NEW DELHI – China’s ambition to reshape the Asian order is no secret. From the “one belt, one road” scheme to the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, major Chinese initiatives are gradually but steadily advancing China’s strategic objective of fashioning a Sino-centric Asia. As China’s neighbors well know, the country’s quest for regional dominance could be damaging – and even dangerous. Yet other regional powers have done little to develop a coordinated strategy to thwart China’s hegemonic plans.
To be sure, other powers have laid out important policies. Notably, the United States initiated its much-touted strategic “pivot” toward Asia in 2012, when India also unveiled its “Act East” policy. Similarly, Australia has shifted its focus toward the Indian Ocean, and Japan has adopted a western-facing foreign-policy approach.
But coordinated action – or even agreement on broadly shared policy objectives – has remained elusive. In fact, a key element of America’s Asian pivot, the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, does not just exclude China; it also leaves out close US allies like India and South Korea.
That is not the only problem with the TPP. Once the lengthy process of ratifying the deal in national legislatures is complete and implementation begins, the impact will be gradual and modest. After all, six members already boast bilateral free-trade agreements with the US, meaning that the TPP’s main effect will be to create a free trade area (FTA) between Japan and the US, which together account for about 80% of the TPP countries’ combined GDP. The conclusion of the ASEAN-initiated Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership – which includes China, India, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, but not the US – is likely to weaken the TPP’s impact further.
Compare this to the “one belt, one road” initiative, which aims to boost China’s financial leverage over other countries through trade and investment, while revising the maritime status quo, by establishing a Chinese presence in areas like the Indian Ocean. If President Xi Jinping achieves even half of what he has set out to do with this initiative, Asian geopolitics will be profoundly affected.
In this context, Asia’s future is highly uncertain. To ensure geopolitical stability, the interests of the region’s major players must be balanced. But with China eager to flex the political, financial, and military muscles that it has developed over the last few decades, negotiating such a balance will be no easy feat.
As it stands, no single power – not even the US – can offset China’s power and influence on its own. To secure a stable balance of power, likeminded countries must stand together in backing a rules-based regional order, thereby compelling China to embrace international norms, including dispute settlement through peaceful negotiation, rather than military intimidation or outright force. Without such cooperation, China’s ambitions would be constrained only by domestic factors, such as a faltering economy, rising social discontent, a worsening environmental crisis, or vicious politics.
Which countries should take the lead in constraining China’s revisionist ambitions? With the US distracted by other strategic challenges – not to mention its domestic presidential campaign – Asia’s other powers – in particular, an economically surging India and a more politically assertive Japan – are the best candidates for the job.
Both India and Japan are longstanding stakeholders in the US-led global order, emphasizing in their own international relations the values that America espouses, such as the need to maintain a stable balance of power, respect the territorial and maritime status quo, and preserve freedom of navigation. Moreover, they have demonstrated their shared desire to uphold the existing Asian order.
In 2014, while visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Tokyo, his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi, took a veiled swipe at Chinese expansionism, criticizing the “eighteenth-century expansionist mindset” that was becoming apparent “everywhere around us.” Citing encroachment on other countries’ lands, intrusion into their waters, and even the capture of territory, Modi left little doubt about the target of his complaint.
Last month, Abe and Modi took a small step in the direction of cooperation. By jointly appealing to all countries to “avoid unilateral actions” in the South China Sea, they implicitly criticized China’s construction of artificial islands there, which they rightly regard as a blatant attempt to secure leverage in territorial disputes – and gain control over sea lanes of “critical importance” for the Indo-Pacific region.
Clearly, both Japan and India are well aware that China’s ambitions, if realized, would result in a regional order inimical to their interests. Yet, while they are committed to maintaining the status quo, they have failed to coordinate their policies and investments in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, both strategically located countries vulnerable to Chinese pressure. This must change.
Asia’s main powers – beginning with Japan and India, but also including the US – must work together to secure a broadly beneficial and stable regional balance of power. To this end, naval maneuvers, such as the annual US-India-Japan “Exercise Malabar,” are useful, as they strengthen military cooperation and reinforce maritime stability.
But no strategy will be complete without a major economic component. Asia’s powers should move beyond FTAs to initiate joint geo-economic projects that serve the core interests of smaller countries, which would then not have to rely on Chinese investments and initiatives to boost growth. As a result, more countries would be able to contribute to the effort to secure an inclusive, stable, rules-based order in which all countries, including China, can thrive.
Comments
Hide CommentsRead Comments (11)Please log in or register to leave a comment.
Comment Commented Lawrence Michael
India chose the Non-Alignment Movement over siding with the US led bloc during the bi-polar moments in recent world history, while clearly favouring Soviet Union. So the idea of an Indian preference for a US led global order could be a recent preference offset by India's membership at the BRICS - another recent development.
Rest remains a muddled viewpoint. The Indian PM's allusion to the fears of a medieval expansionism could only have been a reference to himself as well as India while acknowledging the psychological closeness they share with Islamic & other religious forces. China definitely is not a medieval power.
The idea that there exists a US led global order of which India is an important ally is an Indian medieval illusion of geo-politics. Human Rights as an important UN goal is one of the global goals. Now when the author refers to the China's new found political, economic & military muscle in the past few decades, the author could well have compared India with China in analysing why and how that happened to China but not India. May be this article is all about that: why India is a fast-turning basket case but a burgeoning market. Like the sun that will expand to encompass the planets towards its fag end as a giant red star. One doubts if China is upon that path - before it collapses, like the sun upon itself to become a dwarf star. Read more
Comment Commented Rene Wang
This gentleman sits in his office in India, pretending India and Japan will join forces to keep Chin out? Why doesn't Japan confront China in East China Sea, where they have a dispute over some rocks? Will Japan get away with it? You can't even solve mass povery in India. And you are talking about taking the lead resolving the Asian and global issues! Good thinking! Read more
Comment Commented Richard Solomon
While these are interesting to consider, the propositions in this piece will require considerable amounts of consultation and planning. 'The devil will be in the details,' so to speak. Will India, Japan, and the other SE Asian nations have time to work all this out while China moves along with its plans? Perhaps the turmoil China is facing will slow it down and/or give it pause to reconsider some of its time frame, if not its overall agenda. Still the details of this kind of multinational effort will be complex at best. Maybe impossible at worst.
I'd like to see the author lay out more specifics as to how he envisions it might unfold. Read more
Comment Commented shanmugham anand
The author must be congratulated for bold suggestions, when the entire strategic community in India were divided on the direction the Chinese policies are going. It is important to accurately predict Chinese intentions and prescribe policy measures for other Asian democracies. Read more
Comment Commented ROHIT CHANDAVARKER
The Chinese dragon has well & truly taken off but faces strong headwinds. China's economy does not seem to support the grandiose plans of Xi Jinping in the manner envisaged. Besides OBOR &AIIB one must also take note of SCO. However, much of Xi's vision has been thwarted by his internal upheavals. To begin with is the dismal fall in economic growth despite robust intervention by the state. The currency devaluations could not have come at a worse time for Beijing. The amateurish efforts at propping the capital markets failed resulting in a precipitous fall. Capital flight is Xi's biggest worry. Outflows of around a trillion dollars has severely hampered China's goals. What is more worrying for Beijing is outflows from wealthy Chinese apart from foreign investors. The political landscape is turning murky with murmurs protesting the anti-corruption drives. To compound problems, Taiwan elections saw DPP led by Tsai-ing Wen take over, a development that could spell trouble in the months to come. The South China Sea continues to be in a state of flux but the littorals are taking rearguard action to fortify themselves against further Chinese expansionism. Japan & Australia have made their positions clear & would seem to align their geo strategic moves with India on the issue of SCS & China. The maritime expansionism of China directly affects India's long term strategic goals, particularly in the IOR. Besides encroaching into Myanmar & Sri Lanka, port development of Gwadar,Pakistan would be of considerable concern for India. Beijing's moves in installing its naval presence in Djibouti would help China straddle the entire IOR & Persian Gulf.
Therefore, India would have to take pro-active measures in countering a possible encirclement by China. The IOR-ARC would be an ideal platform to align ourselves with the IOR littorals in maintaining superiority in the IOR commons. India would have to greatly enhance its maritime assets as well as support actively the infrastructure in Maldives, Seychelles, Mauritius &Madagascar. But more importantly, India would have to ratchet up its presence in Andamans substantially. ISRO's observation stations in Indonesia & proposed one in Vietnam would aid India's surveillance capabilities. The acquisition of rights to Chabahar port in Iran would vital to lend commercial as well as security support. However, one critical aspect that India lacks is the infrastructure assets to back these plans & funding for the same. Planning must be followed by implementation diligently, purposefully & resolutely. Read more
Comment Commented Harunur Rashid Shams
In upholding the Asian order the inclusion of geopolitical issue must but limiting geopolitical or central power only to these two countries is a generalization of complex Asian politic. Read more
Comment Commented jagjeet sinha
Containment of China will drain the resources of any coalition that masterminds it.
Soviet containment succeeded in the end - when internally the Soviet Empire crumbled economically.
John Paul II delivered the final Trinity transformation - a Godless civilization never existed.
Fear and greed are the only two drivers - the Soviets feared their own template, and surrendered.
China will not be fearful of any alliance that attempts its containment.
China's greed is based on a template born of The Golden Hordes of Genghis Khan.
China's search for an escape route from a Godless civilization - will produce the fears that will matter.
American led alliances that are tantamount to conquer and conquest - will prove futile.
China too - like the Soviets - will find Infinity in The Trinity.
Zero is considered Infinity's Twin.
Zero is considered the most dangerous idea - since it smashed Papal Infallibility.
Europe smashed by Zero - also found Infinity in The Trinity.
Whether it is - The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit.
Whether it is - Dharma, Buddha and The Sangha.
Time will tell - the choice is cosmetic.
As the origins of The Trinity is the same as The Zero.
Read more
Comment Commented Robbie Jena
"As China’s neighbors well know, the country’s quest for regional dominance could be damaging – and even dangerous. "
Japan or TPP will not support those aspirations...and Japan knows that...including the Foreign Minister...that is the way it is...
Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
'To ensure geopolitical stability, the interests of the region’s major players must be balanced'.
GDP of China is much higher than India, that remains a difficult balance
Japan - Chinese expansionism... "eighteenth-century expansionist mindset”. Would that be the Japan that still has trouble recognising some actions in WW2
South China Sea. Possession is 9/10ths of the law and China understands that. More of the same is likely. If nothing else the artifical islands become a bargaining chip. Once a year regattas do not match permanent islands
If China has a hard economic landing it may knock it back on its regional investment and growth initatives otherwise others have to step up and match it which is not happening at the moment
TPP - it is not clear this wonder deal will actually float
@ uday mudaliar
Brexit outcome is not certain - if EU central has any sense they would not let it happen and cook up a dispensation but like the donkey that starved to death equi-distant between two bales of hay they may be transfixed by their own ego
I look forward to seeing India learning Japanese because that is what is needed to develop ties with Japan. English on the other hand is a different issue as the majority of India is proficient in English according to the stats. I do not question the fact that in a population of a billion that there are some very bright people, even some Srinivasa Ramanujan's Read more
Comment Commented hari naidu
Contrary to upholding status quo, US/Japan have decided to dislodge & contain mainland China in the region. Obama has gone on record - TPP seeks to not only isolate PRC but dictate American concept of rule based trade and development and enforce it. That's why India didn't bite. Even Abe is not sure Japan can strategically deliver, as promised, containment of mainland China.
Methinks PRC's AIIB strategic invocation - supported by major EU economic powers - is fundamentally designed as a wedge against not only US containment of mainland China but to dislodge its strategic isolation from its neighbors, including Eurasia.
Given the growing economic/political instability world-wide, China is more than likely to gain a strategic foothold in Asia & Eurasia with AIIB's forward looking infrastructure investment & development.
Neither Abe nor Modi is in a position to challenge China's regional goals... to undermine American containment policy. Read more
Comment Commented uday mudaliar
Japan has to get more involved in India's democracy. As a democratic nation itself, it has to come across as neutral whilst dealing with the 2 main political parties. This will enable legislation of very important economic laws that will ultimately benefit the deflating Japanese economy. In India japan should invest in cutting edge Technology, especially in areas of Aerospace, Medicine and Robotics. Though India is derided for the quality of its skilled labour howcome USA manages to attract the cream of India's brains, who make up the largest origin of non-Caucasian STEM experts in USA. Japan has to start thinking out of the box to partner India in creating a peaceful and progressives Asia. We do not have to duplicate Europe, where centuries old differences still fester under modern socio-economic union. BREXIT is likely to break the EU, All whilst Britain was always considered to be an arrogant island nation that lived of its colonies. Read more
Featured
The Greece of the Caribbean
Andrés Velasco says that when Puerto Rico finally reduces its debt, the haircut had better be a large one.
The Global Economy’s Marshmallow Test
Jeffrey D. Sachs criticizes mainstream advice to boost consumption rather than invest in the future.
China’s Bumpy New Normal
Joseph E. Stiglitz urges the authorities to focus on well-designed demand-side measures.