Quad's pivot to Indo-Pacific geoeconomics faces a credibility test

Earlier this week, Quad foreign ministers met in Delhi after a gap of almost a year. Before the meeting, doubts had been raised regarding the relevance of Quad. The United States’ renewed focus on the Western Hemisphere, the Iran war, and an attempt at finding a modus-vivendi with China were three key reasons behind Quad losing steam in Washington.

 

The foreign ministers’ meeting aimed to revitalise Quad. More importantly, it sought to focus on geoeconomics. Economic security and prosperity, and critical and emerging technology were major themes of the joint statement. The Quad countries — the US, India, Japan and Australia — believe that “economic security is fundamental” to the grouping and to the Indo-Pacific region. They also expressed concerns regarding economic coercion and non-market policies. Three points stand out.   

First, the Quad countries unveiled a framework on the critical mineral initiative. Critical minerals have emerged as a new frontier of great power politics. China is a dominant player in their supply chain. Last year, in the US-China trade tussle, Beijing deployed rare-earth supplies as an instrument to retaliate against American tariffs. The imperative of diversifying the supply chains for critical minerals has never been greater. The Quad framework reflects the emerging strategic concerns and underlines the necessity of cooperative efforts. The framework builds on the Mineral Security Partnership (MSP) launched in 2022. All Quad countries are members of the MSP. 

The Quad framework notes that participating countries will work to build secure supply chains. Critical minerals are important for developing advanced technologies, the green transition, economic growth, as well as for a resilient  industrial base. The four Quad countries intend to work together to “use economic policy tools and coordinated investment” for developing diversified and fair critical minerals markets. Quad would like to “avoid reliance on any one country” for critical minerals. They have identified three areas for collaborative efforts: Investment and project development, regulatory alignment, and recycling and recovery of critical minerals. More importantly, Quad intends to mobilise private and public capital of up to $20 billion. Moreover, Quad considers Pax Silica as “a pillar of our shared economic security agenda”.     

Second, the foreign ministers’ meeting issued a statement on Indo-Pacific energy security. Due to the Iran war, the Indo-Pacific countries have suffered severe energy shocks. Countries like India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and the Philippines are acutely dependent on oil and gas supplies from West Asia. Smaller countries like Sri Lanka have been worst-hit by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the disruption in energy supplies. These countries have had to undertake emergency measures to absorb the energy shock. Their economic growth has been badly affected by the rising global fuel prices.  

The Quad statement on energy security is an expression of concern as well as a signal to the Indo-Pacific region. The changing energy landscape and geopolitical complexities have underscored the significance of energy security and stability. The Quad statement links energy security with the protection of critical maritime routes and infrastructure. The undercurrents of the Iran war, including the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the attacks on energy infrastructure in the Gulf, are hard to miss here. The statement notes that within the realm of energy security, Quad will focus on technology, management, policy, international market analysis, and emergency response exercises. It seeks to strengthen regional energy resilience and promises to convene a fuel security forum as well.      

Third, the Quad countries seek to develop ports in the Indo-Pacific region. The foreign ministers’ meeting agreed on developing a port in Fiji. This builds on the Quad Ports of the Future Partnership. The Indo-Pacific is a maritime region and the role of ports for economic security is significant. The focus on developing critical infrastructure, including ports, has been on the Quad agenda for a while. In 2024, Quad announced that it would improve regional connectivity infrastructure. It also expanded the Quad infrastructure fellowship from 1,300 to more than 2,200 experts. Last October, India hosted a Quad Ports of the Future Partnership conference. The announcement of the Fiji port fits into this emerging area of cooperation. It also sends a strategic signal to the Small Island Developing States — that Quad is willing to help them build the necessary infrastructure and reduce China’s attractiveness.    

Along with building port infrastructure, Quad intends to link all Pacific Island Forum (PIF) countries through undersea cables. Cooperation in areas like Open Radio Access Network (RAN), digital supply chain resilience, artificial intelligence, next-generation agriculture, and food security is also deepening its focus on geoeconomics. 

Moving forward, the real challenge for Quad countries is twofold. First, they need to deliver on their commitments. Many such initiatives have been announced in previous Quad summits. However, they lost steam or fizzled out. Second, a more significant challenge is to maintain the momentum and keep the US engaged with Quad. Washington’s shifting priorities and, consequently, its focus diverting away from the Indo-Pacific will lead to Quad becoming irrelevant. Will the geoeconomic turn keep Quad relevant?     

The author is an assistant professor of geopolitics and geoeconomics at the Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Pune