A trilateral framework involving India, Australia and Japan should be revitalised as a practical and autonomous mechanism to bolster deterrence in the Indo-Pacific, amid what has been described as a decline in the reliability of the United States under President Donald Trump, according to an opinion piece published by the European foreign policy outlet Modern Diplomacy.
The article argues that the India-Australia-Japan (IAJ) trilateral represents a pragmatic, regionally anchored response to shifting geopolitical realities in the Indo-Pacific, where Washington appears less willing to confront China’s coercive behaviour. It contrasts the current situation with the Cold War era, when the United States was the primary security guarantor for its allies across multiple regions.
According to the write-up, under the Trump administration, the US has shown signs of downgrading its security role in the Indo-Pacific, particularly by avoiding direct pushback against Chinese pressure in contested maritime and strategic spaces. This perceived retreat, the author contends, has created uncertainty among regional democracies that have long relied on US leadership to balance China’s rise.
India, Australia and Japan are all members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), along with the United States. However, the article notes that the Quad itself has been affected by broader strains in US relations with its partners. India was scheduled to host the Quad Summit in 2025, but the meeting was postponed amid trade tensions between New Delhi and Washington. Further uncertainty surrounds President Trump’s own participation in future Quad engagements. Recently arrived US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor reportedly stated that such a summit may take place “hopefully in a year or two,” a remark that the article says underscores doubts about Washington’s near-term commitment.
In this context, Modern Diplomacy argues that regional democracies must assume greater responsibility for their own security. The piece suggests that the United States has also slowed cooperation within various regional “minilateral” groupings—smaller, issue-focused partnerships that were designed in part to counter China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
This slowdown, the author writes, creates a strategic opening for the IAJ trilateral, which deliberately excludes the United States, to assume a more central role in coordinating regional responses to Chinese maritime coercion and other forms of strategic pressure. Rather than replacing existing alliances, the IAJ is presented as a complementary mechanism that can operate with greater autonomy and consistency.
While acknowledging that the IAJ trilateral may not be able to match China’s military capabilities in the absence of US power, the article emphasises that deterrence is not solely about raw force. “Deterrence also includes perceptual factors,” it notes, arguing that a revitalised IAJ—bringing together three of the Indo-Pacific’s most significant democracies—could shape regional perceptions and raise the costs of coercive behaviour.
Maritime security emerges as a central pillar of the proposed trilateral revitalisation. The article highlights China’s expanding naval and coast guard presence across the Indo-Pacific and notes that all three countries face Chinese pressure in different but interconnected theatres. India is increasingly concerned about China’s activities in the Indian Ocean Region, Australia faces challenges in the Western Pacific, and Japan confronts Chinese assertiveness in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.
By coordinating more closely, the author argues, India, Australia and Japan could better align their surveillance, capacity-building, and diplomatic efforts, creating synergies across these theatres of competition. Such cooperation, the piece concludes, would strengthen regional resilience and provide a credible, home-grown response to maritime coercion at a time when confidence in US leadership is being tested.
The call to revitalise the IAJ trilateral reflects broader debates in the Indo-Pacific about strategic autonomy, burden-sharing, and the future shape of regional security architecture in an era of intensifying great-power competition.
