AUKUS: US offshore balancing strategy to contain China

TEST TRENDING CORONAVIRUS PAKISTAN BUSINESS SCI-TECH MULTIMEDIA WORLD OPINION LIFE & STYLE SPORTS CRICKET BLOGS FOOD ARCHIVE OT

CLAIMS STUDY

NORRIE BEATS BASILASHVILI TO CLAIM INDIAN WELLS TITLE

BILL GATES' ELDEST DAUGHTER MARRIES EGYPTIAN FIANCÉ IN MUSLIM CEREMONY
To retain economic and strategic balancing, competing rivals need to foster trust, restraint, cooperation

Dr Zafar Khan October 06, 2021 

The writer is assistant professor at the Department of Strategic Studies, National Defence University, Islamabad where he teaches nuclear strategy and strategic studies

The AUKUS military deal signed by Australia, UK, and the US has left France
infuriated because it came at the cost of the $66 billion French-Australian
submarine deal. Australia will now receive nuclear-powered submarines from the
UK and the US. Given the loopholes in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), many
countries have already exploited its weaknesses, and Australia has become yet
another country to benefit from these weaknesses. Although it is unclear how
members of QUAD have reacted to the formation of AUKUS, it has become
increasingly apparent that the broader aim is to contain China. Compared to
diesel-supported, the nuclear-propelled submarine can stay in deep water for
months. This provides Australia with a security edge. Though it may not
instantly provide Australia an assured second-strike capability.

AUKUS reflects the US grand strategy of offshore balancing: (a) aggressively

following up the core pillars of its strategy in the Asia-Pacific region. One of which is
sustaining key strategic allies vis-à-vis the rise of any potential adversary and the
perceived peer strategic competitor (in this case China); (b) strengthening and
empowering its allies in terms of economy and military forces against the rapid
regional rise of China; (c) retaining a power projection in the Asia-Pacific region to
which the US claims to be the predominant player for over a century. It may not
retrench from the key sea-lines of communication (SLOCs); (d) upholding its key
strategic military basis for carrying out military contingency plans when and if needed
in collaboration with its allies and partners in the region; and (e) more importantly
arguing for the so-called non-proliferation measures in line with the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the NPT.

Australia, UK, and the US may repair their relations with their NATO ally by drawing
France towards a similar deal. This will mean a formation of FRAUKUS only if
France agrees. Regardless of France’s involvement, such a deal for developing
nuclear-powered submarines can have both short and long-term implications on the

EXPRESS NEWS
URDU E-PAPER
ENGLISH E-PAPER
SINDHI E-PAPER
CRICKET PAKISTAN
EXPRESS LIVE
CAMPUS GURU
EXPRESS ENTERTAINMENT
FOOD TRIBUNE 


TEST TRENDING CORONAVIRUSevolving
PAKISTAN situation
BUSINESSof the Asia-Pacific
SCI-TECH region.
MULTIMEDIA Many of
WORLD the US’s
OPINION LIFEclosest
& STYLE Asian alliesCRICKET BLOGS FOOD ARCHIVE OT
SPORTS

including those of its rising Asian rival China are closely monitoring the development
CLAIMS STUDY

NORRIE BEATS BASILASHVILI TO CLAIM INDIAN WELLS TITLE

BILL GATES' ELDEST DAUGHTER MARRIES EGYPTIAN FIANCÉ IN MUSLIM CEREMONY
of such a deal.

First, many analysts argue that such a nuclear deal may not have dire implications on
the non-proliferation regimes since Australia has already stated that it would not go
nuclear being part of the NPT. The US can monitor Australia to not divert such
technology in the making of nuclear warheads. Others are more sceptical about it.
Member states of the NPT have already exploited the weaknesses and it is now
unravelling despite gaining an indefinite life extension since the NPT review
conference in 1995. That said, the state’s possession of technology matters.
Technology that is sweetening has already made many states go nuclear. Besides, in
international politics, intention can change overnight. It may not be surprising if
Australia could divert such technology in the making of nuclear warheads.

Second, such a nuclear deal could potentially increase crisis instability and speed up
the arms race in Asia-Pacific. Since Australia will be the first non-nuclear-weapon
state to have developed nuclear-powered submarines, others such as Japan, South
Korea, and even Taiwan with acute security dilemmas despite the US security
assurances may follow suit. All these states are technologically advanced and may
develop the aspiration for possessing nuclear-powered submarines. This could set up a
precedent which can create a domino effect. An increase in the arms race between
these states will raise the prospects of crisis instability and risk military crises in the
region. Other countries connected with these states may also be affected economically
and militarily.

Third, as part of the US offshore balancing, the US and its Asian allies i.e. QUAD and
AUKUS will put strategic pressure on China, thereby creating a security dilemma
between the US and China. This may create two potential scenarios for China: a)
China will develop effective counter-measures by advancing its military capabilities to
counter the US strategy of encircling China thereby creating balance; and b) China
could further speed up its economic imperatives by integrating as many countries
including the US’s closer allies as China can to potentially avoid the inevitability of
serious military crisis. That being noted, the production of effective counter-measures
for retaining balance and economic integration could greatly prevent serious military
crises between the potential rivals.

Lastly, US strategic alliances like QUAD and AUKUS may serve the vital security
interests of the US and its allies. Such increasing strategic partnership may also
increase the security of Australia, Japan and India. However, such imperatives can
potentially decrease the security of countries like Pakistan because of its strategic
rivalry with India. Thus, the formation of these types of strategic dialogue particularly
those that include India will have deleterious implications on South Asian stability.

To retain economic and strategic balancing, the competing rivals need to

foster trust, restraint, cooperation, and engage in dialogue regularly. This will
ensure the success of all otherwise disparity in power and lack of cooperation
can result in military tensions.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 6th, 2021.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive

all updates on all our daily pieces.



COMMENTS

EXPRESS NEWS
URDU E-PAPER
ENGLISH E-PAPER
SINDHI E-PAPER
CRICKET PAKISTAN
EXPRESS LIVE
CAMPUS GURU
EXPRESS ENTERTAINMENT
FOOD TRIBUNE 

