AUKUS and QUAD

Dr Sudhir Kumar Das

(dasudhirk@gmail.com)

International geopolitics is once again fast moving towards a more severe cold war era of a bipolar world. With the disintegration of the USSR in 1991, it was thought that the era of ideological expansion by both blocks; Communism by Soviet Russia and Capitalism by the USA has come to end. However, the emergence of an assertively aggressive and belligerent China in the last two decades of the twentieth century pushed the world back into the second wave of the Cold War. This time the Cold War is not about ideological expansionism rather economic muscle-flexing between a superpower, America, and an emerging superpower, China. A belligerent China has rattled many countries by its aggressive conduct especially the western countries who value liberal democratic ideals in contrast to China's autocratic regime. A rattled USA is busy forming new defence and military alignments to protect its block from the aggressive posturing of China. One such alliance is the QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) in which India is partnering with the US, Australia, and Japan shedding its Nehruvian non-aligned image. However, what surprised many is the September 15th announcement by three heads of state – President Joe Biden, Prime Ministers of UK and Australia Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison respectively of the formation of a new trilateral defence treaty, AUKUS (Australia, UK, US). The joint statement of these three leaders makes it clear that under this treaty the US and the UK will supply the sensitive nuclear powered, but conventionally armed, SSN (Submersible Ship Nuclear) technology to Australia. The country will build at least eight such nuclear-powered submarines getting the state-of-the-art technology in the coming decades from England. The joint statement also states that the three countries will collaborate in the field of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and undersea capabilities. The announcement also makes it clear that the alliance aims to maintain maritime freedom and stability in the Indo-Pacific. The Australian government has also announced that it will acquire or develop a range of sophisticated missile systems like the Tomahawk cruise missiles from the United States to equip its Hobart-class destroyers. This shows that Australia will be synced with the military hardware systems of the UK and US in a phased manner. AUKUS will give a boost to Australia's military might in the Indo-Pacific with a fleet of modern nuclear-propelled submarines to stand up to the challenge of China. The joint statement nowhere mentions China by name but it is not hard to understand that AUKUS is purely a military alliance formed to contain China.

The formation of AUKUS has raised some curious questions. First, when a similar alliance was already in existence in the form of QUAD, what is the need for a new alliance? Second, why are India and Japan excluded from this new formation? Third, why does the UK want to return to Indo-Pacific being an Atlantic nation?

A cursory glance makes it discernible that these two alliances – QUAD and AUKUS- function is clearly demarcated fields—non-military and military. The QUAD is an alliance of four democratic countries that is more focused on challenging China in fields that are non-military. The recent QUAD meeting of the four heads of state reinforces this idea. QUAD will produce one billion vaccine doses to be distributed among Southeast Asian nations, the countries that are so far solely dependent on the Chinese vaccine. QUAD countries will strive to reduce the dependency of some countries on China in infrastructure development. This four-nation alliance is going to focus on supply chain and technology up-gradation to compete with China in the international market especially in the 5G networking and manufacturing sector. The only thing that comes closest to military cooperation among these QUAD countries is the irregularly held Malabar Naval Exercise. Thus QUAD, in the strict sense of the term, is far from a military alliance; it is a partnership of cooperation in various fields among countries against a common economic giant China. In contrast, AUKUS is purely a military alliance where three of the militarily advanced countries come together to contain and counter China in the Indo-Pacific. Thus, AUKUS would neither supersede nor undermine QUAD rather it would complement it.

As to the exclusion of India and Japan from the AUKUS one requires to examine the different contexts of these two countries. First Japan has a historical aversion to anything remotely associated with nuclear. So it is out of the question that the US would offer or Japan would accept nuclear technology. Now the question is why not India? First, one should not forget that India, from the very inception of QUAD, is a reluctant member of it. India always thought, albeit wrongly, that once the border dispute with China is resolved amicably through diplomatic channels there is no need for it to join any anti-China defence conglomeration. But when the push came to a shove from China after the Doklam confrontation in 2017 and the tension at the LAC in May/June 2020, a helpless India has no other alternative but to embrace the QUAD. However, India has been very shy to call it a defence partnership and always termed it as a partnership for common good. This reluctance of India to be part of an anti-China security alliance has not escaped America's notice. The non-inclusion of India in the AUKUS makes it clear that the USA does not trust India to be of much help in the eventuality of a China-USA military confrontation over Taiwan. The USA now judges India from its initial reluctance to be part of any defence alliance against China. Secondly, the USA does not consider India to stand up to China as Australia would in case of a military conflict. America is very apprehensive of India's capability to counter China as a major military power in Asia. Thirdly, India's dealing with Russia especially in buying military hardware from that country puts America in a dilemma before considering any offer of transfer of modern technology to India. India's decision to buy the Russian anti-aircraft missile system S-400 Triumph has made India an unreliable US partner. Considering all these America found Australia a better candidate to be offered this nuclear-powered submarine technology superseding India. International relation is not about personal chemistry between leaders of nations but it is about national interest. America's foremost condition, in this case, is reliability and loyalty and Australia proved to be a more reliable and loyal partner than India to be trusted with this sensitive nuclear technology. Needless to say that Australia being an Anglosphere country automatically becomes a natural ally of the US and the UK. However, India can now turn to a miffed France asking for nuclear propulsion technology for submarines.

The third question requires some background study of the post-Brexit aspiration of Britain. Now England wants to present itself as a global player by remaining at the side of the USA. By manufacturing parts of the nuclear-propelled submarine at Belfast shipbuilding yard England will reinforce its image as a global power. Its presence in the Indo-Pacific will justify its superpower status. In the post-Brexit economic scenario, England can now create a number of high-end jobs. Many consider it as compensation for England for being sidelined in Afghanistan by the US. The success or failure of AUKUS will depend on how these three leaders steer clear a livid France and a disappointed European Union.