Power equilibrium in SE Asia at stake
IN mid-September,2021 the United States, Britain and Australia signed a security pact to strengthen military capabilities in the Pacific, allowing them to share advanced defence technologies and equipping Australian forces with the know-how to build nuclear-powered submarines.
The “AUKUS” partnership – an amalgamation of the three member countries’ names – is mainly seen as targeting China but has also angered several other countries in the region. Both China and North Korea have voiced their strong objections to the deal.
Under the AUKUS pact, the US and UK will help Australia build at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, the first time that Washington and London will be sharing sensitive nuclear submarine technology with Canberra.
To begin the partnership, naval officials and technical specialists from the three countries will work together over the next 18 months to equip Australia with the technology to deploy nuclear-powered submarines.
But given the complexity of the technology, Australia’s nuclear submarine fleet may not be operational until about 2040.
The biggest benefit of nuclear-powered submarines is that they are able to stay submerged longer, with enough fuel to theoretically run for years, which is an advantage in stealth attacks.
Conventional submarines that use diesel-powered electric motors have to resurface regularly so that their batteries can be recharged, allowing them to be spotted more easily.
Amid increasing recognition of the Asia-Pacific Region (APR) as the engine and centre of future global development and growth, it is important to highlight the historic event held on 12 March 2021—the high-level virtual summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) of the United States, Japan, Australia and India.
The unofficial format of the Quad has been promoted by its participants since 2007 at the behest of Tokyo with varying degrees of activity, national involvement and success.
The rapid analysis of the thematic publications of the leading Asian—mainly Indian—analytical centres suggest the following general conclusions.
Predictably, the key narrative has been a cause-effect link between the increase in action of the Quad and China’s misunderstood intention and alleged expansionist actions in the region, as promoted by the AUKUS and Quad in spite of vehement and repeated denial of China.
The US Administration seeks to involve its regional partners in the confrontation with Beijing, including within the Indo-Pacific Region to achieve its goals.
As the Quad approaches the intended institutionalization, its participants seem determined to work more closely with key regional actors to reassure the ASEAN member countries of their support, amidst the geopolitical turbulence.
Their leaders reaffirmed their strong support for ASEAN’s unity and centrality. However, many ASEAN countries do not want to openly take sides in the confrontation between the US and China.
Some of them welcome the U.S. presence in the region, though. Concurrently, they are aware of the benefits of cooperation with China, which will in any case remain their main trading partner.
Although the parties have not said so, the agreement is largely seen by analysts as a US-led effort to counter the rising influence of China in the region.
US President Joe Biden has termed US-China relations as a battle for the century, calling it a litmus test of the merits of democracy versus autocracy.
Why is it important to the US to be present in South China Sea? A senior official from the Biden administration has recently said that Washington-led Aukus deal was part of larger steps to build cooperation with security partners in Asia “to sustain peace and stability across the entire Indo-Pacific region”.
For decades, Washington has referred to the vast expanse of territory stretching from Australia to India as the “Asia-Pacific”, but during Donald Trump’s presidency he shifted to the term “Indo-Pacific”: a term common among foreign policy experts.
This was initially interpreted as Trump’s attempt to distance himself from the policy of his predecessor, Barack Obama but the present administration has also continued with the same narration.
The region includes a broad range of places, from India to New Zealand, where the US intends to challenge China.
China has slammed Aukus as “highly irresponsible” and said it could trigger a nuclear arms race, a concern North Korea has also voiced.
Under the United Nations Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Australia is prohibited from manufacturing or acquiring nuclear weapons.
But naval reactors are exempted from nuclear safeguards, and other countries have been suspected of exploiting this loophole by using the fuel used to power the subs’ reactors to develop nuclear arms as well.
There are other reasons this particular alliance has ruffled feathers. Australia ditched a multibillion-dollar contract to buy diesel submarines from France in favour of acquiring nuclear-powered submarines under Aukus – a decision French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian has described as a “stab in the back”.
This has led to France recalling its Ambassadors from Washington and Canberra in an unprecedented diplomatic protest, although it has since returned both of its envoys as the countries moved to “repair” their relations.
The UK has also struck a more conciliatory tone recently, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson telling Macron that he wanted to “re-establish cooperation”.
In the light of the competition between the US and China, Washington has described the Indo-Pacific Command as “the single most consequential region for America’s future” and stressed the need to contain Beijing’s influence in the region by boosting its military presence and strengthening alliances.
The US is also considering including South Korea in its Five Eyes intelligence alliance – which also includes Australia, the UK, Canada and New Zealand and this year renewed a military pact with the Philippines that allows American troops to be stationed in the country.
China has repeatedly reiterated that it has no imperialistic, hegemonic or military designs in the region.
It has, however, raised alarm – quiet logically though, about presence of western powers led by America, in connivance with the UK and its regional partners, mainly India along with Australia to disturb peace in the region.
China has strategic maritime interests in the region as it wants to see South China Sea as a trouble and tension free area and has rightly blamed “outsiders” to impose and implement their hegemonic designs in an area thousands of miles away from theirs.
—The writer is former civil servant and consultant ILO and IOM, based in Karachi.
