Top diplomats from Quad countries held talks on Monday in Tokyo, expressing so-called concerns about the situation in the East and South China Seas and vowing to uphold so-called maritime order in the “Indo-Pacific region,” which analysts viewed as another attempt targeting China’s growth, with a bloc-confrontation mentality.
The analysts noted that hyping up the “China-threat” rhetoric is a typical US way of inciting security anxiety, so as to make some regional countries rely more on the US-led bloc. However, most countries know that making China a target of confrontation may largely suit the needs of Washington’s elites, but not their own.
According to the Japanese foreign ministry, the Quad (the US, Japan, Australia and India) foreign ministers have reaffirmed commitment toward the realization of a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” In a joint statement released after the meeting, ministers emphasized the importance of adherence to international law for the rules-based maritime order, including in the East and South China Seas. They also reaffirmed “strong opposition to any unilateral actions that seek to change the status quo by force or coercion.”
“We continue to express our serious concern about the militarization of disputed features, and coercive and intimidating maneuvers in the South China Sea,” read the joint statement, “We also express our serious concern about the dangerous use of coast guard and maritime militia vessels, the increasing use of various kinds of dangerous maneuvers, and efforts to disrupt other countries’ offshore resource exploitation activities.”
Although China has not been directly singled out in the statement, analysts believe their implication for China is quite obvious.
In terms of the South China Sea disputes, the statement said that foreign ministers emphasized the importance of “maintaining and upholding freedom of navigation and overflight, and reiterate that the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal on July 12, 2016 “is the basis for peacefully resolving disputes between the parties.” China has previously declared that the award is “null and void and has no binding force,” due to its fallacies and unfairness.
Besides, foreign ministers also discussed the promotion of cooperation on maritime security, critical and emerging technologies, cybersecurity, and counter-terrorism. They also discussed the Korean Peninsula situation, the Ukraine crisis and the Middle East situation, according to the joint statement.
In response to the Quad meeting, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said at a Monday press briefing that the Quad keeps chanting the slogan of a free and open Indo-Pacific, and all the while, it has been scaremongering, inciting antagonism and confrontation, and holding back other countries’ development.
He said the Quad “runs counter to the overwhelming trend of pursuing peace, development, cooperation, and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific and will by no means gain any support.” He described some external forces as “the biggest threat and challenge to regional peace and stability.”
Quad is a US-led mechanism, and its joint statement shows that the US is attempting to bolster the bloc’s build-up by hyping “China threat” rhetoric and inciting security anxiety in the region, so as to make some regional countries rely more on the US-led bloc in terms of security, Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times.
Quad is a currently more about a partnership, but not yet an alliance. The latest statement suggests that the US is likely to further manipulate other parties with more coordinated actions, to enable Quad to evolve in the direction of a true alliance, Li said.
This means that the quad is likely to become a major source of creating antagonism and confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region, Li said.
Quad foreign ministers’ meeting came after a US-Japan 2+2 security talks on Sunday, when they portrayed China as “the greatest strategic challenge” facing in the region. They agreed on upgrading the command and control of US forces and strengthening American-licensed missile production there, according to AP.
Earlier on Sunday, defense chiefs from the US, Japan and South Korea held a trilateral meeting in Tokyo, they vowed to strengthen cooperation to deter “nuclear and missile threats” from North Korea and formalized a trilateral agreement that would “institutionalize” security cooperation among their defense authorities, including senior-level policy consultations, information sharing, trilateral exercises, and defense exchange cooperation, according to CNN.
Strange bedfellows
Before the Quad meeting, Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar also met with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Sunday on bilateral ties and regional and global issues. In terms of the Quad meeting, Western media commented that any criticism of Moscow by the bloc could be “awkward for India,” whose Prime Minister Narendra Modi has just met with Vladimir Putin this month and displayed close ties.
Chinese Premier Li Qiang visited Australia in June and attended the ninth China-Australia Annual Leaders’ Meeting with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who said that Australia is pleased to see that current Australia-China relations are stabilizing and improving.
About a week ahead of the Quad meeting, from July 21 to 25, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu held the 16th round of China-Japan strategic dialogue with Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Masataka Okano in Tokyo, and held the 10th round of the high-level strategic dialogue between the foreign ministries of China and South Korea with South Korean Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Hong-kyun in Seoul, according to Xinhua News Agency.
“Those interactions are examples that can explain why the Quad joint statement did not name China directly, but dealt with the related issues in an obscure way,” a Beijing-based expert told the Global Times on Monday, requesting anonymity.
“The Quad is divided over its handling of relations with China and many other issues … It is a relatively loose mechanism for strange bedfellows,” he added.
The US can’t get India to break off ties with Russia and fully embrace the US, while Japan and Australia have close ties in trade and people-to-people exchanges with China, and they can’t afford to become vassals of the US at the expense of their own strategic interests, the expert noted.
Making China a target of confrontation may largely suit the needs of Washington’s elites, but it isn’t in line with the interest of the vast majority, he said.
Following the Quad foreign ministers meeting in Tokyo, Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin are expected to travel to Manila, where they will meet with their Philippine counterparts for a US-Philippines 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue.
The Japan and Philippine trip are part of Blinken’s 18th trip to “Indo-Pacific” region since becoming Secretary, according to the US Department of State. And the trip, covering Laos, Vietnam, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, and Mongolia, lasts from July 25 to August 3.
Blinken’s Asia trip is shadowed by the domestic political chaos in the US, including US President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the Presidential election.
Different candidates in the US have conflicting ideas on how to treat allies, which brings great uncertainty to the future foreign policy of the US, and that inevitably make many countries, including Asia-Pacific nations, doubt and even be wary of the credibility and consistency of the US policy, Li said.
“Blinken’s trip served a strong purpose of reassurance, mainly to convince allies that US policy in the Asia-Pacific region and its security policy toward allied partners would not change because of domestic chaos,” Li said. “At the same time, the US is conveying to allies that they need to continue to follow its lead in strategic competition with China and Russia.”
“In fact, the US move is an attempt to consolidate its own hegemony at the expense of regional security, stability and prosperity, and even the interests of its allies themselves,” said Li. “This means that in the long run, the US may not achieve its goals.”
