‘Better to do it in inches than yards’ ~Chinese proverb.
The Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) is standing her ground in the eastern Ladakh region thereby showing no signs of any detente between the two Asian giants. This can be ascertained from the recent statements by EAM Mr.Jaishanker stating that the relationship does have some definite abnormalities vis a vis at both diplomatic as well as military level.
Jaishankar’s first meeting with his Chinese counterpart amid almost 3 years of military confrontation (Border clashes) on the sidelinesof G20 Foreign Ministers conclave in March is yet to fructify into anything substantial. It is a common knowledge and also on analyzingvarious facets of Indo-China relationship there are a multiple contraindications emerging from various diplomatic outreach programs proving that the Chinese are there to stay.
The pre-20th National Party Congress of Chinese Communist Party last October was thought to be last string of ‘escalate to deescalate’ theory among various Foreign Policy experts, but contrary to obvious estimation,mutual de-escalation of forces has been put on the backburner with Indian Army also fully deployed to tackle military emergency. According to assessments by Indian Army, even the additional reserve troops of PLA weren’t sent to back to their bases in eastern and northern command even after Xi was appointed for the third time by CCP.
Just as China had started a massive developmental spree along the LAC, Indiathough a smaller economy at about 3.5 trillion USD in comparison to 17 trillion USD Chinese economy has fared well in-terms of military as well as infrastructural upgradation. The latest report by BRO on border roads ascertains that India has also undertaken massive military infra upgrades along the LAC which meant India has developed the capacity to respond in kind with both adaptability- at times better than the PLA (Ladakh Scouts) and capability to respond to a transgression in faster time than ever in the past decades.
The Quad.
'Quadrilateral Security Dialogue' (QSD), the Quad is an informal strategic forum comprising four nations, namely — United States of America (USA), India, Australia and Japan.The group met for the first time in 2007 on the sidelines of the ASEAN. It is considered an alliance of maritime democracies, with soul objective to promote rules based global order and keep the sea lanes of communications open from any aggressive posturing from any littoral states in the Indo-Pacific region.
However, the real purpose of the formation of QSD is, in fact, a calculated step motivated by deep concern about China’s growing prowess in terms of both Naval as well as Air Force power with Pentagon confirming that the Chinese Navy and Air Force have surpassed the US Navy and Air force thereby putting the US Navy's Pacific fleet almost in the zone of annihilation. The assertiveness on the world stage by Chinese is quite obvious from the fact that after China brokered a Shia-Sunni détente it gained leverage in the Islamic world. The OIC had already been silent and have looked the other way to HanChinese repression on Uyghur Muslims as well as the Tibetans. China is the only country that has close ties with Shia Iran, Sunni Saudi Arabia and UAE.
The Conundrum.
The US- India ties have moved from strength to strength with signing of many security agreements like BECA , COMCASA, LEMOA,but it is also not uncommon practice of Pentagon to ditch it’s allies when the national interest of US is served. And also with a frail economy which has has debt to GDP ratio almost at 123.6% the US won’t be able to take on Beijing in a head on collision with Ukraine failure almost knocking at it’s doorstep no sooner than later. The rapprochement in US-China relations in near future is impossible on the count important strategic interests at global level on both sides. US needs a balancing scale in Indo-Pacific region to balance out the power vacuum created due to realignment of Geo-strategic interests in multi-polar, eurocentric world order.
The ambiguity on the part of Washington to give waiver to India under CAATSA for S-400 purchase, however it wants India under QSD to rise to Chinese aggression in a more assertive manner, or the manner that US would want India to maintain in order to objectively meet the security and strategic interests of Pentagon. Among the Quad members, the US has had bilateral trade going with China amid the sino-american rivalry worth 536 billion USD (~Census Bureau US 2022). So, there is no proper vision for the Quad group as each member is rather very circumspect -which everyone should be given the main lead of the group is acting no less than a rabble rouser and wants other members to share the burden of Chinese assertion at the world stage.
New Delhi is deeply reluctant to portray Quad as a security realignment of global powers to counter Chinese rise so as to avoid direct and wholesome confrontations with Beijing at the behest of Washington – and, in fact,has gone out of their way to counter such perceptions. While Washington seems content or even eager to pursue a Cold War redux, its fellow Quad members are more circumspect, preferring to talk about their shared vision for the region rather than pointing fingers.
China is aware of this dichotomy of affairs among the Quad members – and also remembers that the original iteration of the Quad fell apart precisely because its members did not want to directly confront Beijing.
As the Chinese saying goes, “the bird that sticks its head out gets shot.” Beijing has sorted out the responses to Quad Grouping- on one hand it has made very little statements on the member countries due to unwilling nature of India, Japan and Australia to enter into direct confrontations with China, while giving it equally back to US in terms of customs and excise duties on US goods and services.
The motive behind the Quad is to keep the strategic sea routes in the Indo-Pacific free of any military or political influence. Quad is the answer to ever rising question of Chinese rise,but needs to cater to rising security threat perception of Indian side from the Chinese side ,as EAM would point out, ‘ The west needs to stop looking at things from a eurocentric point of view that the European problems are global problems and Asian problems are the creation of their own’.
Author is a Civil Services Aspirant and member of Kashmir Writers Assocation. He can be mailed at Rizwan.uod@gmail.com
