Debotri Dhar | Animal instincts: Future of Quad in a multipolar world
The four friends are back in the news. As a strategic dialogue that was first started in 2007 between India, Australia, Japan and the United States, the initial focus of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, otherwise known as the “Quad”, was on enhancing economic, diplomatic and military cooperation. Thus, as an example, the bilateral Malabar naval exercises between India and the United States, begun in 1992 to increase interoperability between the two countries’ armed forces, was scaled up to include the other strategic partners in 2007. For the first time that year, the exercise was also shifted from the Indian to the Pacific Ocean, subtly signalling a pivotal place for the Quad in a broader Indo-Pacific security agenda. Australia participated in 2020 following the invitation of India, and Malabar is being held off the coast of Sydney this month.
A major criticism of the Quad has been that it is an “Asian Nato” to contain Chinese expansionism in the Indo-Pacific. While the decision taken at the 2017 Asean summit to revive the Quad was influenced by Chinese actions in the South China Sea and the importance of a rules-based maritime order, the member countries have denied the allegation that the Quad mimics a Nato logic, pointing out that there was no reference to China in its first joint statement and no mutual defence pact. Instead, they emphasise the partnership’s multi-dimensional activities, such as global health security for improving vaccine preparedness and strengthening members’ capacities to respond to infectious disease outbreaks through multilateral organisations like WHO, as well as the humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) during the Indian Ocean tsunami that was later expanded as a joint mechanism and signed in Tokyo in 2022 to coordinate HADR operations while promoting gender equality and socio-economic inclusion.
Yet the Quad continues to be in the news primarily as a military alliance, whether it be an American general’s recent emphasis on the India-US military-to-military dialogue and security challenges in the maritime domain during his confirmation hearings for the Joint Chief of Staff, or plans for US military stockpiling and a joint intelligence centre in Australia just announced, or Australia hosting the Malabar exercise for the first time this month. What, then, is the future of the Quad, its pitfalls and possibilities?
Many schoolchildren are fascinated when they first learn about the national birds of different countries; for the Quad partners, they are the peacock (India) and the pheasant (Japan), the eagle (US) and the emu (Australia). The peacock is known for its resplendent colours, and those who have witnessed this beautiful bird move rhythmically to attract potential partners during the mating season (which often coincides with the monsoons) will seldom see a sight more gorgeous in the animal kingdom. The peacock is not a creature of shadows and silence; it makes a noise. A lover of larger spaces to explore, it dislikes being boxed or caged. Nor does it shy away from tackling stealthy attackers, as many a snake has learned. Then there is the green pheasant -- industrious, also omnivorous, with dark plumage and great ecological range, blending gracefully into woodlands, grasslands, and human habitats. Meanwhile the emu, flightless but long-legged, can run as fast as 50 km per hour, kicking hard and even killing with its big-toed, long-nailed feet. Booming loudly in the mating season, it mates for life.
The majestic eagle is from a different realm, soaring high. Peacocks and pheasants will quickly spot an insect or a worm which an eagle, used to feasting on larger animals, sometimes cannot.
Four very different birds, like the countries they represent, with layered, distinct histories and visions. Any alliance between the four, let alone a friendship, requires mutual respect. As I have earlier noted in an article on international friendship relations, mutuality has been a challenge for superpowers used to dictate terms. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an example, where some nonaligned nations’ refusal to be forced militarily and economically into a war that, while a clear violation of the Budapest Memorandum, was not their creation, led to global shaming by the United States. While the India-US relationship was fortunately not derailed, do we forget Western allies’ own record of wars and conquests, of toppling democratic governments and supporting “friendly” military regimes, including in South Asia? Have those who preach against not taking sides in this war curbed their own animal instincts, running with several hares while hunting with the hounds? Here an important role can be played by Japan which, its own imperialist past and present economic interests notwithstanding, has in the postwar decades pushed back against both Chinese and American aggression, instead promoting peace-building in Asia and working diplomatically to strengthen regional autonomy through Asean. The same is true for Australia, which provides regional security infrastructure and whose role would grow further as it strengthens relations with other member nations.
The obvious differences with Nato aside, it is critical that the Quad therefore not be reduced to a militaristic alliance. Instead, this transnational security dialogue is an opportunity for partners to do genuine good for the global order even while also recognising and meeting pragmatic ends. For instance, the eagle, whose altitude protects it from lesser dangers while also blinding it to what goes on below, might do well to acknowledge the current multipolar world. The peacock demands respect in this new order, and will receive it even more upon promoting the well-being of diverse populations domestically and internationally, exercising strategic as well as moral leadership in the new world.
Health security is one among innumerable areas where the vision and resources of the influential four can help not just in improving the availability and equitable distribution of vaccines, but also in addressing gender and other socio-economic dimensions of public health more broadly. For example, research points to a global spike in violence against women during Covid-19, yet pandemics are not the only times this occurs. A primary strand of my research is on gender violence in humanitarian and other settings, and effective public policies to address it.
Scholar-practitioners know that designating key issues as domestic and foreign policy priorities can make a difference. Aligning not just on traditional security though military cooperation but also joining forces to tackle overlooked aspects of human security through the Quad would go a long way in ensuring a free, fair, and genuinely inclusive Indo-Pacific.
