Quadrilateral Security Dialogue can ensure that a rules-based order prevails in the Indo-Pacific region

The Quad comprises of India, US, Japan and Australia. China has geopolitical issues with all the four-participant countries of Quad. The dragon is in a border stand-off with India, trade war with US, a diplomatic war with Australia and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands dispute with Japan. Hence Beijing views Quad as tailored against it.

The initiative, meant to facilitate conversation and cooperation between the four maritime democracies, lasted till early 2008, after which it fell apart when Australia’s newly-elected Labour Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, withdrew his country from the arrangement in the hope - ultimately in vain - that his gesture would facilitate a breakthrough in Australia-China relations.

After his re-election, Japanese Prime Minister Abe - with a clear eye on the long term and apparently undismayed by Australia’s wobbliness - returned to the fray late in 2012. With the active participation of India, a rejuvenated Quad -2.0 was born.

The Quad is not a silver bullet, however. As a former Australian national security advisor has put it, the Quad has to be “driven by function rather than form.” But the Quad can develop into a significant alliance for the four countries who want to ensure that a rules-based order should prevail in the Indo-Pacific region rather than a coercion-based one.

Apart from maritime security, the quadrilateral could be a useful platform to share assessments of Chinese capabilities, intentions and actions, and ways of dealing with them. The Quad and Quad plus (last year Vietnam, South Korea and New Zealand participated in a Quad plus dialogue) could also become a useful platform for furthering the economic and trade interests of the participating countries, including creation of new global supply chains away from China.