The re-emergence of the Quad—com­prising Australia, India, Japan and the United States — has raised many questions among the Indian strategic community. This is despite the fact the meeting itself was at a fairly junior level, no common statement was released and each of the countries had a different take on it. A number of commentators, including from the defence community, have cau­tioned the government from even moving ahead on it. They see the Quad as an Ameri­can conspiracy, meant to ensure that India and China become suspicious of each other, making normalcy in their relationship diffi­cult to achieve.

This view is not correct in that there is a cloud hanging over India-China ties that does not seem to go away. These commenta­tors are wrong in attributing this regretta­ble downturn to India and the US coming close to each other. They confuse the effect for the cause. That India and the US have developed a better appreciation of each other is something to be welcomed; the mutual suspicion was unnatural and went on for far too long. India has justifiable grievances against the US and the interna­tional order. Some of this-India's weak economic position that prevented it from historically playing a key role in the Indo-Pacific and subsequent refusal to engage meaning-fully with East Asian and Asean countries -is a result of its colonial experience for which the US can hardly be blamed. The US' propping up Pakistan and failing to make it accountable for destabilising its neigh­bours, is more troubling. Fortunately, the US seems to have realised the consequences of its policies and is attempting a correction, even if one cannot predict the outcome.

A basic proposition that must be under­stood is that ultimately each country acts in its self-interest. Having said that, to not take advantage of congruence of interests would be foolish. China's increasingly aggressive posture is motivated by its desire to 'rees­tablish' a Sino-centric world since it feels economically, militarily and politically confident to do so. This feeling has been strengthened by the US' increasing reluc­tance to commit itself to upholding the global order, let alone lead it. This reluc­tance predates US President Donald Trump, even if he has made this more obvious. The 2008 financial crisis and Barack Obama's election were key inflection points. Obama began, like Bill Clinton in 1998 after the India-Pakistan nuclear tests, by envisaging a G2 world in which China could be called upon to police Asia. However, it had to with­draw from going ahead due to the backlash from other countries in the region and China's own unilateral actions, particularly in the South China Sea.

It is not as if the Quad has not been attempted before, but China's strong reac­tion to it made Australia and India rethink their position. Worse, for the Quad, Japa­nese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe lost his job and the idea was put at rest. However, it was merely put on hold as subsequent develop­ments have shown. And this time it was not Abe who brought the Quad together, though he pushed for it, but it was Chinese Presi­dent Xi Jinping.

Far from satisfying China, this forbear­ance seems to have convinced it that circum­stances had turned irrevocably in its favour. It’s promoted aggressive action in the South China Sea, including land reclamation, mili­tarising the newly-created islands, notifica­tion of an air defence zone over international waters and raising the pitch over its dispute with Japan over the Senkaku islands. China also became hyperactive in India's neigh­bourhood, rolled out the Belt Road Initiative unilaterally supported by its 'largesse' and worse, from the Indian point of view, launched the China Pakistan Economic Cor­ridor (CPEC) which passes through Paki­stan Occupied Kashmir. The Doklam incur­sion was possibly the last straw on the pro­verbial camel's back.

India, on the other hand, went out of the way to try and develop good ties with China. For example, Prime Minister Narendra Modi met Xi in China and hosted him in Ahmedabad before he met Abe. The Indian government, throughout the Doklam epi­sode, behaved very maturely and refused to be provoked into hasty statements or action, despite the stream of unpleasant language used by China. It is this continued Chinese unilateralism posing a threat to global rules of behaviour that led to the resurrection of the Quad, albeit in a low-key, non-threaten­ing manner. Xi, and not Abe, should be seen as the catalyst.

Courtesy: Hindustan Times, 28, November, 2017