Spatial constructions have always been a part of International Relations, in spite of attempts throughout history to 'despatialise' the discipline. Through geopolitics, land and water bodies are divided and labeled by the various powers of the world. Today, as we witness a global transition of power, there is a shift in the use of geographic terms, transforming how states and leaders perceive the regional strategic order.
After World War II, old geographical constructions withered away, giving way to new geopolitical struggles over given and imagined geographies. With divergent geo-strategic visions and geopolitical objectives, there is often overlapping and entanglement, sometimes resulting in cooperation, but other times resulting in confrontation or competition.
At the fifth iteration of the Raisina dialogue–an emerging global forum on foreign policy and geopolitics–held in New Delhi last week, we witnessed how various stakeholders envision the Asia of tomorrow. Such events often serve as an indicator of competing architectures and visions. The Raisina dialogue was no different as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov questioned the rationale and forces behind the concept of the 'Indo-Pacific.'
In recent years, the ‘Indo-Pacific’ has permeated the geo-strategic lexicon. Defined as an integrated strategic system that captures the shift in power and influence from the West to the East, the concept now dominates strategic debates and discussions, gaining rapidly in currency and acceptance. What was initially a maritime construct centered on the economic and connectivity of the two oceans have now has acquired a more political and security dimension. Accordingly, a contest is emerging over how to define Asia conceptually, including the choice of terminology. The increasing use of the term Indo-Pacific carries implications for the way countries approach security competition or cooperation in maritime Asia.
Russia has traditionally been a “land power” with a relatively minimal role in maritime politics compared to countries like the United States and Great Britain. However, in recent years, Russia has become increasingly vocal about its vision for the Indo-Pacific region, culminating in its outright rejection of the term at the recently concluded Raisina dialogue.
According to Lavrov, Russia views it as a divisive terminology that "disrupt[s] existing structures." Echoing what has primarily been China's viewpoint for all these years, Russia now sees the conceptualisation of this terminology as an attempt to contain China.
The onset of the Asian century brought a shift in the Weltanschauung (worldview) and a redefinition of the economic centre of gravity. The US Navy's conceptualization of the high seas is being challenged and its maritime hegemony has been eroded, especially in areas like the Indian Ocean. China is literally and figuratively pushing the boundaries of countries in the South China Sea (SCS) and poses a threat to parts of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Such behaviours have prompted countries in the region to come together in an effort to find shared interests and a principled vision.
Beijing and Moscow posit that US presence and power projections in Asia are destabilizing and oppose its claims of creating a stable "rules-based order." Although Russian objections have not traditionally been very vocal on waters near South East Asia and South Asia, that seems to be changing rapidly.
Some skeptics view the 'Indo-Pacific' as an update to Obama’s “Rebalancing Asia” strategy, specifically aimed at China. However, there is little to support Russian claims that the conceptualization of the term came from US pressure to neutralize China. Countries like India, Indonesia, Australia, and even Japan have all reacted to China's revisionist geopolitical stance in the region with skepticism and opposition. Thus, the argument that the popularization of the term 'Indo-Pacific' is driven by American pressure undermines the agentive factor of these nations, who have increased their diplomatic and military engagements even in the absence of a general consensus on the term or concept of 'Indo-Pacific'.
When PM Modi visited Russia in 2018, while addressing the plenary session of the 5th Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, he said, “India, Russia begin 'new era' of cooperation to make 'Indo-Pacific 'open, free and inclusive.” However, in the wake of Russia's rejection of the 'Indo-Pacific' and its growing military ties and maritime coordination with China, the distance between Russia and India is evidently growing. With American arms exports to India outpacing Russia's, and a growing Indo-US security partnership, the once iron-clad relationship between Moscow and New Delhi has been thrown into jeopardy.
Simultaneously, while New Delhi understands Russian cooperation with Iran and others in West Asia and is driven by its need to fend off American dominance, it is less receptive to its growing ties with China and Russia. Russia has participated in drills with the PLA navy in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Additionally, there are reports of Russian naval exercises with Pakistan, arms exports to Pakistan and military exercises in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, disconcerting to Indian policymakers.
Thus, Moscow's calls to replace the term Indo-Pacific with Asia-Pacific were rebuffed by Indian Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale, who called the latter term a 'colonial concept.' Gokhale's sentiment was echoed by US Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Pottinger, displaying India's divergence from Russia and convergence with the US.
Indian acceptance of the 'Indo-Pacific' is not due to its increasingly close ties with the US or its desire to project its centrality to the debate. Rather, it is derived from its wariness of the fact that the Indian Ocean Region is the next geopolitical theater where we can and probably will witness the next Great Game; and India is at the heart of it, willingly or unwillingly. Thus, while Lavrov is not entirely wrong to assert that the conceptualization of the Indo-Pacific has its roots in containing the Chinese threat, he is perhaps not fully cognizant of the motivating factors.
In 1993, realist theorist Hans Morgenthau said that 'space' was the "most stable factor" and that rather than analyzing 'how' these geopolitical templates and terminologies are applied, it is also prudent to look at 'who' constructs them.
Some ASEAN countries who have traditionally been reluctant to be drawn into struggles between the great powers are now waking up to the reality of how the changing Asian geopolitical landscape threatens to infringe on their sovereignty. Despite divergent versions and visions of what the term 'Indo-Pacific' means–where it starts and ends, and who it includes and excludes–there is a growing consensus on the necessity of the term itself. For instance, India has repeatedly stressed that it does not want to exclude anyone as it considers the region of 'Indo-Pacific' to be a part of global commons.
One cannot simply label the terminology of the 'Indo-Pacific as an American trap when trilateral or bilateral dialogues or military cooperation with American participation have taken place even without consensus on various aspects of the construct. Russia will hence find that the 'Indo-Pacific,' in which India remains a central figure, will continue to strengthen and ‘multilateralise.’ Rather than bandwagoning with the US, the regional players are in fact leading and shaping the security architecture of the region themselves.
Reference List
Chaudhury, D. (2020). Russia-India-China to hold Indo-Pacific consultations to build confidence. Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/russia-india-china-to-hold-indo-pacific-consultations-to-build-confidence/articleshow/70152613.cms?from=mdr
India, Russia begin 'new era' of cooperation to make Indo-Pacific 'open, free, inclusive': PM Modi. (2020). Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/india-russia-begin-new-era-of-cooperation-to-make-indo-pacific-open-free-inclusive-pm-modi/articleshow/70994445.cms?from=mdr
India, Russia begin 'new era' of cooperation to make Indo-Pacific 'open, free, inclusive': PM Modi. (2020). Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/india-russia-begin-new-era-of-cooperation-to-make-indo-pacific-open-free-inclusive-pm-modi/articleshow/70994445.cms?from=mdr
Kupriyanov, A. (2020). Analytics. Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/the-indo-pacific-region-and-russia/
Mohan, G. (2020). Foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale defends Indo-Pacific idea. Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/story/foreign-secretary-vijay-gokhale-defends-indo-pacific-idea-1637603-2020-01-17
Russia debunks Indo-Pacific initiative by US. (2020). Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/russia-debunks-indo-pacific-initiative-by-us-26636
Steaming back into the Indo-Pacific. (2020). Retrieved 20 January 2020, from https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/steaming-back-into-the-indo-pacific/article29334501.ece
Image Source: Orissa Post