UNITED STATES ABANDONS "WESTERN OUTPOST" OF INDO PACIFIC SECURITY IN MID-AUGUST 2021

 The United States as the prime mover of Indo Pacific Security and The QUAD abandoned Afghanistan on August 15 2020 for the second time in over two decades and thereby abandoning the "Western Oupost" of Indo Pacific Security, so critical as a 'Strategic Pressure Point' against China's restive Western Regions.

The significance of Afghanistan for Indo Pacific Security was analysed by me in my Blogpost of June28 2020 titled "Afghanistan as Indo Pacific Security "Wetsern Outpost".

In my writings elsewhere, I have termed American abandonment of Afghanistan on August 15 2020 as United States "Munich Moment"--- capitualting to geopolitical pressures of the China-Pakistan-Russia Trilateral ---all three having strong convergences to generate a US-Exit from Afghanistan.

Afghanistan with US Military Forces embedded in this vital geostrategic Nation offered significant geopolitical and strategic advatages both to United States national security and also to Indo Pacific Security.

In relation to the China Threat which has been the catalyst for coalescing of Major Powers  to evolve groupings like The QUAD , Afghanistan provided a strong and potent "Strategic Prssure Point" against China's restive and vulnerable Western Regions.

Afghanistan in safe military protection of the United States offered a 'Firm Base' for the United States to influence events in Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia.

The United States by abandoning Afghanistan to the China-Pakistan-Russia Trilateral has thereby lost strong leverages against China mainly and so also Russia.  The UnitedStates also thereby loses leverages against Pakistan in relation to Pakistan once again facilitating creation of the Islamic Hub of Global Terrorism in Afghan Taliban rule Afghanistan.

At this moment while Aghanistan stands taken over by the Afgha Taliban by US-default for the second time, reports and visuals emanating from Afghanistan portend that Afghanistan is headed for another Civil War.

Civil War once again breaking out in Afghanistan may in its wake prompt the United States for no better alternative than for a third US Military Intervention.

Was it geopolitically and strategically wise therefore for "US Military Abandonment of Afghanistan 2.0" ?

SOUTH KOREA AS A WESTERN PACIFIC NATION CAN ILL-AFFORD TO BE ON WRONG SIDE OF INDO PACIFIC SECURITY 2021

 Prevailing geopolitical realities in Western Pacific do not equip South Korea to stand on wrong side of history of Indo Pacific Security 2021 given its historical record of a 'Front Line State' against Communist China's expansionist designs right since Korean War of 1950s and Communist China currently again displaying the same propensity with greater intensity.

Wsetern Pacific geopolitical environment in 2021 as a crucial sub-text of overall Indo Pacific Security construct  currently presents a disturbing picture of Communist China establishing 'Full Spectrum dominance over South China Sea maritime expanse and air-space above it.

Needless to state that South China Sea is as vital for South Korea as it is vital for Japan in terms of sustaining the economies of both these Western Pacific 'economic power houses' of the Free World. The very survival of Japan and South Korea as Emerging Powers is dependeant on a 'Free & Open Indo Pacific' .

Japan is fully conscious and for decades has taken cognizance of the China Threat to Western Pacific so arising. Japan not only continues to be an enduring Ally since 1945 of the United States configured security architecture for the region in bilateral terms but also in multilateral terms as evident from its pivotal role in the QUAD comprising United States, Japan, India and Australia.

South Korea while equally continuing bilaterally as a US Ally in 2021, however, shirks or fights shy from any United States security initiatives for a multilateral security framework for Western Pacific comprising United States, Japan and South Korea.

South Korea notably gets inhibited in this direction for only one reason and that is because of Japan against which South Korea still bears a grudge of 'historical wrongs' of Japanese colonial role over South Korea from 1910-45 and allegations of use of South Korean 'comfort women' during Second World War.

Historically, by the same token, how has South Korea given a geopolitical go-by to Communist China which brutally overun South Korea in 1950 all the way to Pusan at the Southern tip of the Korean Peninsula.

Yet in the last decade or so South Korea's political leaders were cosying upto Communist China lured by Beijing's inducements of South Korean access to the vast Chinese market.

South Korea was recsued from a certain ChineseCommunist rule if United States had not made a massive and decisivemilitary intervention on the Korean Penisula with Japan unreservedly providing the military 'Firm Base' for US Armed Forces deployed to rescue South Korea.

Having been Military, Naval & AirAttache accredited to South Korea while posted in Tojyo, Japan and having had the privilege of witnesing the economic and military resurgence of South Korea in early 1980s and first hand interaction with South Korean Armed Forces including successive US-ROK TEAM SPIRIT Exercises then conducted on massive scale, it becomes unfathomable for me to witness South Korea riding in 'two geopolitcal boats'. Can South Korea strategically afford it in 2021 especially ?

To put it bluntly as an ardent well-wisher of both South Korea and Japan my blunt question to South Korean political leaders and policy establishment is that does South Korea really feel assured that in the event of Communist China blocking South China Sea to strangle Japan and prompt US Militaryy exit from Western Pacific. would Communist China makean honourable exception for South Korea in that event?

Therein lies the answer for South Korea to reset its policies on Communist China. South Korea needs to face the stark reality that it is Communist China that has aided North Korea to equip itself with Nuclear Weapons and delivery-means of IR BallisticMissiles endangering not only South Korean security but also security of the Indo Pacific as a region.

Before rounding off on the subject no one better than South Korea's first Militaryy ruler can be quoted . General Park who realised this truism fully and opted for masive Japanese economic investmens for South Korea's economic reconsruction much against domestic opposition with perceived wrongs against Japan still afresh. 

South Korea's economic resurgence took place with Japnese investments and US security umbrella---- is a historical fact that  South Korea can ill afford.

In the unfolding geopolitical threatening scenarios scripted by Communist China evident in 2021, South Korea can ill-afford to be on the wrong side of history, It must stand unitedly tall with United Sttes and Japan aginst the China Threat. 

The future of Wesyern Pacific security against the China Threat lies intertwined in united responses by UnitedStates, Japan and notably South Korea

TAIWAN'S AS INDEPENDENT NATION AN OVERIDING IMPERATIVE FOR INDO PACIFIC SECURITY

Indo Pacific Security in 2021 geopolitical context and perspectives likely to unfold in decades beyond dictate that it is an inescapable imperative for United States and its QUAD strategic partners to ensure that Taiwan continues as an independent Nation.

Taiwan's independence was compromised by the Nixon Adminstration in early 1970s under influence of his National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger.

 In a political outreach smacking of abject appeasement of Communist China to normalise relations with the United States the Nixon Adminstration conceded China's demand that United States make a policy declaration of "One China Two Systems".

Implicitly, the United States had conceded that China's sovereignty extended to Taiwan though Taiwan had a different political system.

In 2021, Communist China is not the Communist China of 1972 which was determined to play the China Card with the United States in order to square off against the Former USSR with which it had adversarial relations.

Despite US Adminstrations after President Nixon adhered to 'One China Policy' repetitively even after  Communist Chinese succeeding Beijing Regimes switched to adoption of 'Hard Power' strategies directed at undermining US National Security interests in Indo Pacific and those of US Alies and strategic partners.

Objectively theefore, with Communist China ceasing to be a 'Responsible Stakeholder' in Indo Pacific Security and global security , a strong case exists for United States to dispense with the premises that prompted it to give-in to Communist China's demands on Taiwan's status.

In 2021, Communist China has emerged as a "Serious & Potent Threat" to Indo Pacific Security and intent on imposing a hegemonistic 'Chinese Order' over Indo Pacific Region going by its demonstrated aggressive brinkmanship of the last decade.

The United States now has to urgently repudiate its 1972 policy declaration and assert that "Taiwan ia an Independent Nation" and that Taiwan's independence will be secured by international guarantees.

Major Powers of Indo Pacific seem to be already moving in this direction as evidenced by the recent Taiwan-Japan Dialogue.

Taiwan always figured in US military calculations as United States "Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier" in the Western Pacific. This truism is even far more significant in 2021 when China is provokingly using military coercion and intimidation by sizeable threatening intrusions in Taiwanese airspace.

Should China miscalculate United States determination on Taiwan and Taiwan is taken over by Chinese military intervention then the United States might as well exit from the Western Pacific.

United States making a military exit from Western Pacific consequent to China's take over of Taiwan would mark the final nail in the coffin of a 'Decline of United States as a Global Power'.

Would the Major Powers of the Indo Pacific and Nations partnering them countenance the eventuality of a United States exit from the Western Pacificand Indo Pacific as a whole?

Asian capitals when faced with a stark choice of supporting United States moves to assert 'Taiwan as an Independent Nation' or the prsospects of a China Hegemonistic Order' in Indo Pacific would undoubtedly support the United States.

China's retaliations in response to the Free World supporting Taiwan'sindependence by military intervention will have to be resolutely met in the manner that the US&Allies militarily confronted Hitler's Germany after 1939.

 

JAPAN'S MULTI-PRONGED STRATEGY TO NEUTRALISE 'CHINA THREAT' TO INDO PACIFIC SECURITY

Japan stands out uniquely as the only Asian Nation which boldly faced the 'Soviet Threat'   to Asia Pacific security' alongside  the United States during the 20th Century Cold War. Japan is once again seen now boldly facing the "China Threat" alongside the United States in the evolving 21st Century Cold War.

For Japan, the 21st Century Cold War "China Threat" unlike the 20th Century Cold War is far more threatening to Japan's overall security , more lethal and explosive. 

 Not only Japanese waters and airspace are offensivly intruded into by China but Japan's life-lines of SLOCs through South China Sea are being threatened by China.

China under President Xi Jinping is displaying enhanced propensity to resort to military  force to enforce its misperceived writs.Chinese military brinkmanship is glaringly visible against Vietnam and Philippines in South China Sea and military intervention threats against Taiwan. 

Testimony to China's aggressi impulses range from India's Himalayan Borders with China Occupied Tibet to Japanese Senkaku Islands. 

Asia Pacific Security of the 20th Century stands replaced by a far wider construct of Indo Pacific Security in 21st Century--- a canvas that encompasses both the PacificOcean and the Indian Ocean and the Nations that lay astride these littorals.

Unlike the Soviet Threat in which Japan was drawn-in because of the ideological tussle and power-play between Russia and the United States, the "China Threat" is radically different.

The "China Threat" that Japan is facing today incorporates both the China-Japan territorial disputes and so also China's bid to oust US Forward Militray Presence in the Western Pacific, basically Japan, to establish its 'Full Spectrum Dominance' over the entire Western Pacific.

Japan's 'National Survival' depends not only on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Japan but also that the Region remans a "Free & Open Indo Pacific" not vulnerable to Chinese aggression,and Chinese political and military coercion..

Japan unlike the UnitedStates was even more alive to the "China Threat" and had started improving its security postures virtually from the turn of the Millenium----gradually and imperceptibly to begin with-----but markedly and unapologetically visible in 2021.

Japan's multi-pronged strategy to boldly face  the 'China Threat" stated above perceptionally incorporates the following thrust-lines (1) Strengthen and Reinforce its US-Japan Mutual Security links and mechanisms (2) Participate actively in all dimensions of US Security Architecture for Western Pacific (3) Reinforce and Expand US-led Security Template for Overall Indo Pacific Security (4) Military Capacity-buildup of Nations like Vietnam and the Philippines whose islands pssessions in South China Sea have been forcibly occupied by China (5) Defence build-up and enhancement of Japan's self-relaint defence and military deterrence capabilities.

Reflective of the above is evidenced by Japan's pivotal role in US-led QUAD, Strategic Partnerships with India and Australia, Defence ties with NATO and Major European Nations, and Japanese Navy presence  in the Gulf of Aden region.

In terms of Japanese deterrence there appears a greater effort by Japan for security in domains of Space, Cyberspace and Electronic Warfare---all the domains in which China is attempting supremacy.

Japanese military hardware emanating from Japan'sown advanced indigenous production capabilities of advanced fighter aircraft, helicopter assault ships capable of being converted to aircraft carriers with VSTOL Fighter aircraft , naval ships etc. also stand supplemented by adavanced US military systems.

Notably, under the last Japanese PM Shino Abe Japan took a significant turn away from the fetters of its Peace Constitution to participate pro-actively in wider military participation in distant areas.

Significantly, the latest "Defense of Japan" White Paper 2021 Document, much to the chagrin of China, asserts that Taiwan's security and stability is a a Japanese security concern.

Dramatically, in the fields of Japan's security policies and outlook there is a 'New Spirit' reflected on the 2021 Ink-Sketch on the Document's Cover----- "The Samurai has Risen"

 

CHINA-PAKISTAN AXIS PROPOSES A "QUINTET" OF SINO-ISLAMIC NATIONS TO COUNTER US-LED "QUAD"

The China -Pakistan Axis is seemingly involved in a proposal, reflective of Samuel Huntington's ;Clash of Civilisations' thesis of a likely Sino- Islamic Strategic Coalition to counter the dominance of the Western Civilsation in global affairs.

The China-Pakistan Axis proposed"QUINTET' Strategic Coalition is to counterbalance the US-led "QUAD" Strategic Initiative comprising United States, Japan, Australia and India taking concrete shape to manage the rising China Threat in the Indo Pacific Region.

The China-led QUINTET in its ultimate form envisages a coalition of China, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan and Turkey to counter-balace the QUAD. This ultimate coalition was initially to be formed by a Counter-Quad of China, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. Turkey for reasons uknown is being considered as a final addittion  to the Counter-Quad to form the QUINTET.

The QUINTET proposal was first aired by Pakistan's note economist Shahid Javid Burki in his Opinion Column in Pakistan's English newspaper The Express Tribune on  July 12 2021 titled 'Afghanistan :a possible component of counter-quad or a quintet". Shahid Javid Burki has been eralier Pakistan's Finance Minister and also has had a stint as Vice Preident of the World Bank in Washington.

Given Burki's standing, and with his present writing on geopolitical perspectives overtaking his geoeconomic writings forte', leads one to believe that the QUINTET kite-flying, if it is indeed kite-flying, could have only emerged with some prodding by the Pakistani Establishment and also some interaction with China.

Burki's last paragraph is notable. He asserts that "The US Quad was to constrain China and bind China; the China-led Quad could relaese Chinese energies to the world to the West. Including Turkey in the configuration would result in the proposed counter-quadto become a QUINTET".

Analytically, a Chinese riposte to the QUAD was expected and so also its broad contours, as spelt out above. However, the crucial determinant of the longevity of the initial Counter Quad and its later  evolution as QUINTET is debatable.

Let us first look at the contemporary impulses which have nudged China and Pakistan in the direction of forming the Counter Quad and its later end-version of the QUINTET.

Geopolitically, in 2021, China and Pakistan stand virtually isolated diplomatically. China with its propensity for unprovoked aggression from Indian Hi,alayas to South China Sea is being labelled as "Disruptive State" undermining Indo Pacific security.

Pakistan is being viewed and type-casted as a Chinese satellite stae on lines of North Korea bereft of  long-standingUS support.  Pakistan now has China as its policy helmsman.

Pakistan and China too with the xeit of US Forces from Afghanistan fear addittional strategic challenges to the China-Pakistan  CPEC which is the flgship project of Cnina in Pakistan besides CPEC being the most vital component of China's grandiose global Belt & Road Blueprint.

At first glance the China-led Counter Quad or its end-version of the QUINTET composition suggets that in terms of Naval Balance against the US-led QUAD the Chinese-led Counter Quad or QUINTET will be inadeqaute in countering QUAD's naval operations potency both in Pacific Ocean and in Indian Ocean.

In terms of geographical landspread the QUINTET looks impressive with potential of great geopolitical counterweight against yhe United States and the QUAD,.

But the comparison of the strategic effectiveness of a China-led QUINTET ends when its longevity is measured on thescale of its enduringcaolition-cohesion envisgaed by China-Pakistan Axis?

China and Pakistan are the only predictable entities in the proposed QUINTET in that both these nations are inextricably bound together by their adversarial pstures against a rising India.

Iran may have signed a 25 year Comprehensive Strategic Parnership with China but this has to be viewed as more of a tactical ploy to gain leverages in its dealing with United States. The longevuty of China-Iran Strategic Partnership is open to question.

Afghaistan is in turmoil and Pakistan Army can be expected to prolong this turmoil  until it gets full control of Afghanistan's decision-making setup. Even in that eventuality, Afghanistan is likely to be in turmoil challenging Pakistan's overlordship.

Turkey despite its seemingly strong policy stances against the United States has till date showed no inclination to "Renounce" its membership of US-led NATO Military Alliance.

What then emerges to the fore is that neither in terms of its geopolitical configurations nor its longevity a China-led Counter Quad or QUINTET can seriously imbalance the US-led QUAD. The QUAD Security Initaitive is likely to draw-in more Nations in the Coalition.

Concluding, it needs to be highlighted that sheer  commonality of present Islamic Nations adversarial stances against the United States cannot provide the glue for an effective China-led Counter Quad or QUINTET to emerge as an effective strategic counterweight to the QUAD.