Trump or Harris, US-India relations can’t afford to drift – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

This article originally appeared on Pacific Forum, and it has since been republished with authority. Read the original below.

In one of the most contentious White House elections in recent memory, the US is only a few days away from electing its 47th leader. Countries around the world closely monitor the results every four centuries as the American public casts their ballots to choose the people who best serve their interests.

The impact of this vote on foreign policy cannot be ignored, even though the primary focus of the American presidential election is on social and economic issues that immediately affect the lives of the Americans. Given America’s social, economic, and surveillance traces across the world, foreign policy matters significantly in the US vote.

An extraordinary time shattered the election campaign, opening the earth to a new electoral competition between former president Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, even as the rest of the world considered the benefits and drawbacks of a Trump movie or a second word for President Joe Biden. A Trump 2.0 is the cause of a lot of stress and tension around the world, despite the uncertainty surrounding a Harris administration.

Regardless of who wins in November, there is a sense of comparative calm and trust in Delhi that the bilateral relationship between India and the US has bipartisan help.

The Delhi-Washington collaboration could be characterized as a political Goldilocks with an untapped proper alignment to counter China’s extensive and assertive rise, reshaping the Indo-Pacific’s security and economic landscape. From business to engineering, and Taiwan to Tibet, China is on incident style with India, the US, and their like-minded lovers.

The US and India have a favorable environment thanks to the corporate principles, which cover both military and non-military matters.

A quick glance at the joint statements from bilateral leadership meetings or the fact sheets from multilateral summits like the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (” Quad” ) reveal engagements across the spectrum, from defense to infrastructure, from new technologies to public health, and from space to maritime security.

No day for proper fall

It is obvious that Washington and Delhi prioritized this marriage highly. The difficulty will be in navigating the tensions between delivering agreements and turning convergences into assistance.

Who will win the election in Washington will have the task of moving this marriage ahead while addressing sporadic annoyances and preventing operational risks.

Beyond its conventional group of allies, Washington maintains and envisions a relationship with Delhi. But, Delhi and Washington’s political imperatives will place them on proper axes that might challenge alignment and stifle traction.

The second-order result of individual foreign policy decisions needs to be handled keeping in mind the larger image of a “free, available, equitable and rules-based” get in the Indo-Pacific.

For example, the Delhi-Washington tango’s growing US-Russian animosity and the growing Sino-Russian ally create a more sophisticated complex powerful of commission and omission.

Besides, the US-China opposition is global in scope, while the India-China contest is a local one, more concentrated in western South Asia and the sea Indian Ocean area.

Both Washington and Delhi agree that collaborating and utilizing one another’s capabilities and intentions to address the China problem is beneficial. However, both also employ their own playbooks of “de-risking without decoupling” from China.

Therefore, whether India is a good bet for Washington vis-à-vis China and vice-versa will remain a pivot point in India-US engagement.

Delivering the deliverables

The most significant impact of cooperation in this area is probably the defense sector cooperation.

Both sides demonstrate a willingness to go above and beyond to improve ties between the two, which include co-development and co-production. Given the private sector’s growing involvement in India’s defense modernization, there are significant links between the two nations ‘ defense industrial conclaves.

Initiatives like the India-US Defense Industrial Roadmap and India-US Defense Acceleration Ecosystem ( INDUS-X ) are significant milestones in this effort because the budding synergy needs to lead to timely deliveries for induction into India’s armed forces.

Two new agreements have been signed, one relating to ensuring resilience of supply chains to meeting national security demands, namely&nbsp, Security of Supply Arrangement&nbsp, ( SOSA ) and a memorandum of agreement regarding&nbsp, Assignment of Liaison Officers&nbsp, to increase interoperability between the two militaries.

Moreover, overarching agreements like the&nbsp, Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology&nbsp, (iCET ) show a multi-sectoral and multi-agency partnership cutting across commercial and military technologies that are going to shape the security and economics of the 21st century.

Trade and technology will be increasingly intertwined in times to come and a new&nbsp, memorandum of understanding&nbsp, aims to strengthen supply chains for lithium, cobalt, and other critical minerals to be used in green energy transition efforts such as electric vehicles. A Harris and Trump presidency may have a more significant impact on the trade front.

Delhi would have to prepare for trade agreements with strong climate and environment components if Harris wins. On the other hand, a Trump 2.0 will most likely be more hostile toward multilateralism and focused on reciprocity of trade and tariffs, regardless of allies and adversaries. Trump, during his presidency, and more recently, as well, has often called out India as a “very big abuser” of tariffs.

Global aspirations and regional challenges

Regional challenges closer to home in its neighborhood throw up more looming challenges as India attempts to take over the global south and finds itself at the center of many pressing global issues.

The volatile political climate in Myanmar, the chaotic regime change in Bangladesh, the foreign policy choices of neighboring Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, and the Maldives, as well as the uncertain transition in Afghanistan, will necessitate sober discussions between Washington and Delhi.

Although the geopolitics and geoeconomics of South Asia are generally understood as being related to the India-China conflict, the US’s role is significant because it is a distant power in terms of geography but not in terms of strategy.

How the region fits into the India-US partnership will be a crucial issue for the next American presidency as Washington navigates South Asia following 20 years of shaping its regional policy through the Afghanistan lens.

More specifically, it will be important to discuss how Washington and Delhi collaborate on financing and building infrastructure in the region, and how both sides would coordinate efforts to improve maritime security in the Indian Ocean region.

The India-US relationship, currently called a defining partnership of the 21st&nbsp, century, has seen all kinds of highs and lows in its journey. It would have been difficult to imagine the level of cooperation the two countries had had in all sectors and domains two decades ago.

However, the relationship between these two complex democracies, each with its own unique worldviews and priorities, will also experience a number of ups and downs in the years to come.

Moreover, the world is going through seismic geopolitical, geo-economic, and technological transitions. The key to putting together a partnership that is aspirational yet grounded in realpolitik will be to use the political support on both sides and the institutional links built over the years.

Monish Tourangbam&nbsp, ( [email protected] ) &nbsp, is director at the Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies (KIIPS), India.

Continue Reading

Sri Lanka arrests over 230 Chinese in cybercrime raids

By:
On:
In: Asia

The foreign minister said on Tuesday ( Oct 15 ) that Sri Lankan police have detained more than 230 Chinese men who are accused of stealing money from international banks through online scams with assistance from security officials sent by Beijing. According to Vijitha Herath, authorities have seize 250 computersContinue Reading

Government to contribute US0,000 to Singapore Red Cross’ fundraising appeal for Nepal floods

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

SINGAPORE: The Singapore government did contribute&nbsp, US$ 100, 000 as grain money for&nbsp, the Singapore Red Cross ‘&nbsp, people fundraising efforts for Nepal, where the capital&nbsp, Kathmandu has been affected by severe storms. The contribution will help with humanitarian relief efforts and the immediate needs of Nepal’s affected communities, accordingContinue Reading

Debt forces Maldives to pivot back to India from China – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Maldives, known for breathtaking resorts and serene beaches, is battling an escalating debt crisis and attempting a delicate balancing act between its two largest creditors: India and China. As the island nation braced for an impending debt default, President Mohamed Muizzu’s leadership will be tested by how he steers his country through this turbulent economic and geopolitical landscape.

As of August 2024, the Maldives’ foreign currency reserves totaled $437 million, which could cover only about a month and a half of import bills. The country is projected to arrange $600-$700 million of debt service expenses in 2025 and more than $1 billion in 2026. The island nation owes China about $1.3 billion and India about $130 million.

Against this backdrop, the Maldives president met Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on October 7, in a bid to secure much-needed financial assistance, amid fears that the island nation may default on a crucial $25 million bond payment. Reuters reported that India approved a $400 million currency swap agreement, a much needed lifeline for the debt strapped country of half a million people in terms of accessing short-term liquidity.

Maldives debt troubles are related to Sukuk bonds. Sukok is a special type of financial instrument that is often referred to as an Islamic bond, which operates quite differently from conventional bonds in order to comply with Islamic principles, particularly the prohibition of interest.

Unlike traditional bonds, which are debt instruments setting out that investors have lent money in exchange for interest payments, Sukuk represents ownership in a tangible asset or a pool of assets. Investors receive returns not from interest but from the revenue generated by the asset. If Maldives default on its Sukuk debt, that will be the first such event of sovereign default for Sukuk.

Absent much needed financial rescue from the likes of India, the ramifications of Maldives missing its Sukuk payment would be devastating: it could block access to international capital markets, shake investor confidence, and tip the Maldives into deeper economic turmoil.

While the Maldives with the latest assurances of help from India may have avoided an immediate default on its Sukuk debt, the country’s broader economic troubles remain unresolved, with significant debt payments looming in the coming years.

Geopolitical rivalries, structural weaknesses

The Maldives’ economic distress is deeply intertwined with the geopolitical rivalry between two major players in the region, India and China. Over the past decade, the country has borrowed extensively from both nations, but the two offer assistance with different goals in mind.

China’s loans have largely funded infrastructure projects tied to its Belt and Road Initiative, helping Beijing expand its strategic footprint in the Indian Ocean. India, on the other hand, sees the Maldives as a critical part of its regional security and has provided financial aid to counter China’s growing influence.

President Muizzu in his ‘India Out’ T-shirt. Photo: X

Muizzu’s rise to power in 2023 was underpinned by an “India Out” campaign, aimed at reducing the Maldives’ reliance on New Delhi and drawing the country closer to Beijing.

On his way to electoral victory, Muizzu promised that, once elected, he would expel Indian soldiers who were deployed in the Maldives on humanitarian assistance engagements.

Bowing down to such political pressure, India replaced dozens of its soldiers – exchanging them with civilian experts. However, as Maldives continued its plunge towards a debt crisis, shortly after coming to power, President Muizzu’s government caved in to pragmatism and softened its stance toward India, recognizing that Maldives’ immediate survival hinges on securing financial support from both China and India.

Maldives’ real challenges lie in its unsustainable debt burden and the structural vulnerabilities that underpin its economy. The country is overwhelmingly dependent on tourism, an industry highly susceptible to global economic shocks, as evidenced by the downturn following the Covid-19 pandemic. Furthermore, Maldives imports most of its essential goods – and rising global commodity prices have compounded its financial woes, draining foreign reserves and making it even harder to service debt.

This situation places the Maldives in a precarious position between the two competing powers. India and China both have significant economic and strategic interests in the Maldives, and their financial aid comes with expectations.

For China, the Maldives is an important link in its maritime strategy, while for India, the Maldives represents a key part of its efforts to counterbalance Chinese influence in the region. As President Muizzu navigates these tricky diplomatic waters, he must find a way to secure financial support without compromising the country’s sovereignty.

As for India, there are strong incentives to take President Muizzu into its fold, given that India sustained a series of diplomatic setbacks as several pro-India governments lost power in South Asia recently.

In Sri Lanka, a marxist politician, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, became president. In Bangladesh, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, arguably the most Pro-Indian Prime Minister in Bangladesh’s history, fled to India after being forced to resign by student-led protests. In Nepal, K.P. Sharma Oli, a pro-China politician, was elected as prime minister.

Reversing any of the recent diplomatic failures in India’s backyard will be viewed as a political victory for Indian Prime Minister Modi.

The goal: long-term solutions that leave sovereignty intact

The Maldives’ economic problems are structural, and addressing them will require more than temporary currency swaps and loans. The country needs a comprehensive strategy to diversify its economy away from tourism and reduce its dependency on imports, but such changes will take time – and political will.

The Maldives’ government has proposed several measures to address the crisis, including tax reforms, budget cuts and the restructuring of state-owned enterprises. These proposals aim to improve fiscal discipline and reduce the reliance on external borrowing. Yet, implementing these reforms will be a daunting task. Austerity measures such as tax increases and public service cuts have historically triggered protests in the Maldives, and Muizzu’s government may face significant resistance to these changes.

The question of whether the Maldives will turn to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a bailout also looms large. Although the government has thus far resisted this option, citing the temporary nature of its financial difficulties, many experts believe that an IMF intervention may be inevitable if the debt crisis worsens. However, an IMF bailout would come with stringent conditions including further austerity measures that could exacerbate social unrest and hurt the economy in the short term.

Unlikely to have a long term solution ready at hand, the Maldives will continue to depend heavily on India and China for financial support. But this dependence will come at a cost as both these regional powers are likely to use their financial leverage to push for greater political influence in the country.

India may seek to use its financial assistance as a way to reassert its strategic interests in the region, while China could leverage its economic investments to secure long-term control over key infrastructure projects.

The danger of this approach is that it could undermine the Maldives’ sovereignty. While financial support from India and China may help the Maldives avoid an immediate default, it risks entangling the country in the broader geopolitical rivalry between the two powers – thus endangering its own security. The delicate balancing act necessary to handle this geopolitical quicksand will require President Muizzu to be both a shrewd diplomat and a careful economic planner, as the stakes could not be higher.

A template for other small nations to follow?

The Maldives’ debt crisis is a cautionary tale for small nations that rely heavily on foreign loans and single industries such as tourism. Without a long-term plan for economic diversification and debt restructuring, the country will remain vulnerable to financial instability and external shocks.

President Muizzu’s recent mending of ties with India in exchange for accessing capital reliefs offers only a temporary solution, as it is not a substitute for the broader reforms that are needed to stabilize the economy.

The political cost of these reforms could be significant, but the alternative – continued dependence on foreign loans and increasing debt – is far more dangerous. To prevent a deeper crisis, the Maldives will need to enact tough but necessary reforms, build its foreign reserves and explore new sectors for economic growth.

President Muizzu must know that bold actions are needed at this critical juncture of his country’s national history. It is his time to take decisive actions to secure its financial future or risk being drawn deeper into the geopolitical currents that threaten to pull it under.

In a region marked by rising competition between India and China, the Maldives’ next moves could set a precedent for how small, debt-ridden nations handle the delicate balance between economic necessity and political independence.

Continue Reading

Commentary: No one wants an Asian NATO, except Japan’s new PM Ishiba

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Cold War, which began with the US and the Soviet Union working together to defeat Nazi Germany in World War II, came about as a result of NATO’s establishment in 1949. NATO’s second secretary-general Hastings Ismay reportedly said that NATO was created to “keep the Soviet Union away, the Americans in, and the Germans down”.

As part of Washington’s isolation policy, NATO worked not just to support its member states, but also to examine the spread of communism.

Not everyone was convinced. European President Charles de Gaulle withdrawn France from NATO’s integrated military command in 1966 because he desired more freedom from the US. Emmanuel Macron, the present French president, sees a European military that is American-uniform, despite Paris ‘ return to NATO in 2009.

Many people believed that NATO’s anti-communist vision was superfluous after the end of the Cold War with the political upheavals in Eastern Europe in 1989 and the Soviet Union’s breakdown in 1991.

Strangely, NATO reinvented itself to support democracy and stability despite the presence of significant Russian threats, including military activities in the Balkans, the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa.

Despite this, many in Europe also question whether the US can be trusted to fulfill its NATO agreements, especially if Donald Trump is elected president once more after the November US election. The beach country of Japan, Japan, and the United Kingdom continue to be the most fervent supporters of NATO.

Continue Reading

Nepal floods and landslides kill at least 38 people

By:
On:
In: Asia

KATHMANDU: At least 38 people have been killed in Nepal since early on Friday ( Sep 27 ) as persistent downpours triggered more flooding and landslides, closing major roads and disrupting domestic air travel, officials said on Saturday. The dying toll may fall, they added, with another 29 individuals reportedContinue Reading

Brookfield raises .4bn for catalytic transition fund, names four new investors | FinanceAsia

By:
On:
In: Asia, Finance, South-East Asia

Brookfield Asset Management has closed $2.4 billion for its Catalytic Transition Fund (CTF), as it seeks to raise up to $5 billion for deployment towards clean energy and transition assets in emerging markets. These include funds from CDPQ, GIC, Prudential and Temasek.

CTF was previously launched at COP28 with up to $1 billion of catalytic capital provided by Alterra, the world’s largest private investment vehicle for climate finance based in the United Arab Emirates, with the purpose of mobilising investment at scale to finance a new climate economy.

Alterra’s fund commitment has been designed to receive a capped return, thereby improving risk-adjusted returns for other investors in the fund, according to a statement. 

Brookfield has committed to provide 10% of the fund’s target to align itself with investment partners and investors.

The partnership is designed to help drive clean energy investment into emerging markets, where investment needs to increase sixfold over current levels to reach the $1.6 trillion required annually by the early 2030s in line with global net zero targets.

CTF is focused on deploying capital into clean energy and transition assets in emerging markets in South and Central America, South and Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe.

In Asia, FinanceAsia understands that target markets will include Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

The fund expects to announce its initial investments later in 2024, and a traditional first close – with additional capital from Brookfield’s ongoing fundraising efforts through its extensive network of institutional investors – is expected by early 2025.

H.E Majid Al-Suwaidi, CEO of Alterra, said in a statement: “CTF demonstrates Alterra’s catalytic capital as a powerful multiplier of climate finance to the Global South. This early momentum around CTF shows strong global demand not just for climate strategies, but for opportunities to invest in climate solutions in emerging markets.”

Al-Suwaidi said: “Alterra looks forward to working with CDPQ, GIC, Prudential and Temasek and other partners who share our ambitions to redefine how the world invests in climate solutions and go beyond business-as-usual to deliver positive impact for both people and planet.”

Mark Carney, chair and head of transition investing at Brookfield Asset Management, said: “These anchor commitments from CDPQ, GIC, Prudential and Temasek demonstrate significant momentum for the CTF.”

Carney added: “The support from the world’s most sophisticated investors for the CTF strategy underscores the unique combination of the major commercial opportunity and the climate imperative. We look forward to working with other like-minded investment partners to accelerate the transition in these critical and vastly underserved markets.”

Marc-André Blanchard, executive vice-president and head of CDPQ global and global head of sustainability, said: “Globally, around $6.5 trillion will be needed yearly for the energy transition over the next 15 years. It’s a staggering figure, and various partnerships and investments are necessary to accelerate the path forward.”

Don Guo, chief investment officer, Prudential, said: “We believe there is an opportunity to drive scalable positive change in emerging markets through investing in the climate transition. Prudential’s investment in Brookfield’s CTF underscores our belief that responsible investment is not only an environmental imperative but also a significant opportunity for growth in emerging markets.”


¬ Haymarket Media Limited. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Resurgent Quad puts China on a new defensive edge – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

For the fifth Quad Leaders ‘ Summit, US President Joe Biden hosted for the last moment his peers from Japan, Australia, and India in Manila this year.

The US head focused on institutionalizing participation and the alleged threats posed by China in remarks made by Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio, and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his home state of Delaware.

” China continues to behave violently, testing us all across the place, and it’s true in the South China Sea, the East China Sea, South China, South Asia and the Taiwan Straits”, Biden told his brother Quad officials. &nbsp,

” At least from our perspective, we believe Xi Jinping is looking to focus on domestic economic problems and minimize the volatility in China diplomatic ties, and he’s also looking to buy himself some diplomatic place, in my view, to forcefully pursue China’s attention”, Biden said during the high-level meet in a hot-mic time.

Although more measured in their joint statement, the four strong political leaders announced a series of innovative initiatives with a growing emphasis on quality system growth, security, semiconductors and, most crucially, coastal security.

In particular, they announced the launch of mutual coast guard procedures for 2025 regardless of who wins the White House following the November election, and made a promise to improve military logistics cooperation by expanding the previous Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness.

Beijing was quick to criticize and even denounce aspects of the meeting, despite Quad leaders ‘ attempts to portray the event as a more comprehensive and constructive gathering. The grouping was too “loose” and informal to have any impact on the global and regional balance of power, according to the state-backed Global Times.

Chinese experts who claimed the Quad was inciting “bloc confrontation” and adopting a Cold War-style mindset at the expense of regional security in Asia were also featured in the same nationalist newspaper.

In a press conference earlier this year, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian was reported as accusing the four partner nations of “scaremongering, inciting antagonism and confrontation, and holding back other countries’ development”.

China’s growing interest in maritime security and its increasingly harsh criticism of the Asian power’s actions in neighboring waters seem to have been particularly piqued by Quad’s growing focus on maritime security.

The leaders of the US, Japan, Australia, and India” serious concern about the situation in the East and South China Seas,” according to a thinly veiled criticism of Beijing.

The risky “new normal” of constant clashes and near-clashes between Manila and Beijing in the South China Sea in recent months raises concerns for the US and its allies especially.

India has become more active in regional maritime disputes by publicly supporting and arming the Philippines with advanced weapons, including its potent supersonic BrahMos missiles, despite not being a claimant state or a US ally.

Indian officials have occasionally used the phrase” West Philippine Sea” to describe Manila’s claims in the disputed South China Sea waters.

In the East China Sea, Japan is directly involved in maritime disputes with China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. In addition to expanding its security cooperation with Manila, Tokyo recently signed a Reciprocal Access Agreement (RAA ), which places a greater emphasis on emergencies in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.

It has close security cooperation with both Japan and the Philippines under a Status of Forces Agreement and is an Australian ally of the US. In recent quadrilateral naval patrols with the Philippines and the US in the South China Sea, both Japan and Australia have participated.

However, Washington, which has a Mutual Defense Treaty ( MDT ) with the Philippines and is concerned about the escalated situation, which many fear could soon put to the test against China.

The US Indo-Pacific Command ( INDOPACOM) provided, in a first, direct assistance in joint resupply missions to hotly disputed features like the Second Thomas Shoal, which is a de facto Philippine military base, following numerous near-clashes and direct collisions between Chinese and Filipino maritime forces in recent months.

The Philippines and China were successful in reducing tensions over the Second Thomas and Sabina shoals following several rounds of bilateral negotiations, including the recently concluded Bilateral Consultation Mechanism high-level meeting in Beijing.

Upon closer examination, however, there is every indication that the South China Sea disputes have entered an unstable and dangerous “new normal”.

Tensions have resumed over the Second Thomas Shoal in recent days following weeks of relative calm and no significant incidents involving Chinese and Philippine maritime forces.

According to Philippine authorities, between September 17-23, China deployed as many as 251 vessels, representing a new milestone in China’s “gray zone” swarming tactics in the disputed maritime area.

” This time, this is the biggest increase we’ve seen”, Rear Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad, the Philippine Navy spokesperson for the South China Sea, told reporters this week.

According to him, “if we notice, the total number of maritime militia vessels in the entire South China Sea could be between 350 and 400.” He also warned of a dangerous increase in China’s presence across disputed waters at the expense of smaller claimant states.

China has largely adhered to its non-lethal gray zone tactics, including frequent ramming and water cannoning of smaller Philippine vessels. Under the mutual defense treaty between the two countries, any “armed attack” against Philippine troops or vessels would automatically lead to American military intervention.

China has, however, successfully used its enormous fleet, which is currently the largest on earth, to determine the speed and coordinates of maritime conflict across the South China Sea.

From Beijing’s perspective, its true rivals are not smaller claimant states such as the Philippines, which has a modernizing yet still limited fleet of warships, but rather the US and the broader Quad.

China believes it is facing nothing less than a Washington-orchestrated” containment” strategy in tandem with a network of regional treaty allies and strategic partners, most notably India.

For Chinese analysts, the Quad is playing a “detrimental role of fomenting confrontation and inciting geopolitical tensions in]the ] Asia-Pacific”.

Ding Duo, deputy director of the Institute of Maritime Law and Policy at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, stated to the Global Times that “targeting China” is done at a strategic level as well as tactical arrangements and specific plans.

According to Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, the Quad is” US-led and serves as a strategic tool in its competition with China at both regional and global levels.”

Even senior Chinese officials are starting to criticize the Quad with similarly harsh words, reflecting growing concerns in Beijing over the formation of a new Cold War with the West.

” 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”, underscoring Beijing’s threat perceptions towards the quadrilateral grouping.

“]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”, Chinese spokesperson Lin said at a press conference earlier this year. China “firmly opposes the bloc confrontation they incite in the name of “anti-coercion,” and the enforcing of house rules in the name of maintaining order.

Follow Richard Javad Heydarian on X at @Richeydarian

Continue Reading