Reimagining Australia's Regional Security for the Indo-Pacific Century
Introduction to the Indo-Pacific Concept
The Indo-Pacific concept has become a defining theme in Australian foreign and security policy from 2016 to 2020.
It replaced the term 'Asia Pacific' in the geopolitical discourse in Australia and was recognized internationally.
- Policy-makers and scholars viewed the area as the 'engine of global growth'.
- This perspective was reflected in various economic initiatives, such as:
- Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)
- Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)
- Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
The Indo-Pacific served as a new battleground for superpower rivalry, as noted in the 2020 Australian Strategic Defence Update (SDU), emphasizing increased strategic competition.
The relationship between economic security and traditional military-security risks became a focus, complicating Australia's regional navigation efforts.
Australia's reliance on the United States for security strained its trade relations with China, revealing the complexity of balancing economic and security interests.
Evolution of the Indo-Pacific Concept
Although the term 'Indo-Pacific' had appeared in Australian strategic discussions since the mid-1960s, it gained prominence in the mid-2000s.
By 2016-2020, the Indo-Pacific established itself as a critical reference frame for Australia, according to Dobell (2016: 5).
This shift was influenced by previous efforts to define the Asia Pacific as Australia's region, reflecting broader geopolitical changes.
- The Indo-Pacific narrative involved multiple stakeholders, including think tanks and political leaders.
- Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull emphasized the Indo-Pacific as a focus for security and prosperity in 2017.
- Scott Morrison reinforced this view, asserting Australia’s identity as an Indo-Pacific nation in 2019.
Related policy documents, such as the Defence White Papers (2016, 2020) and Foreign Policy White Paper (2017) incorporated the term broadly.
Australia's identification of its region now included:
- From the eastern Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, connected through South-East Asia, India, North Asia, and the United States (DFAT, 2017).
Critics questioned the coherence of the Indo-Pacific compared to established regions like Europe or North America.
Its strategic use was framed as a means to enhance Australia’s geopolitical stance and security in the face of rising powers, particularly China.
The Strategic Importance of the Indo-Pacific
Characterized as a 'single strategic system' (Medcalf, 2014b: 47), the Indo-Pacific serves as a conceptual and policy framework for Australia’s international engagements.
Key strategic objectives included:
- Enhancing India's influence.
- Mitigating China's prominence.
- Engaging more middle powers.
- Keeping the United States integrated into regional affairs.
- Emphasizing maritime policy.
Australia’s strategic placement in the Indo-Pacific aimed to redefine its role and address its previous liminality in Asian dynamics (Beeson, 2018).
Australia's Indo-Pacific Strategy
Australia navigated its Indo-Pacific strategy using several foundational pillars:
- Upholding a rules-based order (RBO)
- Strengthening the US alliance
- Enhancing regional engagement (Gyngell, 2017).
As a middle power, Australia’s strategy was largely aligned with its allies and collective security interests, necessitating strong ties to major regional players with similar visions.
Diplomatic relationships were pivotal, particularly with major nations like the United States, Japan, and India, as detailed below.
Regional Security Relations in the Indo-Pacific
The United States
Initial relations were troubled, highlighted by a contentious phone call between Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and President Donald Trump regarding refugee resettlement policies.
Trump's presidency saw a pivot away from global governance, questioning the value of long-standing alliances and international structures, including withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Australia responded by focusing on strengthening ties, marked by:
- Increased defense spending to 2% of GDP to reaffirm commitment to the US alliance.
- Campaigns like 100 Years of Mateship that reiterated the historic bond.
The US formal endorsement of the Indo-Pacific framework enhanced Australia’s strategic posture in the region, aligning closely with the US Indo-Pacific Strategy Report (2019) emphasizing security and economic governance.
Critical shared principles included respect for sovereignty, peaceful resolution of disputes, and adherence to international norms.
- These alignments validated Australia's foundational strategies and regional goals.
Japan
Australia's relationship with Japan evolved into a Special Strategic Partnership, significantly bolstered by shared commitment to the Indo-Pacific.
Key events included:
- Japan’s early advocacy for the Indo-Pacific concept initiated by former PM Shinzo Abe in 2007.
- Joint military exercises, further enhancing interoperability and mutual security provisions.
Both nations denounced China's aggressive actions in contested territorial waters and faced shared economic coercion.
- Emphasis was placed on multilateral cooperation through initiatives like the Trilateral Investment Fund and opposition to ‘debt trap diplomacy’ exemplified by China.
India
The Indo-Pacific framework has positioned India as a central partner for Australia, emphasizing shared democratic values and regional security roles.
Key developments included:
- Bilateral defense agreements and annual ministerial meetings established in 2017, leading to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2020.
- Joint military exercises and collaborative maritime initiatives underscored the commitment to regional stability.
The Quad’s formation further included India, reflecting a shift toward multilateral security cooperation among major powers in the region.
China
Australia’s embrace of the Indo-Pacific framework negatively impacted its relations with China, culminating in deteriorated bilateral ties and public antipathy towards China.
China's defensive reactions included dismissive remarks about the Indo-Pacific and persistent promotion of its own ‘Asia-Pacific’ narrative.
Conflicts arose due to:
- Canberra's accusations regarding China's assertive behaviors undermining the RBO.
- Economic coercion and retaliatory measures by China against Australian exports like beef and coal, following political tensions.
This created a significant security/economic disconnect in Australia's foreign policy, complicating strategic engagement with both superpowers.
Australia’s response involved reinforcing its domestic and international frameworks for engagement and defense, such as the establishment of the National Foundation for Australia-China Relations in 2019.
South-East Asia and the South Pacific
Australia's strategic interests in South-East Asia highlighted the region's importance as a battleground for great power competition (Adamson, 2019).
Despite efforts to include ASEAN in the Indo-Pacific framework, skepticism remained, with many countries preferring to avoid conflict with China.
Key initiatives included the Indo-Pacific Endeavour, showcasing naval diplomacy through significant regional engagements.
In the South Pacific, Australia's response to increasing Chinese influence involved:
- The Pacific Step-up initiative to reinforce historical ties and partnerships based on equality and respect.
- Establishment of dedicated offices and initiatives to assist Pacific Islands in capacity-building and infrastructure development.
Conclusion: Concept vs. Strategy
The Indo-Pacific concept became integral to Australia’s strategic lexicon from 2016-2020, emphasizing a shift from purely economic perspectives to more comprehensive security considerations.
While articulating growth and prosperity, policymakers acknowledged the pressing need for strategic stability in light of rising China.
The Indo-Pacific idea served as a strategic platform for collaboration among nations sharing concerns about regional stability, while exacerbating tensions with Beijing.
Critics cautioned that the Indo-Pacific framework, while ambitious, may not effectively address the complexities of Australia’s geopolitical landscape and security dilemmas.