Brahma Chellani's column: Trump is endangering the region by increasing his engagement with China

Foreign policies don't change overnight. Often they are gradually dismantled through changing rhetoric, bureaucratic adjustments and manipulation of diplomatic priorities. America's Indo-Pacific strategy is no exception. A decade ago, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe put forward the idea of a free and open Indo-Pacific. The idea behind this was that the Indian and Pacific Oceans are strategic areas that will have to be formed a coalition of committed democracies to prevent any power from dominating. Later, the US also adopted this approach and revived the Quad. Its members – Australia, India, Japan, the United States – were considered pillars of the regional balance of power. But now Donald Trump is pushing the idea of a G2 consisting of the US and China. In contrast to the open and open Indo-Pacific approach, the G2 concept assumes that the world's two largest powers must negotiate and shape the regional balance. This approach fosters bilateral bargaining at the expense of multilateral diplomacy, diminishing the strategic importance of middle-powers. Its stability largely depends on the personal chemistry and changing calculations of the leaders of Washington and Beijing. Today, Trump seems to be softening towards Xi Jinping, but it is difficult to say what will happen tomorrow. This can be described as another example of Trump's unconventional diplomacy, which often emphasizes bilateral bargaining. But his administration has also made the Quad a low priority, and his latest National Security Strategy only briefly mentions the group. The US Department of Defense has also started calling it only Pacific instead of Indo-Pacific again. This is not an immediate diplomatic disturbance. Under Trump, the Indo-Pacific strategy is openly disintegrating. Abe's Indo-Pacific vision over the past decade underpinned Japan's National Security Strategy, which aimed to ensure that China did not exert military pressure in East Asia. If the US focuses on the Western-Pacific, Japan will face the threat of facing China's maritime power. India also occupies a central place in all this. This was evident during Japanese Prime Minister Takeichi's visit to New Delhi last month, when he and Narendra Modi reaffirmed their commitment to the Indo-Pacific framework. They agreed to expand cooperation in areas ranging from AI and critical minerals to defence technology. For Japan, India is not just another strategic partner. With its sheer size, strong military power, dynamic economy and dominant position in the Indian Ocean, India is the unshakable Western pillar of the Indo-Pacific architecture. India presents China with a two-pronged dilemma, forcing Chinese military planners to divide their focus and resources in two places. If China did not have to guard its long, tense Himalayan border with India and protect the Indian Ocean trade routes, it would have been able to concentrate a large number of forces in the western Pacific. By removing the Indo from the Indo-Pacific, the Trump administration has exposed its lack of understanding of this critical dynamic. Combined with the G2, this shift amounts to a significant symbolic and geopolitical victory for China. After all, Chinese leaders have long argued that the real purpose of the Indo-Pacific strategy was to contain China and make Asia-Pacific countries pawns of US dominance. They would much prefer a Pacific-centric framework in which the US and China negotiate directly and other regional powers do as they are told. (@प्रोजेक्ट Syndicate)