The Quad says it’s a ‘positive alternative’ to China. What can it deliver for Asia?
- The US-led security grouping won’t be able to supplant the economic clout of the region’s top trading partner, analysts say
- But the Quad could rival the ‘Sino-centric system in Asia’ by offering supply chain diversification and an alternative for infrastructure support
The ministers went on to say that they viewed with concern Chinese challenges to the maritime rules-based order, including in the South and East China Seas, and they opposed any unilateral actions that seek to change the status quo or increase tensions in the region.
Analysts say the Quad could offer a viable alternative for Asia in terms of infrastructure support and supply chain diversification, but called it unrealistic for the four nations to supplant China’s economic heft – despite being the first, third, fifth and 13th largest economies in the world.
China remains the top trading partner for much of Asia, where many nations have long said they do not wish to take sides in the growing geopolitical contest between Beijing and Washington and its allies.
Critics say a lack of economic engagement has long been a major weakness of the US’ approach to the region.
US will increase economic ties to Asian nations, White House official says
“The Quad is not an alternative to China, but it can provide some alternatives in particular areas,” said Kei Koga, an associate professor at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University whose research focuses on security in East Asia and the Indo-Pacific. This includes reducing regional states’ “risk of overdependence on China”.
“Obviously, the amount of economic assistance and development finance would not be matched with China’s,” he said, adding that the Quad could exert strength in areas such as maritime domain awareness and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
‘Not all roads lead to Beijing’
Over the years, its scope has expanded to also cover cooperation on vaccines, climate change, technology governance and infrastructure, as well as in more recent months on cyber threats, counterterrorism, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
“This includes … reinforcing each other’s infrastructure activities and developing a new region-wide discussion on supply chain diversification.”
China’s global belt and road spending dipped to US$67.8 billion last year from US$68.7 billion in 2021, said a report published last month by the Green Finance and Development Centre at Fudan University in Shanghai. That figure was US$47 billion in 2020, about a 54 per cent year-on-year decrease.
Asia’s infrastructure needs are expected to cost about US$26 trillion between 2016 and 2030, or more than US$1.7 trillion annually, according to the Asian Development Bank.
Hemmings said neither the US nor India could go very far in offering trade blocs or market access but the Quad was gradually becoming “the locus of new activities” as Washington calls on Asian countries to diversify their supply chains for energy and critical minerals away from China and Russia amid the war in Ukraine.
Regional countries certainly don’t want to “take sides”, Hemmings said, but they would be “willing recipients” of investment, quality infrastructure and other forms of cooperation offered by Quad.
“The Quad’s very existence is one of its most potent weapons against the establishment of a Sino-centric system in Asia: not all roads lead to Beijing,” he added.
Quad members can also gather support from other partners, Nanyang Technological University’s Koga noted, in the form of “informal Quad plus” groupings such as in critical and emerging technologies – but it “cannot be an alternative to China on every front”.
An Asian Nato?
The economic arm of the Quad is certainly weaker than what China is able to offer
As for economic rule-making, the US has offered its Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF), Koga said, in which Australia, India, Japan, South Korea and much of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations have agreed to take part.
Aimed at promoting sustainable and inclusive economic growth by advancing resilience, sustainability, fairness, and competitiveness, the grouping has been criticised for lacking the tariff cuts that make up traditional trade deals.
Akriti Vasudeva, a fellow with the South Asia programme at the Washington-based Stimson Center think tank, said the real value of the Quad for regional countries is the public goods and services it can offer such as through maritime capacity building and the Covid vaccine initiative, which responds to a more immediate need.
The US State Department said last month that more than 267 million vaccine doses had been delivered to the region over the past year with the help of “allies and partners” and that Washington was building capacity to strengthen the regional response to future health emergencies.
As Australia repairs its ties with China, what of the Quad?
“The economic arm of the Quad is certainly weaker than what China is able to offer”, Vasudeva said, agreeing with Koga that this was a role for the IPEF.
“The IPEF allows Indo-Pacific economies to be involved in an inclusive and collaborative process to shape the economic rules,” she said, noting that these include supply chain resiliency, clean energy and digital economy.
“[These are] not something they can do with China.”
