Russia and China
Discern Indian Participation in the Anti-China-Anti-Eurasia Groupings By Sajjad
Shaukat (JR 185 SS 56)
The
Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (ASD, also known as the Quad),
comprising the United States, Japan, India, and Australia held a meeting in Bangkok
in Thailand in the beginning of March, this year. The strategic meeting was
attended by the senior officials of these countries who talked on their
collective efforts for a free, open and inclusive Indo-Pacific region, opposing
China’s influence. They agreed for collective cooperation.
The Quad was
initiated in 2007 by the
then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe during his first term.
In 2018, the
administration of the US President Donald J. Trump re-raised the concept as
part of its ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ strategy. In deference to
China, India objected to Australia’s inclusion in Malabar naval exercise among
the US, Japan and India. As part of American double game, Admiral Phil
Davidson, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command has suggested that the Quad
be shelve for now. As Davidson stated, “there is limited appetite for
operationalizing the Quad” presumably meaning the militarization of the
arrangement. Indeed the concept–at least as a military alliance—is more likely
to go the way of the dodo than rise from its ashes like a phoenix.
However, the
grouping of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue reappeared on the international
stage in November 2017 after a ten-year hiatus. The grouping immediately
garnered attention because of two things: the impressive characteristics of its participants—the
largest-economy in the world and top military spender, the third-largest economy, the
fastest-growing economy economy and second-most populous country in the world,
and a significant middle power.
The timing of
its rebirth is linked with Sino-US trade and political conflict which have
started heating up. Relations between
China under Xi Jinping and the United States under Donald Trump were
deteriorating rapidly in late 2017, and the reinstatement of the Quad was the
first concrete step in the Trump administration’s strategy toward the
Asia-Pacific region and the adjacent Indian Ocean.
At the 4th
Raisina Dialogue held in New Delhi on January 8, 2019, Admiral Phil Davidson,
described the core of strategy in advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific. But,
from the perspective of Russia, this strategy’s main goal is the containment of
China and sabotage of Beijing’s efforts to reshape its surroundings in
accordance with its increased capabilities and expanded interests. Nevertheless, such a stance may alienate
Russia’s traditional partner India.
Russia’s
reaction to the first meeting of the reinvigorated Quad, though negative,
was very restrained: the concept behind the grouping was (and still is) too
vague to make serious objections, but it was immediately perceived as
contradicting Russia’s interests. Russian Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor
Morgulov called it an American strategy aimed at “drawing dividing lines”
between countries. Aside from an inherent inclination to see all US ideas as
contrarian to Russia’s interests, there are several more cogent reasons as to
why Moscow will likely never look at any positive aspects of the Quad or the
Indo-Pacific concept as a whole.
Analysis of the
Russian state-backed think-tank Valdai Club said: “Russian authorities perceive
the Quad as a military axis within the US Indo-Pacific strategy”.
It is notable that in the recent past, despite Russian efforts to
de-escalate India-Pakistan tensions, New Delhi has tried to down play it due to
her hegemonic attitude and frustration with the outcome of standoff with
Islamabad. Saner
elements within India have already sounded skepticism with the Indian Prime
Minister Narendra Modi’s ill-founded policy of ‘muscular approach’ vis-à-vis
Pakistan. The Hindu newspaper on March 2, 2019 reported: “Reacting to reports
that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had offered to mediate as well as
provided a venue for talks between India and Pakistan, Indian Ambassador to
Moscow Mr. Verma stated I want to emphasize that we did not receive a formal
offer of mediation. And even we do, we will not accept it. So far, no country
has offered to mediate in resolving the conflict…According to the statement of
the Russian Ministery of Foreign Affairs (MFA), Mr. Lavrov had expressed Moscow’s
readiness to promote the de-escalation of tensions and the lack of an
alternative to resolving any differences between Islamabad and New Delhi by
politico-diplomatic means.”
More recently during an interview
with Sputnik News, DG ISPR, spokesman for
Pakistani military, Maj-Gen Asif Ghafoor explained the post Pulwama environment
(False Flag terror attack in the Indian Occupied Kashmir) and appreciated
Russian positive and proactive role in cooling down the hot environment created
by Indian jingoism.
In this regard, DG ISPR highlighted, “We greatly value the relevance and
importance of Russia in the region, especially what role Russia has
lately played toward the Afghan reconciliation. Russia looks
toward balance of power and multi-polarity in the world. We
value Russia’s voice as the voice of reason, and we would love if
Russia, being a powerful country, plays its role which enables bringing peace
in South Asia and beyond. And we expect that Russia will do it,
as the efforts in fact being undertaken by Russia are generating
good results”.
Besides, it is pertinent to talk about how
multilateralism in Eurasia and the Indo-Pacific is affecting the triangle of
Russia-Pakistan-China and India. It
may be of value to discern the underlining currents in the intellectual debate
held in the Raisina Dialogue
held in New Delhi.
One
of the discussion forum with participation from Russian delegates representing
prestigious think tanks was titled “The Arrival of Global Politics: Navigating a
Multi-perspective World Order”,
moderated by Feodor Lukyanov of Valdai Club and was
participated by delegates from the US, India and China.
The Indian delegate Indrani Bagchi cherished the role being assigned to
India in the Indo-Pacific as legitimate, while referring to Trump’s
unilateralism and disruption, she allegedly equated it with disruption and
unilateralism by blatantly saying that when Russia walked into Ukraine and
China walked into South China Sea, there was unilateralism. Under the pretext, She also
boasted that India will have Quad—the military cooperation mechanism, built
upon participation from India, Japan, Australia and the US to make sure that
India gains her strategic space in the Indo-Pacific and expand it further into
West-Pacific and the gulfs connecting Indian ocean with Mediterranean and
Africa.
Russian delegate
Anton Tsvetov, advisor to Chairman Centre for Strategic Research talked about
emerging concepts and initiatives like China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) and
Eurasia, a version of Mega regional initiatives in the wider quest for managed
globalization. He also added that the new dilemma facing states is not only
inter-state, but also intra-state where states are becoming uncomfortable with
chaotic forces within.
General Evgeny
Buzhinsky from Russia proposed that any Strategic Arms Control mechanism in
future will have to involve Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea as well,
thus a Multilateral Arms control system was the only way the world could manage
the Strategic Arms.
Chinese scholar
Ms. Yang Yanyi observed that there was an apparent deficiency of wisdom in
policy advisors and strategists in the West, especially those who propagate a
new Cold War, disruption of global supply chain and erecting political
obstacles to even cultural exchange and economic development.
Although it may
be premature to comment on the feeling of Russian and Chinese delegates in
Raisina Dialogue, yet they took the Indian thoughts with a pinch of salt,
particularly when Indian delegate Ms. Indirani openly talked of Quad and tagged
Russia and China with disruptive forces in one breath.
It is
mentionable that Russia-Pakistan relations have now started crystallizing and
have the potential to move beyond military cooperation. The idea of RUPACH
(Russia-Pak-China), or Russia-Pakistan-China can be given a thought for intellectual
debate, six important points for this debate are appended:-
The convergence of geopolitical and geo-economic interests of these
states (RUPACH) is clearly discernable—whether it be the quest for collective
security, terrorism emanating from Afghanistan-India-US nexus, opening of new
strategic corridors of development or the drive for multilateral cooperation in
checking the emerging realities in Indo-Pacific and the larger Eurasia, all
points to commonality of interest.
Global geo-economic power grid has decisively shifted towards Eurasia,
the region is no more dependent on Anglo American and Western dominance of
world financial system; the region can stand on its own owing to existence of
the production depository and market in one strategic space. The Pan-Eurasian
big space as projected by the Russian President Vladimir Putin and Alexander
Dugin is no more a dream, but a reality. Alexander Dugin who
happens to be a trend-setter in Russian political thought, has maintained a
respectable position in Russian hierarchy and happens to be an informal advisor
to President Putin.
Global connectivity through internet and remote communication can allow
free flow of ideas by using information technology; this phenomenal change has
brought down the old barriers of language, faith, culture and even
civilizations, leading to creation of fraternity of brotherhood and collective
peace, while
the region is also fed up and weary of
perpetual wars and conflicts, the fraternity of brotherhood is no more zonked
by cacophony of neo-liberalism and capitalism, the region needs someone to lead
two billion people into a new era of peace, prosperity and inclusive
development.
In this respect, those who projected the isolation of Pakistan may be
frustrated; the morphing and mutation of the idea of RUPACH should be discussed
in Pakistan as well as by the Russian and Chinese think tanks, including academia.
It may not be farfetched to state that the idea of RUPACH, along with corridors
of economic development like China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) or China’s OBOR may become the harbinger of peace for entire
Eurasia.
Meanwhile, we can witness a contest between the contemporary
traditionalist-imperialist block hiding behind the façade of neo-liberalism and
the proponents of Eurasia; can RUPACH be the new kid on the block in the
emerging order of nations?
America has established global dictatorship, with de-facto power to
decide who is right and who is wrong and who should be punished. There is a
need for global community to fight against it.
Therefore,
the concept of RUPACH needs a strategic road map, some of the suggested points
can be discussed through formal and informal channels, and a road map for next
two decades can be charted to develop supporting strategies.
In
this connection, the strategic areas of cooperation can be in many fields;
however the important ones could be infrastructure
development,
energy, including strategic pipe
lines and off shore exploration, mining,
cultural exchanges, higher education, information technology,
health sector, air corridors, maritime trade, agriculture
and regional security. In
these terms, CPEC has already paved the way for helping the Eurasian dream of
regional integration, which could become the bedrock for RUPACH.
Sajjad Shaukat
writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic
Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International
Relations
