Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
The phoenix-like rise of China, which is challenging the established U.S.-led geostrategic order, is a reality that confronts every IPR state. Nations like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Taiwan are no longer feeling secure under the American umbrella. Prosperity has whetted Chinese revisionist instincts, as it goes about building and flexing its military muscle.
And that poses a huge dilemma for all IPR states ― they wish to maintain robust ties with Beijing, but are apprehensive of its intentions; they know that only a unified push-back can thwart China, but are wary of being seen as ganging up; they welcome Washington's continued role in maintaining peace, but are loathe to choose between the two powers. As such, IPR states are hedging their bets by cultivating countervailing powers. India is no exception.
ASEAN views the IPR and the India Ocean Region (IOR) as closely integrated and interconnected. After a year of internal negotiations, the grouping unveiled its "Indo-Pacific Outlook" in June this year. It envisages the Indo-Pacific as a rule-based region committed to dialogue and cooperation, instead of rivalry, to ensure development and prosperity for all. The central tenets enumerated by ASEAN are inclusivity, connectivity, ASEAN centrality and redress of issues by ASEAN-led institutions. There is a marked similarity in the ASEAN and Indian viewpoint.
South Korea faces an even bigger challenge. It hosts American troops and is under the U.S. security umbrella, yet has strong economic, cultural and people-to-people ties with China. Nevertheless, it faced Beijing's wrath when it deployed THAAD anti-missile batteries in July 2016. South Korea is naturally quite cautious about Chinese sensitivities. President Moon Jae-in was thus reticent when U.S. President Donald Trump broached the subject of the IPR during his visit to Seoul in July 2017.
Seoul's position has since evolved, given unremitting pressure from the U.S., its own security vulnerabilities, the Sino-U.S. tussle for global leadership and Chinese ambivalence in pushing North Korea to denuclearize.
Moon gingerly endorsed the concept during Trump's second visit to Seoul on June 30 this year, observing: "Under the regional cooperation principles of openness, inclusiveness and transparency, we have agreed to put forth harmonious cooperation between Korea's New Southern Policy and the United States' Indo-Pacific strategy." Analysts aver that Seoul's acceptance of the IPR would significantly increase the operational capability of the U.S. (and allies) in the region, especially in the South China Sea.
The U.S. State Department welcomed the move, urging Seoul to engage in "meaningful cooperation" in "maritime" affairs and said: "Both sides reaffirmed that the strong U.S.-ROK alliance is the linchpin of peace and security in the Indo-Pacific." Nonetheless, South Korea is maintaining strategic ambiguity and the final word is yet to be heard.
All IPR nations seek greater connectivity, trade and people-to-people ties. However, there is bound to be a strategic difference in the outlook of nations located in and outside the Asian continent. The U.S. has the luxury of pivoting toward or away from Asia, but the Asian nations have no choice but to engage with China. After all, the security umbrella of a distant power against an immediate and proximate threat is not reassuring enough. If push comes to shove, IPR states may need to join hands to deter Chinese adventurism. That is the logic of the Indo-Pacific construct.
Vishnu Prakash is a former Indian ambassador to South Korea.
