A brief thought piece, by Merlene Toh-Emerson MBE
What is the significance of the “Indo-Pacific” region, you may well ask? A German academic Karl Hauschofer is often credited with coining the term in the 1920s, referring to the countries connected via the Indian and Pacific Oceans. However often we see its use as coded expression to exclude any mention of China, by far the most influential power in the region. The Indo-Pacific has become more commonly used in the context of defence and security issues whereas “Asia Pacific” would for example be a more neutral term, whilst ASEAN+5, or signatories to CPTPP or RCEP (both excluding the US) more specific references where discussions revolved around trade matters.
The past week has been an eventful one vis a vis discourses relating to the Indo Pacific. It started for me at a round table held at RUSI’s HQ in Whitehall on Thursday 29th June on the topic of “UK & Europe’s Relations with the Indo-Pacific”. Then to keeping a watching brief on the Shangri-la Dialogues organized by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in Singapore (30th May – 1st June), and ending with the Government’s Strategic Defence Review 2025 unveiled on Monday 2nd June.
The round table at RUSI organized by the Centre for Geopolitics, Cambridge was focused on the study of the Indo-Pacific to cover security, economic and other dimensions. However inevitably discussions would lead back to the US and China rivalry – the elephant and dragon in the room! This was of course unavoidable given that we are in the era of Trump 2.0 with rapidly shifting geo-political sands, not to mention and a full-blown trade war between the US and the rest of the world!
As for the IISS Shangrila Dialogues, we read about the no show from Defence Minister of China, DongJun, probably a public snub of the US Defence Minister, Peter Hegseth. The latter made a belligerent speech on the need to counter China’s “imminent” threat in the South China Sea and calling on Asian countries to boost their respective defence budgets. However, US’s policy of strategic ambiguity policy towards Taiwan remains as before – ambiguous.
Were I in Singapore, the host country, at the time, I would most likely have trailed President Macron and PM Lawrence Wong at the Lau Pa Sat, for a wefie! But more seriously, I share the sentiments and political views of other ASEAN nations including President Prabowo of Indonesia who look to “hedging” our interests, advocating principles over power play in pursuit of a middle way, and calling for more inclusive communication. In other words “jaw jaw” rather than “war war” to misquote Winston Churchill.
Finally to UK’s Strategic Defence Review, and the question of whether there will be any change to its Indo-Pacific strategy? There were hints of continued engagement and certainly continuing with partnerships such as AUKUS with Australia and the US. However there is also expression of caution with regard to any expeditionary deployments which should not detract from UK’s commitment to NATO’s core Euro-Atlantic commitments. Though China is described as a “sophisticated and persistent challenge” UK’s position unlike the US’s or the EU’s is not to view China as a rival or adversary.
What do you think?
Merlene Toh-Emerson MBE is a Director of The Paddy Ashdown Policy and Research Forum Limited and editor of the PAF’s publications on “The Rise of China” and “The Five Decade Journey of EU-ASEAN Relations”.