The 2024 Shangri-La Dialogue highlighted ongoing U.S.-China discussions on regional security, emphasizing differing perspectives on multilateral cooperation and strategic priorities.
Every year in Singapore, an inter-governmental security conference named the Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD) is held. This Track-I inter-governmental security conference is an initiative by the Bahraini-funded think tank, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). The forum's name is derived from the Shangri-La Hotel in Singapore, where it has been held since 2002. It is attended mainly by defense ministers, heads of other ministries, business leaders, security experts, and military chiefs of the Asia-Pacific region. This year, it was held from May 30 to June 2, 2024, where a variety of discourses were presented and various issues were discussed. However, the U.S.-China rivalry overwhelmed the proceedings.
The hallmark activity of the event was the meeting between the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin III, and his Chinese counterpart, Admiral Dong Jun, Minister of National Defense, on the sidelines, which continued for about 75 minutes. The meeting was important on various accounts; it was the first meeting between Secretary Austin and Admiral Dong, who was appointed Defense Minister of China in December 2023 after his predecessor, Li Shangfu, was abruptly removed from his post. This was the first engagement between the defense ministers of both countries after 2022. Moreover, it was also important amid the growing tension in the Asia Pacific region on contesting narratives and arguments. The two sides, therefore, had a chance to come face to face with their agendas.
It has been reported that during the meeting, both U.S. and China agreed on the importance of stable U.S.-China military-to-military relationships. Both sides approved more communications and exchanges in the future, which is a good sign. However, the two sides remained stuck to their understanding of the issues in the region and tried to prove their point with logic and evidence. This assertion was also evident during the speeches that both dignitaries made during their respective turns as they confronted each other on issues ranging from Taiwan to the South China Sea.
From the U.S. side, concerns were expressed about People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) activity around the Taiwan Strait. From the Chinese side, there was a clear manifestation of understanding of the One China policy with no alteration.
Analysing the overall theme and the conference environment, one comes across some interesting facts. All the countries vowed to regional development and cooperation for everyday challenges like climate change, economic upheaval, keeping pace with technological advancement, and avoidance of conflict in the region. However, strategies to pursue their goals have been differently cited as being varyingly executed. China's assertion of common development and win-win cooperation remained the prevailing trend from their side, while the U.S. called freedom of expression their main pretext. The underlying concept of both are the same, yet the handling of situations is different.
It has been reported that during the meeting, both U.S. and China agreed on the importance of stable U.S.-China military-to-military relationships.
In 2013, China developed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which sought connectivity and the collective development of regional countries. Through BRI, it envisioned to connect Asia Pacific with Central Asia and ultimately to Europe. Finding China at an unexpected pace on this course, the U.S., in consonance with the fears perceived by any incumbent superpower, felt threatened and devised strategies for impeding China's race towards prosperity and ultimate rise. It dished out the Indo-Pacific strategy in the year 2022, which was aimed at retarding if not halting the rise of China. It called for states in the region to join hands in the name of multilateralism and tackle China's growing challenge.
China's assertion of common development and win-win cooperation remained the prevailing trend from their side, while the U.S. called freedom of expression their main pretext.
Interestingly, despite the declaration of multilateralism as the core concept of this strategy, the U.S. resorted to "minilateralism" and formed small alliances in the region such as Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), Quad 2.0, India, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States (I2U2), Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (AUKUS) etc. In such alliances, only like-minded nations such as the U.K., Australia, Japan, India, Philippines, Israel and the U.A.E were involved, and other important countries of the region were neither consulted nor taken in the loop. For instance, Pakistan, Iran, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, etc., were ignored, nor were their interests kept in sight.
The U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy has elements that might lead to increased competition and tension among the neighboring countries, potentially fostering an arms race, and ultimately, conflicts in the region since the adversary countries are supported in terms of politics, military, economy, and technology. This is creating serious concern for countries like Pakistan since our arch-rival India has been epitomised as the Net Security Provider in the Indian Ocean, which hurts Pakistan's interests. China, in response, also launched the Global Security Initiative (GSI) in the year 2022, by virtue of which the Chinese military vows to work with even counterparts to pursue major initiatives in Asia-Pacific to deliver more benefits to the people. China aims to pursue common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security. China abhors bloc confrontation, which can only exacerbate tension and provoke war and conflict. This is evident from China's response to the current major crises worldwide. For instance, in the Ukraine crisis, China has been promoting peace talks instead of providing weapons to either party in the conflict. Even the export of dual-use items has been put under strict control. Likewise, China has adhered to a just and impartial position on the Gaza conflict to push for a ceasefire.
Similarly, it has actively sought political settlement on the issues concerning the Korean Peninsula, Afghanistan, and Myanmar. China's stance on the sovereignty over islands, reefs and maritime rights is based on the authority of international law. Considering future warfare scenarios, Pakistan’s representative at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Lieutenant General Ahsan Gulrez, HI (M), mentioned that “cyber warfare, hybrid strategies and emerging technologies are fast becoming principal sources of competition in an intensifying power struggle, necessitating the adoption of a cooperative approach for harnessing their immense potential. Confidence-building frameworks are essential for strategic stability and a secure civil, military, and nuclear environment. It is imperative that the international community co-opts and collaborates to establish a globally acceptable rules-based framework that promotes peace, security and stability, including ethical and moral aspects as well”.
Both the U.S. and China share aspirations for the region focused on collective and collaborative development through multilaterism. However, their approaches reflect their own perspectives. Despite dialogue, the lack of mutual understanding suggests a future for the region that may become more antagonistic and chaotic. Providing forums for discussion is important, but prioritizing humanity’s core issues and collective well-being is crucial for real progress.
The writer is a Communication Strategist at the Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad.
E-mail: [email protected]
Comments