ASEAN AS SOUTHEAST ASIA REGIONAL GROUPING AT STRATEGIC CROSSROADS ON CHINA--ASSERT OR LOSE CENTRALITY

ASEAN as a regional organization of Southeast Nations stands in2023 at strategic crossroads wherein its dithering and dichotomous stands on 'China Threat' threatens "ASEAN Centrality" in Indo Pacific Security geopolitical dynamics and so also its own vibrancy as a regional economic grouping with security underpinnings.

Geopolitically, wherein IndoPacific Region has already acquired bipolar overtones, ASEAN cannot pretend that it should not be forced to take sides in the ongoing power tussle between a belligerent China and US-led 'Coalition of Democracies.

China under President Xi Jinping on switching to muscular 'Hard Power' approaches on its peripheries targeted ASEAN Nations Vietnam and Philippines as its targets for aggression and military occupation of Vietnamese and Filipino islands in South China Sea.

China's aggression against ASEAN member nations instead of united outright condemnation by ASEAN as the regional grouping was muted and impassive emboldening China to continue its aggressive brinkmanship in South China Sea where in addition to Vietnam and Philippines, the Muslim nations of ASEAN, namely, Indonesia and Malaysia whose littorals in South China Sea are now being threatened by Chinese expanding c claims in South China Sea.

Can Indonesia and Malaysia now similarly threatened by China not change their ambiguous policies on China Threat, and as major Nations of ASEAN take a 'United ASEAN Stand' to oppose Chia's depredations in South China Sea?

China stood emboldened by lack of unity within ASEAN in opposing China and exploited the divisions. Major Muslim ASEAN Nations, Indonesia and Malaysia chose to 'sit on the fence' till recently when China impinged on their sovereignty by extending China's arbitrary 'Nine Dash Line' in the South China Sea.

China brazenly defied the Hague Tribunal Award in favor of Philippines declaring Chinese claims on South China Sea as invalid. China also adopted dilatory tactics in agreeing to a common Code of Conduct in South China Sea pursued by ASEAN Nations to prevent conflict.

ASEAN Nations despite notable geopolitical and strategic changes in Western Pacific like US-led QUAD and AUKUS and reinforcing of bilateral security cooperation of countries opposed to unbridled China Threat manifestations have still chosen to remain impassive on China.

Persistently analyzed in strategic community is that ASEAN Nations do not want to be forced to take sides in the inevitability of a looming US-China conflict.

ASEAN Nations do not seem to have come out with any strong condemnations of China's recent military "bullying" of the Philippines in South China Sea. 

China is smarting under Philippines intensified security relationships with the United States and India. India recently contracted to supply three batteries of its BEAHMOS Cruise Missiles to Philippines.

ASEAN as a Southeast Asia Regional Grouping with implicit regional security underpinnings is at strategic crossroads on China. The moot question that arises is whether ASEAN Nations can put up a 'United Front' against China's aggression selectively applied against individual ASEAN Nations.

In Conclusion, simple language, the strategic choice facing ASEAN in 2023 as a regional grouping is: "ASSERT ON CHINA THREAT or LOSE ASEAN'S CENTRALTY" in global geopolitics, Indo Pacific security dynamics and its internal cohesion as a Southeast Asia Regional Grouping.

UNITED STATES 2023 IMPERATIVES TO DISPENSE WITH "STRTEGIC AMBIGUITY" ON TAIWAN'S FORCEFUL ANNEXTAION BY COMMUNIST CHINA

The Indo Pacific security environment in 2023 stands unprecedently threatened by the persistent propensity of Chinese President Xi Jinping to generate strategic turbulence emanating from the exponential rise in China's military arsenal. 

President Xi's propensity for provocative armed conflicts on China's peripheries commenced with establishing 'Full Spectrum Dominance' over South China Sea during 2013-2022 and thereafter undisguised threats of 'Military Reunification of Taiwan with Mainland'.

The year 2023 has been marked with high-voltage political and military coercion by Xi's China spurred by Russia's invasion of Ukraine notwithstanding United States implicit policy of military strengthening of Taiwan's capacity to defend itself against Communist Chinese aggression.

Chinese President Xi's brazen threats of military annexation of Taiwan stem from the "Strategic Ambiguity" policies on Taiwan that United States adopted ever since President Nixon under misguided prodding of his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who "Mortgaged US Security Interests to China" hoping to de-link China from Former Soviet Union.

United States such impulses resulted in Taiwan Relations Act (April 1979) whose end result was United States breaking of formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan and scrapping the 25-year-old US-Taiwan Mutual Defense Treaty which was a US Shield for Taiwan against Communist China thus far.

Fast forward to 2023, despite China's open 'Taiwan Invasion Threats' the United States has not displayed any indicators in adopting "Dissuasion and Compellance" strategies to impose deterrence on China's aggressive impulses on Taiwan.

United States problem in this direction lies on American reluctance to dispense with its 'Strategic Ambiguity' on Taiwan. 

In 2023, the looming China Threat in Indo Pacific palpably felt from South Korea to India and more intensely focused on Taiwan springs strategic imperatives for United States to manifest "Strategic Clarity" in terms of its firm intentions to militarily intervene in event of Communist China's military invasion of Taiwan.

US President Biden and Secretary of State Blinken have recently made the right noises in this direction, but these are not enough to deter China and China's 21st Century Emperor.

The US self-imposed restraints in Taiwan Relations Act have outlived their strategic utility. These restraints are no longer valid as China has not reciprocated US hopes of Cross-Strait's security and stability of Taiwan's security.

On the contrary, China stands further emboldened by these self-imposed US restraints shackles.  

The United States needs three forceful steps in this direction, namely, (1) Renounce US "One China Policy; (2) Establish Full Diplomatic Relations with Taiwan (3) Sign a US-Taiwan Mutual Security Treaty forthwith.

Concluding, the above steps will not only deter China from Taiwan's Military Invasion but also galvanize Indo Pacific Nations more solidly to back US-led Indo Pacific Security Template "assured" of United States determination to checkmate the all-encompassing China Theat.

"Strategic Ambiguity" is a weapon of less powerful Nations as a policy ploy and therefore does not behoove the United States as the only globally powerful Nation. 

PAKISTAN'S CLIFFHANGER FRAGILITY IMPACTS INDO PACIFIC SECURITY CHIEFLY BECAUSE OF UNITED STATES LINGERING PAKISTAN-CENTRIC OBSESSION

Pakistan's 'Cliffhanger Fragility' precariously hanging on the edge of complete meltdown impacts Indo Pacific security not only by virtue of its location on Western Flanks of Indo Pacific Security Template and India (QUAD'S Pivotal Partner), but moreso because of United States' lingering Pakistan-centric strategic obsession.

Pakistan's dubious strategic company of PRIC--Pakistan-Russia-Iran-China Quartet and the dangers posed by this Quartet were highlighted in my post of February 2023.

PRIC Nations are markedly adversarial to United States and the danger posed by them is that all of them possess Nuclear Weapons Arsenals. Contrastingly, within QUAD, only United States and India possess nuclear weapons.

The United States still mistakenly. believes that Pakistan can be retrieved to within the American strategic orbit. A 'Strategic Reality Check' by US policy planners would indicate that it is delusionary to think so.

 Pointed out in my earlier analyses was the fact that with China's 'Colonial Grip' over Pakistan, no bandwidth exists for Pakistan to escape China's vice-like grip, even if Pakistan wants to wriggle out of it.

China, however, is pragmatic, in that if Pakistan tumbles down the cliff into a 'complete meltdown' , China analytically will not save Pakistan from a 'Meltdown Disaster'.

The United States despite machinations of President Nixon and his Secretary of State Kissinger could not prevent Pakistan's "fragmentation" in 1971 when United States was all-powerful, and Pakistan was a trusted US ally. 

In 2023, the geopolitical and geostrategic landscape in Southwest Asia is disconcerting for the United States as follow-up events in wake of ongoing Israel-Hamas War in Gaza suggest.

Pakistan and its fellow-PRIC nations perceptively view United States as a 'Declining Power' under adversarial siege by China's military and economic power. 

PRIC nations are against Israel and are seconding Iran's proxy war in the Middle East through its armed militias, Hezbollah and Hamas.

Pakistan in 2023 as China's 'Frontline State' and a strategic vassal of China perceives that China's countervailing power combined with Iran and Russia makes it less vulnerable to any United States coercive policies.

Pakistan's value to PRIC is that today it is the only Islamic Nation with Nuclear Weapons and that Pakistan's "disruptive quotient" to US security interest is high.

In 2023, with Pakistan decidedly out of US Strategic Orbit, with its 'State Meltdown' an overhanging possibility, what chances does United States has in preventing a "Second Fragmentation" of Pakistan?

Should the United States still persist in delusionary policies of retrieving Pakistan from its terminal decline, the United States could face the irreparable loss from its strategic fold of its most "Pivotal Partner" India in IndoPacific Security Template.

Chia and Pakistan figure as 'Enemy States' in Indian threat perceptions and overwhelmingly in eyes of Indian public opinion. 

In today's age of 'Perceptional Wars' can United States afford risking Indian public opinion with policies suggestive of   "Dancing with the Wolves" with 'softening-up' on the "China Threat" and bolstering up India's most inveterate enemy---Pakistan?

INDIA-ANUSTRALIA 2+2 MINISTERIAL DIALOGUE NOVEMBER 2023 AT NEW DELHI ADDS SALIENCE TO COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

 The Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between India and Australia acquires enhanced salience in November 2023 when analyzed contextually against the failed November outcomes of US-China APEC Sideline Summit between Presidents Biden and Xi Jinping and visit of Australian PM Albanese to China.

Chinese President refused to oblige both United States and Australia on their "expected deliverables" in terms of Indo Pacific Security.

In the last five years strategic, military and economic cooperation between India and Australia has intensified considerably impelled by the increasing belligerence of China in disrupting Indo Pacific security.

China's ever-increasing belligerence in Indo Pacific seriously impacts the legitimate security interests of both India and Australia in the region.

Geopolitically, India and Australia besides their comprehensive bilateral security linkages are intertwined in the multilateral QUAD Security Initiative and jointly cooperating with United States and Japan in capacity-building of Southeast Asia nations like the Philippines to withstand the predatory China Threat.

QUAD Nations are committed to maintain a "Free and Open Indo Pacific both in maritime domains and Overflights" and maintaining stability in the Indo Pacific region.

Geoeconomically, India and Australia to cement their Comprehensive Strategic Partnership have signed a Free Trade Agreement which will take much of the slack of China restricting Australian imports. This FTA gives duty-free access to each other's markets and is a landmark agreement. 

Geo strategically, the enhanced military exchanges between India and Australia need to be viewed in the context of the respective geostrategic weight in Indo Pacific security.

India dominates the India Ocean and with legitimate security interests in Western Pacific. Australia dominates the Southern Pacific and the Eastern Segment of the Indian Ocean. Like India, Australia has legitimate security interests in Western Pacific and Southeast Asia.

Needless to add that the palpable China Threat to India and Australia in their contiguous IndoPacific regions provides strategic convergences for both these Major Indo Pacific nations to forge a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership to position an 'Existential Counterweight' to the China Threat, even if not so articulated officially.

The Inda-Australia 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue held in November 2023 ended on optimistic notes indicated by the official statements of both the Indian Ministers and the Australian Ministers,

India was represented by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and Foreign Minister Dr S Jaishankar, Australia was represented by Deputy PM an Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong.

India and Australia have already signed a Logistics Memorandum of Understanding granting access to each other's logistics facilities to their Navies and Air Forces. Joint military exercises have increased.

A defence Science & Technology Agreement also exists which promotes cooperation in defence technologies with each other.

Notably a Civil Nuclear Agreement permits Australian mining companies to export Uranium to India.

Analytically, it can be assumed that when such proximate Strategic Partnerships are forged and mature, then close cooperation between Intelligence Agencies and intelligence-sharing is a natural outcome. This would be truer in case of intelligence on China.

Superimposed over these are a host of Ministerial Dialogues, consultative mechanisms and increasing people to people contacts. It is reported that the Indian expatriate population in Australia is about a million now.

Contextually therefore, terms of future perspectives, it can be safely asserted that the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between India and Australia is destined to intensify and deepen with evolving shared perspectives on Indo Pacific security and as Australian and American political and economic outreaches to China are rebuffed. 

Independent of the 'China Factor' there is much that unites India and Australia in terms of shared military history, shared values and democratic institutions and their respective geostrategic and geoeconomic weight.

APEC 2023 SIDELINE SUMMIT OF AMERICAN & CHINESE PRESIDENTS YIELDS N GAME-CAHNGERS ON CONFLICTUAL ISUES

Expectedly, the APEX 2023 Sideline Summit at San Francisco on November 15, between US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping was a tepid Apex Meet, despite nearly a year-long preparatory effort by US Cabinet -level officials.

Noticeably, Chinese President was vocal on Plaet Earth being big enough for both United States and China as Global Powers to coexist and that China was ready to partner with United States.

The above allusion seems to echo what then US President Obama made of a US-China 'Global Dyad', which was globally rejected.

That no major breakthroughs emerged at the Summit on major conflictual issues, reflects the extreme 'Strategic Distrust' that continues to pervade US-China relations.

If the measure of political successes of such Sideline Summits at U-China apex level can only be measured by 'small niblings' then restoration of US-China military ties, Drugs Control cooperation, dialogue on Artificial Intelligence and increase in aviation flights were the only achievement.

Taiwan continues to divide United States and China more intensely as China has intensified military and political coercion. China did not hold out any guarantees that United States desired to lower the brinkmanship.

Some had expected that on South China Sea, some Maritime Control format may emerge. It has not been so.

On the major global crisis in November2023, the Israel-Hamas War in Gaza, the United States asked China to prevail over Iran to restrain both Hamas and Hezbollah, both Iran's proxy armed militias.

Similarly, North Korea issue which is major concern for US Allies, Japan and South Korea, no observations were made by the Chinese President at the Summit.

Surprisingly, no reports have emanated whether Russian Invasion of Ukraine, now nearly two years old, was discussed by the two Presidents. Though, the United States has been broaching with China that it was China that is continuing the lifelines for Russian Invasion of Ukraine.

The United Staes has not obliged China with any removal of high-technology restrictions which Chinese President did mention during the Summit.

Therefore, the only major takeaway from this Summit can be analyzed as 'Risk Reduction' which would emanate from direct military-to-military contacts and at apex level in terms of crisis.

Concluding, even 'Risk Reduction' having been achieved is debatable, as China by available indicators is in no mood to oblige President Biden in a presidential election year. 

Similarly, US President Biden, with an intensifying 'Hard Line' sentiment against China prevailing in United States across the entire political spectrum, could only indulge in what can best be termed as 'China Management'. No China demanded concessions conceded.