Signaling and Tactical Hedging as Political Tools in the Formation of Minilateral Security Coalitions: Quad and AUKUS in the Indo-Pacific Region

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

This article explores the dynamics of minilateral institutions such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) and the Trilateral Security Partnership (AUKUS). As the global order shifts from unipolarity to multipolarity, finding truly “like-minded” allies for strategic coordination remains a challenging task. Thus, states as hedgers deploy signaling and tactical hedging to build mutual trust and “like-minded allies”. The revival of QUAD in 2017 was a response to strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific region, where China is increasingly influencing the regional security architecture. The recent creation of AUKUS can be seen as a tactical hedging by the US, UK and Australia against challenges from China in the South China Sea disputes. In this article, signaling and tactical hedging approaches are considered as a means of assessing the readiness of allies to cooperate in a minilateral format. Minilateral partnerships facilitate cooperation among key regional actors, while signaling mechanisms are used to convey intentions and deter adversaries. Additionally, the concept of tactical hedging is analyzed, highlighting the nuanced strategies used by countries to navigate a complex security environment. The analysis shows that states resort to tactical signaling and hedging maneuvers to advance their interests and limit the influence of competitors, while avoiding unnecessary confrontation. For instance, the implications of minilateralism extend beyond mere military cooperation; they also encompass economic and diplomatic dimensions that can shape regional stability. For instance, while QUAD emphasizes a Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP), its focus on non-traditional security issues such as climate change and health policy. Minilateral formats like QUAD and AUKUS are thus increasingly important as flexible cooperation tools for regulating security in the region. By exploring these interrelated elements, the article aims to provide insights into the evolving security architecture of QUAD and AUKUS in the Indo-Pacific.

About the authors

Supatat Mafuang

Email: supatatmafuang@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2494-5602

References

  1. Mearsheimer J.J. The Gathering Storm: China’s Challenge to US Power in Asia // Chin. J. Int. Polit. 2010. Vol. 3. P. 381–396.
  2. Keohane R.O. Multilateralism: An Agenda for Research // Int. J. 1990. Vol. 45, № 4. P. 731–764.
  3. Ruggie J.G. Multilateralism: the Anatomy of an Institution // Int. Organ. 1992. Vol. 46, № 3. P. 561–598.
  4. Tago A. Multilateralism, Bilateralism, and Unilateralism in Foreign Policy. Oxford University Press, 2017.
  5. Singh B., Teo S. Minilateralism in the Indo-Pacific: The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Mechanism, and ASEAN. London: Routledge, 2020. 156 p.
  6. Tirkey A. Minilateralism: Weighing the Prospects for Cooperation and Governance // ORF Issue Brief. 2021. № 489. P. 1–25.
  7. Naim M. Minilateralism The magic number to get real international action. 2009.
  8. Falkner R. A Minilateral Solution for Global Climate Change? On Bargaining Efficiency, Club Benefits, and International Legitimacy // Perspect. Polit. 2016/03/21 ed. Cambridge University Press, 2016. Vol. 14, № 1. P. 87–101.
  9. Eckersley R. Moving Forward in the Climate Negotiations: Multilateralism or Minilateralism? // Glob. Environ. Polit. 2012. Vol. 12, № 2. P. 24–42.
  10. Anuar A., Hussain N. Minilateralism for multilateralism in the post‑COVID age // Rajaratnam Sch. Int. Stud. RSIS. 2021.
  11. Teo S. Could Minilateralism Be Multilateralism’s Best Hope in the Asia Pacific? [Electronic resource]. 2018. URL: https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/could-minilateralism-be-multilateralisms-best-hope-in-the-asia-pacific/ (accessed: 25.10.2024).
  12. Wilkin T.S. et al. Indo-Pacific Minilateralism Strategic Competition (I): Australia/Japan and Chinese Approaches Compared: Occasional Paper. Pacific Forum International, 2024.
  13. Koga K. Tactical hedging as coalition-building signal: The evolution of Quad and AUKUS in the Indo-Pacific // Br. J. Polit. Int. Relat. 2024. P. 1–26.
  14. Farrell J., Gibbons R. Cheap Talk with Two Audiences // Am. Econ. Rev. American Economic Association, 1989. Vol. 79, № 5. P. 1214–1223.
  15. Kertzer J.D., Rathbun B.C., Rathbun N.S. The Price of Peace: Motivated Reasoning and Costly Signaling in International Relations // Int. Organ. 2019/11/05 ed. Cambridge University Press, 2020. Vol. 74, № 1. P. 95–118.
  16. Ciorciari J.D., Haacke J. Hedging in international relations: an introduction // Int. Relat. Asia-Pac. 2019. Vol. 19, № 3. P. 367–374.
  17. Fenton C., Langley A. Strategy as Practice and the Narrative Turn // Organ. Stud. 2011. Vol. 32, № 9. P. 1171–1196.
  18. Miskimmon A., O’Loughlin B., Roselle L. Strategic Narratives | Communication Power and the New World Order | A. 1st ed. New York: Routledge, 2013. 240 p.
  19. Miller J.D. The Conditions for Cooperation // India, Japan, Australia: Partners in Asia? / ed. Miller J.D. Australian National University Press., 1968. P. 195–212.
  20. Koga K. A New Strategic Minilateralism in the Indo-Pacific // Asia Policy. 2022. Vol. 17, № 4. P. 27–34.
  21. Hambrick D.C., Lovelace J.B. The Role of Executive Symbolism in Advancing New Strategic Themes in Organizations: A Social Influence Perspective // Acad. Manage. Rev. Academy of Management, 2018. Vol. 43, № 1. P. 110–131.
  22. Koga K. Japan’s “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” strategy : Tokyo’s tactical hedging and the implications for ASEAN // Contemp. Southeast Asia. 2019. Vol. 41, № 2. P. 286–313.
  23. Alvesson M. The Business Concept as a Symbol // Int. Stud. Manag. Organ. Taylor & Francis, Ltd., 1998. Vol. 28, № 3. P. 86–108.
  24. Koga K. Quad 3.0: Japan, Indo-Pacific and Minilateralism // East Asian Policy. 2022. Vol. 14, № 01. P. 20–38.
  25. The White House. Quad Leaders’ Joint Statement: “The Spirit of the Quad” [Electronic resource] // The White House. 2021. URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/12/quad-leaders-joint-statement-the-spirit-of-the-quad/ (accessed: 27.10.2024).
  26. The White House. Fact Sheet: Quad Leaders’ Summit [Electronic resource] // The White House. 2021. URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/24/fact-sheet-quad-leaders-summit/ (accessed: 27.10.2024).
  27. Bisley N. The Quad, AUKUS and Australian Security Minilateralism: China’s Rise and New Approaches to Security Cooperation // J. Contemp. China. Routledge, 2024. Vol. 0, № 0. P. 1–13.
  28. Koga K. Institutional Dilemma: Quad and ASEAN in the Indo-Pacific // Asian Perspect. 2023. Vol. 47, № 1. P. 27–48.
  29. Wilkins T. Minilateral groupings as an alternative to multilateralism in an era of strategic competition // Issues & Insights / ed. Baker C. Pacific Forum Internatioanal, 2023. Vol. 23. P. 35–40.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).