‘Indo-Pacific’ is structural, not situational: India need not obsess over US terminology

There has been extensive discussion on social media as well as the subject of strategic deliberation in think tanks. The central point being, has the United States willy-nilly withdrawn from Indo-Pacific constructs such as Quad and Malabar? Some aspects are worth examining.

US President Donald Trump during his first term coined the term 'Indo-Pacific' and prefixed 'Indo' to the then-existing Pacific Command. The US administration’s team included Defence Secretary Gen Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, as well as Admiral Harry Harris, the commander-in-chief of the Pacific Command. These military leaders and thinkers observed the Chinese rise in the South China Sea as an effort by China to break out of the first island chain towards the Pacific. The US was quite confident of strong opposing western naval combat power, given its own presence in the Pacific (HQ Pacific Command is located in Hawaii) and three strong US allies: Japan, South Korea and Australia. This power and permanent presence of the 7th Fleet in Yokosuka, Japan, makes breaking out of the first/second island chain into the Pacific, as well as forcible occupation of Taiwan, a difficult task for China. While Pacific Command, by nomenclature, gave the impression of power projection in the Pacific.

As far as the Indian Ocean was concerned, Gen Mattis, having been CENTCOM at one time, knew that the 5th Fleet was adequate and primarily mandated for Gulf security. In the event of use of that power in the Gulf, the Indian Ocean may be left short on firepower. That could have intimidated China to increase its naval activity in the IOR. There were already reports of PLAN ships, submarines and ocean research vessels with a near-permanent presence in the IOR. China had befriended island nations in the Indian Ocean. Its close partnership with Pakistan, increasing activities in Bangladesh and Myanmar, and a base in Djibouti were alarming. While Quad had India in the grouping, it was not a military partnership. Joining hands with the US to oppose China in the Indian Ocean was not the policy of the Indian government. To make it known to China that the US Navy was committed to the Indian Ocean as well, in addition to the Pacific, the term 'Indo-Pacific' appeared to convey that impression. When the nomenclature was changed, China was first to react, calling the Quad and Indo-Pacific an “Eastern NATO”. Admiral Harry Harris coined the term “Hollywood to Bollywood” and participated in the Raisina Dialogue to convey the US Navy’s commitment to the Indian Ocean.

More from Opinion

Over a period of time, the Indian Navy has become much stronger and interoperable with the navies of Malabar countries. The induction of the P-8I in the Indian and Australian navies and interoperability with the Kawasaki P-1 of Japan make Malabar a formidable anti-submarine force at sea. The Indian Navy’s policy of permanent deployments near all choke points of the Indian Ocean 24x7 (mission-based deployment); active anti-piracy missions, response to Houthi attacks in the Red Sea post-Israeli attacks on Hamas; and coordinated action with the USN in providing assistance to damaged ships over 100 days, as well as Indian naval ships’ proactive deployment to blockade Karachi harbour in Operation Sindoor, have all given confidence to the US in Indian naval assets and political support. This view has also been strengthened by the Indian Navy’s escort missions during Operation Epic Fury. These operations strengthen the long-held view of Bharat that the Indian Ocean is India’s ocean and that the Indian Navy is/will be the first responder to any episode requiring maritime action. It will remain the preferred maritime partner to all nations in the IOR. The addition of an indigenous aircraft carrier and a third SSBN with the enhanced-range Agni nuclear-tipped missile has converted the Indian Navy into a formidable maritime power capable of maintaining power balance in the Indian Ocean by itself.

Coming to the latest US Navy operation of over 100 days against Iran in the Gulf, it has been a bit of a disappointment for the US Navy. Much to the surprise of the USA, NATO allies declined to participate in Operation Epic Fury. At one stage, the POTUS wished to withdraw from NATO. The US also invited China to join and bring the operation to an end. However, China’s absence from this operation and its lack of active projection as an alternative world power have probably convinced the US administration that militarily China is not ready for a leadership role, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Given improved relations with China, its unwillingness to display leadership gave an impression that China would not act aggressively against US interests in the IOR. This called for a reduction in force levels, which is also in consonance with the US desire to practise a “strategy of denial” rather than an “aggressive prevention of adversarial intentions”.

The Secretary of War of the US, Peter Hegseth, during the Shangri-La Dialogue 2026, mentioned that a self-reliant India, while advancing its own self-interest, advances shared goals for regional security and holds the line against hegemonic dominance in the Indo-Pacific. He praised India for stepping up to carry its share of the security burden. He was quick to highlight India’s developing logistics capability to sustain high-end military operations, including repair and maintenance of shared defence platforms. He described India as a “critical anchor” in South Asia, playing a pivotal role in maintaining the balance of power in the Indian Ocean.

These recent events not only reflect India’s growing might but also give confidence to the US that India’s leadership in the Indian Ocean is unquestionable.

The dropping of “Indian” from the Indo-Pacific is well timed. It may be recalled that Secretary Marco Rubio attended the Quad foreign ministers’ meeting in Delhi a month ago and conveyed the commitment of the US towards the Quad. In fact, new issues of joint artificial intelligence and sharing of critical mineral technologies have been added, in addition to impetus to Indo-Pacific maritime domain awareness and joint Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) initiatives.

It must be understood that while there is a thaw in US-China relations, China remains a strategic competitor to the US and continues to challenge its global leadership, even if it is on the decline.

(The writer is ex-Chief of Integrated Defence Staff and Commander-in-Chief of the Western Naval Command. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.)