Indo-Pacific Concept Research Articles

India, Japan and the Indo-Pacific: Evolution, Consolidation and Limitations of the Strategic Partnership

India–Japan relations over the last two decades have become a regionally and globally oriented ‘strategic partnership’ from a narrow bilateral relationship. A key factor driving this transformation has been the discourse of the Indo-Pacific regional construct. Considering the overwhelming space occupied by maritime affairs in the bilateral strategic agenda, describing contemporary India–Japan relations as an India–Japan Indo-Pacific Strategic Partnership is justified. The article attempts to provide an evolutionary account of the India–Japan Indo-Pacific strategic partnership. In doing so, it identifies four phases in the evolution of the partnership: conception, actualisation, consolidation, and resilience, corresponding to the evolution of the Indo-Pacific concept from a geographic idea to a strategic concept to a regional order framework.

A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS ON THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF INDO-PACIFIC REGION IN GLOBAL POLITICS

The Indo-pacific region is enfolding the vast areas and islands which surroundings either the Indian Ocean or the Pacific Ocean. In the geopolitical theme the term earliest used by the German geopolitician in 1920s in his numerous work on geopolitics. The region significance reinvigorate in the contemporary world politics. Australia, Japan and India popularized the term they conducted trilateral dialogues and sometimes discuss the region under the US umbrella. In the contemporary world the Indo-pacific region lay down implications on the global politics due to its huge importance. This research paper aim to examine the Indo-pacific region and to unfolding its different sides which are connected with the global politics. The paper thoroughly investigate currents ongoing geopolitical and geo-economics significance of the region. Major and Middle powers have been trying to acquire their respective national interest from the region. The United States trying to persist her hegemony in the region reactive the quadrilateral security dialogue which is the group of foursome Australia, India, Japan and US and leading by US to contain the broader engagements of China in the Indo-Pacific region and concentrating to mitigate the China geopolitical and geo-economics influences through different strategy. This paper assess the China Belt and Road Initiatives which mainly focusing on the geo-economics connectivity of multiple countries for the targeted purposes. China increasing leadership influences in the region is impelling United States and its partner countries such as India, Japan, US, Taiwan, South Korea and Philippines which have been confronting against China interest and the region is transferring into a new regional geopolitical tension and seeming to drag into new cold war between Sino-US. The free and open Indo-pacific concept reinvigorate 1906 by the Japanese prim minister Shinzo Abe with the American cooperation. In 2019, United States has formalized the concept and referred many Southeast Asia and European Union States to the Indo-Pacific. The concept has been criticized by the China official that it a closed and exclusive group structure and called for open and inclusive Asia-Pacific which does not target any third country.

The AUKUS debate in New Zealand misses the big picture

ABSTRACT The topic of whether New Zealand should participate in AUKUS or not has emerged as a significant debate in popular political discourses in 2024. Thus far, clear pro-AUKUS and anti-AUKUS camps have developed. The pro-AUKUS camp emphasises the growing threat of China in the Indo-Pacific and New Zealand’s lacking technological capabilities that have it exposed if a conflict emerges. The anti-AUKUS camp emphasises New Zealand’s embedded independent foreign policy and staunch anti-nuclear stance which makes participating in AUKUS an ethically untenable option. However, neither side has considered the deeper, ontological questions on the table and how this affects New Zealand’s main foreign policy concern: the Pacific. New Zealand’s recent engagement with the Pacific and its experimentation with a Māori foreign policy led it to being a champion of the Blue Pacific narrative, an ontologically distinct approach that challenges the geopolitically-focussed Indo-Pacific concept. Yet, in the wake of New Zealand's flirtation with AUKUS, the Blue Pacific has been largely ignored in debates. Ultimately, the debate about AUKUS misses the big picture as it, so far, limits the focus on the true existential threat to New Zealand and the Pacific which is not China’s rise but rather climate change.

Examining the systemic realities of India in the US-backed Indo-Pacific Strategy

This paper examines India's role in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS). The first section discusses China's rise and the threat perceptions that led the U.S. to adopt the IPS. The main objectives of the IPS are discussed, along with the growing partnership between the U.S. and India, studying the strategic shift from Asia-Pacific to Indo-Pacific. India-China rivalry in South Asia is then discussed, followed by US-India differences and India-China convergence. The systemic reality of India, as well as the consequences of its policy of strategic autonomy on the smaller South Asian states, is also examined. The paper thereafter concludes with the idea that even though India is unquestionably at the centre of any meaningful Indo-Pacific concept, it is not wise to assume that it will choose to intensify its security rivalry with China or become overly dependent on the United States. As the U.S. hopes to play a more meaningful role in establishing and maintaining an Indo-Pacific order, it remains to be determined as to how it will deal with Delhi. Further research into the developing Asian system and its systemic effects on small power behaviour in the Indo-Pacific region would be beneficial.

A Wave of Indo-Pacific Strategies and Canada’s Positioning: Reckoning with Global Power Rebalancing and the Crisis of Hyperglobalization

The Indo-Pacific concept grew out of a movement to refocus and redefine the Asia-Pacific region to include the Indian Ocean and South Asia, largely as a result of China’s rise. Over the past 10 years, an increasing number of Indo-Pacific strategies have been officially released in the region and beyond. The first question this article tackles is the following: What are the key drivers behind the rise of Indo-Pacific strategies? We argue that Indo-Pacific strategies have become a fast-moving experimenting space for countries searching for adjustment strategies to at least two concurrent deep trends in a changing global order: the great recent shift in the balance of power most vividly characterized by an increasingly assertive China, and the peaking of the liberal globalization experiment and the return of economic security to the fore. We are also concerned with the comparative angle to this question. In particular, how do Indo-Pacific strategies vary among key countries? And finally, how does the Canadian strategy fit within the broader landscape of Indo-Pacific strategies? In answer to these questions, the article develops a typology of existing Indo-Pacific strategies and how they each insert themselves in the current transitionary stage. Finally, we turn to Canada’s own Indo-Pacific strategy and its key features and drivers, including a discussion of Canada’s approach vis-à-vis China. We argue that this represents a touchstone in how Canada is responding to great power shifts and the erosion of the liberal international order.

Middle-power behaviours: Australia’s status-quoist/Lockean and Indonesia’s reformist/Kantian approaches to crises of legitimacy in the Indo-Pacific

ABSTRACT This article maps the behaviours of two middle powers, Australia and Indonesia, as a response to the emergence and evolution of the Indo-Pacific concept. The background for this analysis is the emergence and development of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ concept as a response to crises of legitimacy enveloping the region and how countries in the region, including middle powers, respond to it. Using a minimalist definition which I have developed of a middle power as a country with a middle level of power capabilities and a penchant for cooperation, this article develops a framework based on two dimensions of outcome (ranging from status-quoist to reformist outlooks) and process (ranging from Lockean to Kantian strategies) to facilitate a more open-ended approach towards looking at middle-power behaviours beyond the common categorisation of traditional/emerging, and Western/non-Western. Using Australia’s 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper and 2023 National Defence: Defence Strategic Review, and Indonesia’s 2015 Defence White Paper and 2019 ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific, this article concludes that while Australia is exhibiting a status-quoist/Lockean approach, Indonesia is demonstrating a reformist/Kantian approach towards the Indo-Pacific. The outcome-process dimension framework developed in this article is useful as a tool to map other middle power behaviours in various contexts.

Pacific Pumas in Indian Jungle: Place of Latin America in Indo-Pacific

The article examines the political potential of Latin American countries in bolstering their influence within the Indo-Pacific region (IP). It delves into the Indo-Pacific concept, championed internationally by India and Japan, as an alternative viewpoint in contrast to the predominant orientation towards China as the regional leader in the Asia-Pacific region. Carlos Exudé's "Peripheral Realism" provides the theoretical framework for the study, although Latin American states strive to move beyond their peripheral status.The focus is on four Pacific coastal countries in Latin America: Colombia, Mexico, Peru, and Chile. It identifies key areas of cooperation between these nations and major players in the IP such as India, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. Chile and Peru have established a more robust transpacific partnership compared to their neighbors. However, Mexico possesses a significant advantage due to its unique geographical position intersecting the Atlantic and Pacific routes.Colombia, along with Mexico, Chile, and Peru, formed the Pacific Alliance, an integration association that emphasizes closer ties with Asian countries. Over its decade-long existence, this Alliance has significantly increased in both economic and political significance. The article highlights the pivotal role of this alliance in fostering Asian-Latin American trade and entrepreneurship.The study also delves into the prospects of integrating the two regions by extending the reach of Pacific economic megablocks (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Trans-Pacific Partnership) to Latin America. After the ratification of the TPP by Mexico, Peru, and Chile, an agreement that unites all four Pacific Ocean continents for the first time emerged. The advent of the RCEP, which includes powerful economies such as China, South Korea, and Japan, demonstrates a clear global shift from the Atlantic to the Pacific and from West to East. The inclusion of Latin American countries in these processes is poised to advance their regional and global interests on the international stage.

What's in an Indo-Pacific Concept? Shared Visions and Varied Approaches

What's in an Indo-Pacific Concept? Shared Visions and Varied Approaches

The Indo-Pacific Context : Maritime Security Challenges And Diplomacy Of Asean Countries

The Indo-Pacific region is considered strategic considering that there are intersections in international trade routes in it. Meanwhile, the strategic value as a geopolitical center is emphasized by the presence of strong countries such as the United States, China, India, Australia, Japan, as well as ASEAN countries. Based of the problem that has been described, the objective of this article is to examine the strategies and diplomatic efforts of ASEAN countries in dealing with maritime security threats in the Indo-Pacific Region. The study used qualitative methods with descriptive research design. This research through the Zoom Meeting application by inviting representative speakers from Universitas Pertahanan Malaysia. The activity will be held on 28 June-2 July 2021. Theoritical framework in this article using maritime security concept, maritime diplomacy concept, and Indo-Pacific Concept. The conclusion is the feud between China and the United States in the Indo-Pacific region, especially the South China Sea has the potential to disrupt regional stability and security. Maritime security related to undisturbed shipping traffic and communications is an effort that the United States is guarding. China's presence in the South China Sea area threatens the interests of the United States regarding sea traffic which will have an impact on the global economy and its country if no action is taken. Countries in Southeast Asia see this problem as something that must be resolved. The presence of AOIP is expected to be able to help resolve existing problems regarding actions that are carried out individually by ASEAN member countries.

South Korea’s New Southern Policy and the Middle Power Quest: Implications for India-Korea Relations

This article provides an Indian perspective on the evolution of South Korea’s New Southern Policy (NSP-K) and its implications for the two countries’ bilateral relations. It argues that, amid the intensification of regional great power geopolitics, NSP-K manifests Korea’s assertion of middle power agency, featuring a quest for regional influence and autonomy. As an instrument intended to strengthen relations with India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), NSP-K was driven by a desire to reduce Korea’s great power dependence and promote its image as a bilateral partner through an agenda of economic and diplomatic diversification. The evolution of NSP-K as Korea’s regional approach and its ambiguous position on the Indo-Pacific concept manifested the Moon administration’s prioritisation of ‘balanced diplomacy’ and the pursuit of ‘strategic autonomy’ in regional affairs. NSP-K, with its emphasis on the upgrading of India’s status in Korean foreign policy, has significantly contributed to the visibility and prospects of India-Korea bilateral relations. However, Korea’s ambiguity on the Indo-Pacific concept and its neglect of geostrategic and security issues, which New Delhi sees as critical in building a stable regional order, has become a limitation.

Indonesia's Foreign Policy in Marine Defense Strategy in The Indo-Pacific

In the global interaction with the Indo-Pacific order which is dominated by dynamic contestation issues, the Indo-Pacific system stipulates that Indonesia created the Indo-Pacific concept to advance the habit of inclusivity for dialogue with regional settlements to create peace through building blocks in the region. The author formulates the formulation of the problem in the form of: the development of Indonesia's foreign policy in the strategy of inter-state resilience in the Indo-Pacific region. The purpose of this article is to discuss the Indo-Pacific Integration Project as Indonesia's foreign policy sustainability strategy and provide recommendations for implementation at various levels, including strategic, bilateral and practical levels. The author uses Barry Buzan's national security system and foreign policy theory, namely neo-realism, with the concept of national interest and foreign policy analysis. The role of the military is limited to the capabilities of defense institutions, threat assessment and security interactions. The writer analyzed the data qualitatively using descriptive method with secondary data. The writing analysis in this journal emphasizes the centralization of the Indonesian state as an important actor in influencing conceptions in the Indo-Pacific region. Indonesia's strategy is in the context of the Security Community, the formation of norms and identity in ASEAN is actually a modality that further strengthens values, identity and norms in ASEAN. Indonesia's idea is for ASEAN to have a more inclusive, open and respecting international law, namely the ASEAN Indo-Pacific Outlook (AOIP)

Aspiration and Leadership Research of the Diffusion of Indo-Pacific

The Indo Pacific concept (IPC) may be one of the hotspots in IR during the past decade. This ancient geographical concept was originally packaged by former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe into the so-called Free and Open Indo Pacific (FoIP). After being highly politicized, this concept has been officially adopted by Australia, the United States and India. After President Biden took office in 2020, the Indo Pacific strategy has undergone further diffusion around the world. Especially in Western democracies. By 2022, the Biden government has taken the promotion of FoIP into the primary strategic goal in the In-do-Pacific Strategy of the United States [11]. At the same time, the report emphasized that protecting the democratic values of regional allies from interference is the direction of the US efforts. Leading by values has become an important accelerator for the United States to boost the diffusion of Indo-Pacific strategy. However, It is implausible for observers to explain the global diffusion of IPC after 2020. This article adheres to the viewpoint of constructivism and holds that the IPC, as an idea, has been recognized and accepted by states with common values. When the IPC was put forward and used by states platform as an initiative, it was constructed as a blueprint of “Democratic Alliance”. The Western-dominated international order based on the values of democracy and freedom is socially, politically, and historically ‘embedded’. This article argues that the diffusion of IPC could be understood as an political aspiration. Such aspiration contains the expectation of reuniting states sharing values of western democracy and freedom.

ОСОБЕННОСТИ КОНЦЕПТУАЛИЗАЦИИ ИНДОТИХООКЕАНСКОГО РЕГИОНА ИНДОНЕЗИЕЙ И ИНДИЕЙ

The article is devoted to identifying the features of Indonesia’s and India’s conceptualization of the Indo-Pacific region at the present stage. In this research, the authors use a poststructuralist approach to international relations, namely critical geopolitics, since the Indo-Pacific is a concept based on the political construction of space. In addition, the authors use the elite theory as a second-level theoretical approach to identify the range of actors (institutions) shaping contemporary foreign policy discourse regarding IPR, as well as their role in promoting this concept. Based on the results of the analysis, the authors came to the following conclusions. The goal-setting of the ruling elites of India and Indonesia while using the concept of the Indo-Pacific region is similar: through it they project the perception of themselves as key regional players to create an inclusive and safe prosperity area. At the same time, the geopolitical discourse of the elites in two countries is different. While Indians perceive the IPR as a region in which they want to play a “natural” leader role, Indonesians concentrate on Wawasan Nusantara (the vision of the Indonesian archipelago as a single political, economic, social and cultural space), paying more attention to their own development. For Indonesia, the IPR concept allows ASEAN to remain central to its emerging vision for the region. At the same time, New Delhi’s understanding of the Indo-Pacific concept logically fits into its proactive foreign policy course, one of the main directions of which is the development of ties with Southeast Asian countries.

From Conceptual Idea to Strategic Reality: ‘Indo-Pacific Strategy’ from the Perspective of Chinese Scholars

Chinese scholars’ research on “Indo-Pacific Strategy” has undergone two shifts. Firstly, they began to pay limited attention to the Indo-Pacific concept and the US Indo-Pacific regional strategy in 2013. With 2017 and 2018 as the turning point, the attention to the Indo-Pacific strategy shows a significant increase. Secondly, regarding the scholars’ judgment of the Indo-Pacific strategy, since the end of 2019, they reach a consensus on their assessment of the strategy, especially on its threat to China. The two main reasons that drove the above shifts were the enrichment of the Indo-Pacific Strategy by the United States and China’s perception of India’s attitudes. China’s official responses to the strategy have shown a co-moving rhythm with scholars’ research, shifting from a more open and neutral attitude toward the concept to a critical one. Against the background of America’s continuing effort to implement the Indo-Pacific strategy, China’s policy responses can focus on three aspects: do a good job of itself, handle China-US relations peacefully and cooperatively, and break down the group politics.

Beyond Inclusion: Explaining China's Rejection on the Indo-Pacific Regional Construct

The concept of “Indo-Pacific” has been increasingly adopted in foreign policies during the past few years. Despite its multifaceted nature, China has consistently rejected the use of the Indo-Pacific concept in its official policy. Beijing’s attitude was reflected in Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s remarks that dismissed the Indo-Pacific as a “come-back of Cold War mentality” and “retrogression of history.” This study explains why China renounced the Indo-Pacific concept despite the increasing inclusion in defining the region. By employing realist constructivism theory, this paper finds that the prevalence of containment and anti-China narrative engenders Beijing’s threat perception to the concept. The dominant narratives in China’s regional strategy, such as “community of common destiny,” also affect how the country treats the Indo-Pacific as a Western-centric concept, aimed to limit China’s influence. Beyond seeking inclusion from the Indo-Pacific conception, China advances its own vision to the region. China’s vision is projected through the Belt and Road Initiatives and various concepts to shape regional order in Beijing's preference.

The Indo-Pacific and Southeast Asia: the impact of external strategies on Southeast Asia and ASEAN’s response

The Indo-Pacific concept is imprecise and designates more a geopolitical reality than a geographical space, but it is not, as is often suggested, a recent creation of the US, nor of the Trump administration. On the contrary, several actors have used it before the United States itself. And the US will not be the last actor to adopt it, either. On the contrary, it has gradually been adopted by other actors, including ASEAN, which tries to turn the concept in its favour in a way that reaffirms the importance of the group in the region as a whole and does not put in question neither “its centrality or its unity”, something that is far from being achieved.

From Asia-Pacific to the Indo-Pacific, in three different world(view)s

There is a sense of déjà vu in the recent Indo-Pacific talk. Twenty years into the twenty-first century, after the interlude of the (US) “unipolar moment”, Asia-Pacific seems to have metamorphosized into the Indo-Pacific, an even vaster expanse. But are we correct in presuming the latest regional construct? Without denying the possibility that it might turn out a useful notion, based on the experience of the Asia-Pacific idea in this article I question the current furor around the Indo-Pacific concept. I probe how the Indo-Pacific region could come into being from three different International Relations (IR) perspec-tives: realism, liberalism, and constructivism. The article is divided into five sections: in the first one I begin by recapping the origins and reach of the Asia-Pacific concept, and then I proceed to trace the origins of the more recent one, Indo-Pacific. In the three following sections I briefly review the three analytical perspectives mentioned (realism, liberalism, and constructivism) in turn, looking at how they would account for the (potential) emergence of the Indo-Pacific. The final section recapitulates and presents some concluding remarks.

Europe’s Foray Into the Indo-Pacific

Abstract The term Indo-Pacific has enjoyed growing popularity for years as a geographical and strategic construct. Increasingly, the Indo-Pacific is not conceived merely as a geographical construct, but also as a vital alternative to the Chinese “Belt and Road” Initiative (bri). Conversely, Beijing views the debates over the Indo-Pacific as nothing more than an anti-Chinese containment strategy. Chinese criticism notwithstanding, the debate on the Indo-Pacific has gained traction within Europe, too. France promoted its own Indo-Pacific concept from 2018 onwards, followed by Germany in 2020 with their own Indo-Pacific Leitlinien (guidelines) that preceded the launch of the EU’s own Indo-Pacific strategy in 2021. To assess possible focus points of an emerging EU approach to the Indo-Pacific, this article evaluates strategic convergence and divergence between the so-called E2, France and Germany. It finds that Germany and France, despite their different role conceptions, converge with regard to their key objectives, planned initiatives and conceptualisations of regional order. The article also finds, however, that these contain, for the most part, very general declarations of interests and intent while also foregoing concrete strategic choices. It argues that any future EU approach to the Indo-Pacific is therefore likely to emerge around the least common denominator focus points, drawing on long-established EU approaches towards the Asia-Pacific, rather than a new, clear-cut EU approach to the Indo-Pacific.

Whither the Indo-Pacific? Middle power strategies from Australia, South Korea and Indonesia

Abstract Against the backdrop of US–China superpower rivalry in the Indo-Pacific, this article assesses the visions and strategies of the region's middle powers, which remain under-examined at present. First, it briefly traces the boundaries of this research by reviewing the contested nature of the Indo-Pacific concept and the definitional complexities of middle power theory. Second, it provides a novel comparative framework to analyse Australia, South Korea and Indonesia as the region's major middle powers, exploring their goals and strategies. The framework consists of: 1) middle power categorization; 2) interconnectedness with the two superpowers; 3) vision for the Indo-Pacific; 4) resulting regional posture; and 5) capacity to implement the country's goals. Third, it assesses the ensuing implications of this analysis for the region's strategic landscape. It finds that Canberra is now firmly aligned with Washington in balancing against China, as epitomized by the Quad and AUKUS; Seoul is cautiously increasing cooperation with the US, though potentially only to protract its strategic ambiguity; and Jakarta is pursuing strategic autonomy for itself and ASEAN, with the ambitious but precarious goal of creating a ‘third way’ for the Indo-Pacific. Consequently, middle powers seem unlikely to provide an alternative platform for the region's direction in the near future, due to a number of internal divisions. By shedding light on such understudied aspects, this article addresses a gap in the scholarly literature and provides a novel contribution to the understanding of both the diverse roles of middle powers and the Indo-Pacific's evolving strategic landscape.

The EU’s strategic projection in the Indo-Pacific

The Indo-Pacific is becoming the new geopolitical axis of the planet for multiple reasons, among which three stand out: security (with six nuclear powers in the area, some of them amidst clearly growing tensions), demography (with 64 percent of the world population) and economy (with 62 percent of world GDP). Since its founding, the European Union has been absent in the development of a strategy for the region, an absence that has recently ended with the publication of national strategies of three member states (France, Germany, and the Netherlands), as well such as the EU announcement of a future EU strategy for the region. This paradigm shift may mark the beginning not only of greater European cohesion in terms of strategic projection, but also of greater European geopolitical assertiveness in a post-COVID-19 world in the Indo-Pacific and other regions. This article will trace the birth and evolution of the Indo-Pacific concept, will identify the reasons for its geostrategic importance for the European Union, and will analyze both the three national strategies of France, Germany, and the Netherlands as well as the announced EU strategy for the region.
 Received: 01 September 2021Accepted: 05 November 2021