The White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s ruling out any further inclusions to the AUKUS (Australia, UK and US) partnership, is an indication of the US’ short-sightedness in dealing with the imperatives of the power struggle in the Indo-Pacific region, and efforts to contain China’s burgeoning and aggressive rise.
On September 22, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters at her daily news conference that: “The announcement of AUKUS last week was not meant to be an indication, and I think this is the message the President also sent to (French President Emmanuel) Macron, that there is no one else who will be involved in security in the Indo-Pacific.”
On September 15, US President Joe Biden, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson jointly announced the formation of the trilateral security alliance, AUKUS, under which Australia would get a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines for the first time.
The brief update by the White House about the status of AUKUS displays the US’ reluctance to share military technologies with anyone outside a close-knit western alliance, at a time when countries like India and Japan are prepared to face up to China’s indefensible reprisals, to suit the US’ strategic interests.
Immediately after the AUKUS announcement, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said the three countries forming AUKUS were in the grip of an “obsolete cold war zero sum mentality and narrow-minded geopolitical concepts” and should “respect regional people’s aspiration […] otherwise they will only end up hurting their own interests”.
China also questioned Australia’s commitment to nuclear non-proliferation, while the state-run Global Times said: “Australian troops are also most likely to be the first batch of western soldiers to waste their lives in the South China Sea.”
China’s swift response to the AUKUS deal is just another instance of the nation’s intolerance towards any alliances that it believes are actuated to counter its growing stature on the world stage.
Australia has already been the victim of China’s economic arm-twisting, what with China relentlessly cutting imports from the former. Australia depends heavily on exports to China.
Now, the US’ stance at restricting military technological alliances with two members of the Quad reeks of exclusiveness and discrimination.
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue(QSD, also known as the Quad) was set up as a strategic dialogue between the United States, India, Japan and Australia that is maintained by talks between member countries. The dialogue was initiated in 2007 by then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, with the leaders of US, Australia and India. The dialogue was paralleled by joint military exercises of an unprecedented scale, titled Exercise Malabar. The Chinese government responded to the Quadrilateral dialogue by issuing formal diplomatic protests to its members.
The Quad ceased following the withdrawal of Australia during Sinophile Kevin Rudd’s tenure as prime minister of Australia. With Kevin Rudd’s removal by Julia Gillard in 2010, enhanced military cooperation between the United States and Australia was resumed, leading to the placement of US Marines near Darwin, Australia, overlooking the Timor Sea and Lombok Strait. Meanwhile, India, Japan, and the United States continued to hold joint naval exercises under Malabar.
During the 2017 ASEAN summit in Manila, all four former members led by Abe, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump agreed to revive the quadrilateral alliance in order to counter China militarily and diplomatically in the South China Sea. Tensions between Quad members and China led to fears of what was dubbed by some commentators as “a new Cold War” in the region.
In a joint statement in March 2021, “The Spirit of the Quad,” the Quad members described “a shared vision for a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” and a “rules-based maritime order in the East and South China Seas which the Quad members state are needed to counter Chinese maritime claims.
Now, the US should not escape the onus of its allies making sacrifices to suit its strategic interests. India and Japan need to update their military technologies given their security concerns in their respective regions. While the US has always maintained that India is a strategic partner, it has been very casual about India’s strategic dilemma of being flanked by noisome adversaries on both sides. On its eastern flank , China is intent on land-grabbing vast swathes of Indian territory. And on the western front, Pakistan aggravates tensions with its initiative of inciting militancy in India’s restive northern state of Kashmir. Japan, itself, has to contend with, both, a belligerent China and a bellicose North Korea.
Now, the meeting between Quad leaders should migrate to something more than mere discourse and military exercises, if it intends to put China in its place. It needs to have more teeth. The US needs to transfer vital military technologies to both Japan and India. A new arms race in the region could engender a repetition of what Ronald Reagan perpetrated in the early nineties (the collapse of Soviet Union) with his Star Wars programme.
montes-musings.blog 