... list of the new opportunities that need to be carefully considered.
Geopolitically, Russia tends to associate the notion of “the Indo-Pacific” with U.S. endeavours to preserve its strategic hegemony in the Pacific and Indian oceans in the face of China’s growing power. However, India has a somewhat different perspective on this, believing “the Indo-Pacific” to be an opportunity to expand its political and economic presence east of the Strait of Malacca. As far as this standpoint goes, the central place in the emergent mega-region is assigned to the ASEAN nations rather than the U.S.
Obviously,...
... pandemic), it is more proactive when it comes to investment, trying to ensure that the Indo-Pacific market continues to be highly dependent on U.S. investments (especially in the ASEAN countries, where U.S. foreign direct investment exceeds that of China, Japan and South Korea).
The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity is designed to promote and strengthen partnerships within the Quad of the United States, Japan, India and Australia. Industry-specific priorities largely overlap with the
economic agenda of the Quad
, which is aimed at combating climate change and ensuring compliance with regulations in the field of IT, biotechnology, etc.
Moving forward with the ...
... on a final decision.
Andrey Kortunov:
Why India Will Never Be Part of U.S. Alliances
White man’s burden (is no longer)
British foreign policy doctrines envision the U.S. as its most important strategic ally, while Russia is the most urgent threat. China, India and Japan are recognized as the three important powerhouses in the Indo-Pacific. The UK’s relations with each of the three, however, are viewed differently. Tokyo is seen as London’s closest strategic ally in Asia. New Delhi is more of a partner, while the option of cultivating relations with Beijing is virtually ...
... partial list of the new opportunities that need to be carefully considered.
In a geopolitical sense, Moscow and New Delhi could lend each other a helping hand: New Delhi could do so in the India–U.S.–Russia triangle to become Moscow’s guide in the Indo-Pacific, while Moscow could do so in the Russia–China–India triangle by advancing the involvement of the other two in multilateral security and development projects in Eurasia. The international system slipping down towards a rigid bipolarity cannot align with the strategic interests of either Moscow or ...
... possibility of directional improvement in the near future, which is also an important background for the future of the Indo-Pacific strategy. This situation will stimulate the four countries to get closer, thus naturally contributing to the development of the Indo-Pacific. Among these, the change in China-India relations has a greater impact. The relations between China and the United States, Japan, and Australia have been subject to strategic tensions, so the impact of them as variables is relatively consistent. India has been abiding by its non-aligned ...
... Indian interpretation of the concept differs significantly from the American one, both in terms of geography and content. Some Indian experts interpret the Indo-Pacific to fall under the historical sphere of Indian cultural influence (something like the Indian World, compared to the Russian World), while others suggest including China and even Russia within the construct of the Indo-Pacific. Whatever the case may be, the general thrust of Washington’s strategic design of the new Eurasia within the context of the Indo-Pacific is aimed squarely at the military and political containment of Beijing in one form or another.
Community ...
