The Quad's uncertain horizon

Editor's note: Imran Khalid, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is a freelance columnist on international affairs. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

The Quad's recent hiccups reflect broader global recalibrations. The U.S., often seen as the linchpin of this strategic grouping, appears preoccupied with domestic politics, raising questions about its commitment. With U.S. President Joe Biden opting out of the Quad summit, prioritizing domestic concerns, it has certainly sent ripples across this club for the second time in the last eight months.

Speculation mounts about U.S. commitment, with recent events suggesting the alliance's relegation from the U.S.'s hierarchy of regional priorities. Biden's decision to forgo the Quad summit for domestic reasons underscores this sentiment. India's plans to host the summit, post its Republic Day on January 26, have been derailed, leaving the bloc's future uncertain. The previous Quad summit slated for Sydney in May last year also faced an abrupt cancellation when Biden deferred his visit to Australia to address the U.S. debt ceiling crisis.

Biden's recent decision to decline a visit to India raises speculation: Could the Quad summit encounter a second consecutive year of disruption? As the Quad's future hangs in limbo, it underscores the evolving nature of alliances in a multipolar world. There is little shadow of doubt that the Quad's aspirations face a precarious path as global geopolitics intertwine with domestic priorities.

Crucial elections loom this year for three of its four members, with the U.S. and India bracing for general elections and Japan's Liberal Democratic Party gearing up for a leadership election in September. The uncertainty surrounding the electoral fate of current U.S. and Japanese leaders further casts a shadow over the prospect of this year's Quad summit.

The interplay of geopolitical considerations and domestic political exigencies underscores the intricate nature of sustaining this alliance. For obvious reasons, China is observing the unfolding dynamics of the Quad with a discerning eye. While the U.S. remains pivotal, its wavering commitment has sent ripples of doubt.

More intriguing, perhaps, is India's evolving role. Often perceived as the Quad's fragile nexus, India's sporadic alignments and recent tiffs with the U.S. add layers of unpredictability. How India recalibrates its stance within this strategic framework, especially in light of its nuanced relationship with the U.S., will shape the geopolitical contours of the Asia-Pacific. These nuances regarding the Quad's cohesion – or lack thereof – will directly influence regional dynamics.

While Washington often seeks New Delhi's alignment on global matters, the latter frequently charts its self-serving course, diverging on pivotal issues like the Russia-Ukraine conflict. This divergence is not mere happenstance; it underscores India's strategic intent to leverage its relationship with the U.S. for its own gains, often without commensurate concessions.

Similarly, Australia's evolving rapport with China adds another dimension to this equation. As Canberra and Beijing foster closer ties, the U.S.-led "Indo-Pacific Strategy," with its implicit targeting of China, may face resistance within Australian corridors. These shifting dynamics within the Quad echo broader recalibrations in regional alignments.

While there is a semblance of unity in specific domains, the Quad's raison d'etre, ostensibly to counter China, is rooted in speculative and exaggerated fears. Ostensibly formed as an "anti-China" club, the Quad's foundation seems shaky, grounded more in apprehensions than genuine cooperation. However, relationships forged on strategic paranoia and misconceptions often struggle to thrive.

The Quad, with its increasing divergence in member states' interests, seems to increasingly losing its impetus and efficacy as the linchpin of Washington's ambitious "Indo-Pacific Strategy." As individual member states recalibrate their priorities, the cohesion of this alliance appears increasingly tenuous.

The Quad's narrative, shaped by surreal apprehensions about China's perceived threat, overshadows the divergent national pursuits within the alliance. As these differences come to the fore, the Quad may find itself constrained by the limitations of its own ideological foundations, questioning the sustainability of an alliance built on the shaky grounds of strategic apprehension and geopolitical conjecture.

Within the Quad, a potentially more formidable challenge emerges from its de facto leader, the U.S. The mercurial nature of U.S. foreign policy, exemplified by potential leadership shifts, casts a shadow over the Quad's future as the U.S. faces an internal threat that looms large – the specter of Donald Trump's return to the presidency. Trump, a frontrunner in the next presidential race, has threatened to dismantle the "Indo-Pacific Economic Framework" should he assume office again.

The fate of a formally endorsed agreement hangs in the balance; the uncertain destiny of a loose coalition like the Quad appears even more precarious. Washington's mosaic of regional partnerships, from the Five Eyes to AUKUS, reveals a pattern of instrumentalism, driven by blatant self-interest rather than enduring alliances. The Quad seems to be slipping down the U.S. priority ladder due to its lack of cohesiveness and its perceived role as a mere rhetorical arena rather than an effective operational entity.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)