The foreign ministers of members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) — consisting of Australia, Japan, India and the US — met last weekend in Tokyo following meetings at the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit Foreign Ministers’ Meeting convened in Vientiane, Laos. After their discussions in Tokyo, they achieved greater clarity on how the Quad could be more focused. Except for Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs Penny Wong Penny Wong (黃英賢), who had met Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) in Canberra in March, they all met Wang in Vientiane.
The Quad has consciously turned toward a “doing good for the region” approach. This requires greater implementation efforts and follow-ups. Working groups are increasing and the foreign ministers have discussed serious ideas for the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) region, the Pacific Island nations and to increase the inclusion of ASEAN.
These initiatives include a space-based climate warning system in Mauritius, support for Open Radio Access Networks, joint projects on disaster relief in Palau and Papua New Guinea, ASEAN countries in the Quad fellowships and greater involvement of India’s International Finance Corp in the national marine domain awareness plan.
Following the ministers meeting, the Quad announced the establishment of a Quad Cyber Ambassadors Meeting which would discuss capacity-building projects and responsible state behavior in cyberspace.
They also announced the establishment of a Quad Cyber Bootcamp in India. This is significant progress.
These are important initiatives for potential partners in the IORA, among which are ASEAN countries and the Pacific Island nations who collaborate with the Quad in areas which do not conflict with China.
The Quad versus China framing makes these nations anxious. This Quad functional approach allows engagement with reduced anxiety.
The Quad must seek better physical connectivity. The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor announced in September last year is an example and a warning of difficulties. Cooperative projects within the Indo-Pacific region itself are necessary to counter China.
However, a few cogent ideas need to be determined and feasibility studies need to be conducted to deliver on these projects.
First, Quad countries need to divide their responsibilities and work toward fulfilling these initiatives with other partners. This has not been an easy task, even in arrangements among Quad members.
Second, strategic issues invariably dominate Quad meetings. “Unwritten, but evident” is the Quad challenge to China’s domination of the region. By seeking a level playing field and adherence to international rules by all, the Quad hopes to make breakthroughs. China’s response to the Quad meeting is to label it an effort to curtail China’s influence. It has also increased its military exercises in the region and brought the first Russian ships in a long time back into the South China Sea.
The Quad fully backs ASEAN’s centrality and encourages its conclusion of a code of conduct with China in the hope that China would abide by the rules it sets for itself.
China’s bullying of the Philippines is discouraging. Although the standoff between the Philippines and China has diffused, China Coast Guard vessels continue to surround Filipino vessels at the Second Thomas Shoal (Renai Shoal, 仁愛暗沙) and tensions could escalate at any time.
Japan and the US have already enhanced their military engagement with the Philippines. Japanese fighter jets now undertake rotational roles in the Philippines and Australian forces are also likely to see rotational deployment soon.
India has provided it with BrahMos missiles, the most potent in the Filipino armament.
Although these are not all of the Quad activities, they arise from a common outlook.
India has shed its reticence in calling for Beijing to uphold the 2016 South China Sea Arbitration ruling in favor of the Philippines. Previously, India had only spoke about the need for all sides to uphold the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Beginning on a bilateral basis last year with the Philippines, and now in a Quad communique, India has asked for China to abide by this ruling.
The South China Sea and China’s actions were a dominant feature of this Quad meeting and a carryover of the meetings in Vientiane.
The Quad would be happier if ASEAN could negotiate a worthy code of conduct with China. In reality, whatever they agree to is likely to be an effort to circumscribe the role of non-Chinese powers in the South China Sea, rather than an agreement on keeping a free and open Indo-Pacific region.
Third, like Russia’s war on Ukraine, Israel’s war in Gaza has also attracted the Quad’s attention.
All four members are in favor of peace, a two-state solution and Israel’s right to defend itself. On Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there is less commonality, but a general agreement that the war should end.
India’s possible engagement with Ukraine would be viewed with interest because, among the Quad members, India is the only one that has not publicly criticized Russia, and maintains stable relations with Russia and Ukraine.
Finally, the dichotomy of the Quad formally working for the public good in the region while continuing to coordinate military responses to problems would continue. The Quad is here to stay, and it is evolving.
Although on some issues the US, Japan and Australia work separately and India does not join them, in the overarching scheme of things, India is a participant.
There have been several maritime and multi-role exercises happening in the Indo-Pacific region over the past month. While some have been between Japan and its European partners, in the larger exercises, India has been an important and integral partner.
This is the nuance that India is showing in the Quad. It is strategic congruence, but not alignment. India remains committed to dealing with “shared challenges, and present our respective visions for stability and prosperity together with other countries in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, and our plans for the Quad to provide tangible benefits for the region.”
Gurjit Singh is a former Indian ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, ASEAN, Ethiopia and the African Union.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS