles apart. However, after a sober strategic review of the contemporary international situation, Biden administration took the decision to bite the bullet. There was a surprising momentum and lead in reviving the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue but the name was changed to the Quadrilateral Framework. The virtual summit of the leaders was a huge success with three working groups having been set up on the QUAD vaccine initiative, climate change capacity building and new technologies including artificial intelligence and cyber security. These working groups will submit report by the end of the year. Experts from the four countries agreed to meet periodically. The foreign Ministers of the four countries will meet once a year setting up an institutional mechanism. There will be an in-person summit of the four leaders before the end of the year. The Quad vaccine initiative will deliver one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses by 2022. It will receive funding from US (Development Finance Corporation) and Japan. Manufacturing will be done in India at Biological E Ltd, Hyderabad. US vaccines of Johnson & Johnson will be manufactured in India and the Logistics of shipping to SEA and beyond will be provided by Australia. The QUAD leaders joint statement focused on the “Spirit of the Quad and mentioned promoting a free, open rules-based order  (RBO), supporting the freedom of navigation and overflight, ensuring peaceful resolution of disputes, promoting democratic values, and territorial integrity, seeking to uphold peace and prosperity and strengthen democratic resilience, based on universal values and reaffirming commitment to the complete denuclearization of North Korea in accordance with the United Nations Security Council resolutions. The joint statement also emphasized the urgent need to restore democracy in Myanmar and the priority of strengthening democratic resilience.

China’s reaction to QUAD 3.0

Predictably, the Chinese reaction to the QUAD has been harsh and insulting in accordance with their current phase of the “wolf warrior diplomacy”. China’s foreign ministry spokesperson labelled the QUAD as a case of “selective multilateralism” and hoped that it would not be directed to contain China. The English language mouthpiece of the Chinese government, Global Times castigated India as a negative asset for BRICS and SCO, trying to bring these two organizations down and misusing the platforms for her own financial needs. One Chinese academic called the QUAD as a club of “the losers”. China also accused the Quad of indulging in COVID Politics. China has indulged in scaremongering while trying to instigate the ASEAN countries to reject various Quad initiatives.

Regional Sensitivities

In order to be successful in near future, the new Avatar of the Quad 3.0 must have “buy-in” from the regional stakeholders. Indonesia is traditionally, a staunch non-aligned country since 1955 and continues to remain so. In contrast to Indonesia, India has gone through the vicissitudes of non-alignment, genuine non-alignment to poly-valent alignment, strategic autonomy and issue-based alignment in a multi-polar world. Thailand always worships the rising sun. Malaysia and Singapore will be cautious about any military overtones to the QUAD 3.0. While Laos and Cambodia are totally beholden to China, Vietnam is more likely to cooperate with the QUAD 3.0. ASEAN countries have been very lukewarm to the idea of the Quadrilateral security dialogue. ASEAN grouping is essentially the regional answer to the now defunct SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organization) or the Manila security pact which was created in September 1954. ASEAN was constituted on August 8^th 1967 in Bangkok as a regional grouping of five South East Asian countries which has 10 members now.  SEATO was finally dissolved on 30 June 1977 after many members lost interest and withdrew from it. SEATO was heavily dominated by powers outside the former “Indo-China” region. Because it was not proposed as a military alliance, the regional countries were attracted to and focused on the ASEAN. The ASEAN countries prefer the concept of Asia or Asia-Pacific and have criticized the Indo-Pacific concept. The ASEAN observers comment that Indo-pacific label puts two oceans together to squeeze Asia out of it or “Two oceans drowning Asia”. Their fear is that the centrality of the ASEAN grouping will be usurped by the QUAD or the Indo-Pacific. Most of them have bilateral problems with China but are too afraid to assert against a hegemonic China. On the other hand, China considers the 21^st century as the Asian Century and has been lobbying for its Mantra of “Asia is for Asians”. Chinese paradigm is to exclude the US from any role in the Indo-Pacific community, contain India in the South Asia, replace Japan as an economic power in Asia and convert Australia into its colony and thereby become the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific region. China also frowns upon the concept of the Indo-Pacific.

Future of the QUAD 3.0

QUAD 3.0 must not be a failure like BRICS that is riven by internal contradictions and has lost its relevance. It is often repeated mantra: “The QUAD is not Asian NATO”. The strategic experts should be saying, instead, that the QUAD should not try to become SEATO, a failed and defunct organization. The success of the QUAD 3.0 will be predicated upon its economic, commercial, mercantile, manufacturing, developmental and humanitarian engagement in the Indo-Pacific region. Though QUAD 3.0 will eventually fill an important regional security role as it fosters rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific region; that role should not be foisted suddenly on the region. Instead, QUAD 3.0 should promote global governance and the rule of the law. In order to achieve those goals, US may need to shed a bit of the “American Exceptionalism”. If the US is not a party to the UNCLOS, it cannot be morally expected to tell China to adhere to the UNCLOS while dealing with the littoral states in the South China Sea. The US must ratify the UNCLOS before its role will be taken seriously by the ASEAN countries to foster rule-based order in the Indo-Pacific. The US must understand that the QUAD 3.0 has to be a club of equals. The US cannot be the big brother of the QUAD 3.0. Membership of the QUAD 3.0 must not be mutually exclusive with the membership in any regional or global grouping as there are no zero-sum games in geo-politics. Admittedly, two members of the QUAD 3.0 are already members of the NATO and US allies, it should not be assumed that India, by virtue of her QUAD 3.0 membership, will be agreeable to behave as “NATO-lite” partner of the US. The US cannot hijack the QUAD agenda unilaterally and foist its own will and national interests on the QUAD 3.0 nations. Such a parochial attitude and hegemonic behavior will lead to the instantaneous demise of the QUAD 3.0.  The QUAD 3.0 leaders have to understand that securitization of the QUAD is not necessarily muscular militarization of the grouping! The QUAD 3.0 can’t be and should not portray itself as the so-called “Asian NATO” of the Indo-Pacific. Instead, it should strive to be the agent of creation of wealth and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific community. The QUAD countries must, however, continue to focus on counter-terrorism efforts, anti-piracy operations, maritime security and keeping sea lanes of communications (SLOCs) free and open for international commerce.

The QUAD countries must develop alternative supply chains and manufacturing facilities utilizing India’s nimble manufacturing potential, Japanese and US investments so that Chinese domination in the manufacturing is placed in its proper perspective. India is already the pharmacy of the world and is going to be the manufacturing hub for the QUAD vaccine initiative supplying one billion doses of COVID vaccine by 2022. China currently controls 58% of the world’s rare earth production. In 2010, China controlled more than 90% of the world’s rare earth production. China used its economic clout and production strange-hold to punish Japan leading to increase in the prices of rare earths nine-fold. Currently, the US accounts for 16% of the rare earth production, Australia around 7 % and India around 1%. US still sends majority of its rare earths to China for refining. Similarly, Japan is looking for alternative supply chains for its rare earth needs and has started a production facility in Malaysia. India currently holds 6% of the world’s rare earth deposits. Conceivably, a joint production and refinement of rare earths by the QUAD countries will diminish China’s coercion potential to bully others by withholding supplies. A working group on rare earth production, refining and supply chain will increase the economic clout of the QUAD 3.0 Avatar.

A next economic step for the QUAD 3.0 will be to discuss a preferential trade area (PTA) or a free trade area (FTA) amongst the QUAD countries. Per 2020 data, the QUAD countries GDPs are as follows: US $20.8 trillion, Japan $4.9 trillion, India $2.6 trillion and Australia $ 1.34 trillion. The combined GDP of the QUAD countries in 2020 was $29.6 trillion compared to the GDP of $14.8 trillion for China. Currently, both US and India, for reasons of their own, are out of CPTPP and RCEP. Both Japan and Australia are part of the two trading blocks along with China. China has access to all the world markets while it puts restrictive trade and monopolistic practices for others. An economically unified QUAD 3.0 will be able to give a mercantilist China run for its Yuan! For the QUAD 3.0 to be successful, it has to work towards reducing Indo-Pacific region’s economic dependence on China.

The QUAD must focus on deepening the relationship instead of enlarging the grouping. The current mechanism is very nimble and decision making is easy with instant communications amongst the four leaders. Any talk of QUAD-plus three, at this stage, should be set aside as it will complicate the decision-making process. The QUAD 3.0 is here to stay. China no longer holds a veto over the QUAD countries. In its current Avatar, the QUAD 3.0 is not going to go away unlike the QUAD 1.0 despite Chinese obnoxious hyper-reaction. The QUAD 3.0 will emerge as an important institution in global governance and security architecture while promoting a free and open Indo-Pacific community of nations. Strategic wisdom on part of the US should ensure that QUAD 3.0 does not suffer the ill fate of the now-defunct SEATO.

Image Courtesy: The Daily Guardian