13 June 2020, NIICE Commentary 5315
Aditya Kant Ghising
As most economies of the world start to embrace the idea of living and co-existing with the novel Coronavirus and start to breathe, albeit cautiously, the Indo-Pacific region finds itself in one of the areas where global limelight is currently focused on. Although the concept and membership of the Indo-Pacific region itself is a contested topic in international relations, the latest signs as of this writing, pointing towards a reinvigoration of policy initiatives aimed at strengthening relations amongst some of the member-countries of the region have come in the form of India and Australia elevating their ties to a comprehensive strategic partnership and upgrading their 2+2 foreign affairs and defense dialogue to the ministerial level during a virtual summit between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Australian counterpart Scott Morrison in June 2020. The two countries have also unveiled a “shared vision for maritime cooperation in the Indo – Pacific” and signed seven agreements focused on areas such as defense and rare earth minerals. At the moment, Australia has active free trade agreements with eleven countries as well as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. Although many scholars have pointed to a possible shift in Australia’s foreign policy shortly, the rise of China as an important trade partner to Australia since the beginning of the 21st century with an export value of AUD 6,868 million in 2000 and AUD 91,297 million in 2015 (according to the data published by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Government of Australia) and USD 87.72 billion in 2018, according to the United Nations COMTRADE database, is undeniable. It sits at the top of Australia’s list of trade partners. In its tourism sector, the number of visitors from China was 1,422,000 in 2017-18. In the fallout of the pandemic and amidst a restructuring of the global order, whether such economic relations and dependencies will change drastically to shape the new future of the Indo-Pacific is yet to be seen. In the case of India, as of this writing and according to the figures from Export Import Data Bank, the total India – China trade value stands at USD 72,357.46 million with exports worth USD 14,421.37 million and imports worth USD 57,936.09 million. Comparatively, India’s total exports to Australia between April 2019 and January 2020, were valued at USD 3, 520.44 million and total imports at USD 13, 131.21 million.
The nature of commodities that India imports from China is itself relevant in this regard. Electronic equipment, organic chemicals, iron and steel, machines and engine parts, etc. make up a huge chunk of India’s imports from China. The latter also enjoys a strong grip on the PCB (printed circuit board) market. These are the most important components in manufacturing smartphones and other electronic devices which are an important part of the lives of a vast majority of people today, especially those belonging to Generations Y and Z.
For the USA, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations sits at the geographical center of its Indo-Pacific vision, according to a report titled A Free and Open Indo-Pacific: Advancing a Shared Vision, published by the US Department of State in November 2019. A myriad of regional policies finds themselves intertwined in the concept of Indo-Pacific today. The US has traditionally been regarded as the main ‘actor’ in Indo-Pacific affairs and its vision and approach in the region aligns closely with Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific concept, India’s Act East Policy, Australia’s Indo-Pacific concept, the Republic of Korea’s New Southern Policy as well as Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy. Given the backdrop of US – China trade war that has been a matter of contention in international affairs recently, coupled with the economic tsunami brought about by the outbreak of the novel Coronavirus, these new attempts of forming and reinvigorating regional associations seem like a logical move that would follow. How these calculations are based on a workaround manner without promoting antagonism in vulnerable areas like the South China Sea as well as the Indian Ocean Region has raised important questions in the global academic community. Although China’s focus seems to have momentarily shifted towards managing the political chaos in Hong Kong, concretized by certain decisions taken during the last session of the National People’s Congress in May 2020, its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its achievements, thus far especially in Southeast Asia remains the bone of contention among most of the countries in the Indo-Pacific.
The timing of political decisions, especially at the global level is generally well thought out to avoid sending the wrong signals, or in some instances, to achieve precisely that. The current re-shifting of focus on the Indo-Pacific region comes at a time when global economic and political order is going through one of the most unpredictable times. With rising pressure on China from almost all fronts, policies based around regionalism need to be handled cautiously, especially since it views the membership of the Indo-Pacific as an “Asian NATO”. The other important members of the region viz., Japan and South Korea could start to play an increased role in the days to come, however they too have strong trade relations with China and would not risk further damage to their respective economies caused by counter measures. A peaceful cooperation on all fronts between the members of the Indo-Pacific is therefore, desirable in the post COVID-19 world order. With the US increasingly following a rather isolationist strategy in global affairs of late, rather than an approach aimed at blatantly countering the rise of China in the region, perhaps it would serve the regional actors better to find possible ways to cooperate on areas where it is necessary. The region is laced with sensitive areas and miscalculations in foreign policy formulations shortly could have disastrous consequences on the civilizations inhabiting it. Certain global realities cannot be denied as they are a result of years if not decades of policy formulations, treaties and agreements. The global reality of today is eerily similar to the days of the Cold War and political representatives at the helm ought to take small and calculated steps rather than a great leap forward.
