This month the talks about ‘NATO type US-Indo-Pacific Alliance’ are doing round as being reported and discussed in media (https://tfipost.com/2020/09/us-wants-a-nato-like-military-alliance-in-the-indo-pacific-and-it-means-the-end-of-natos-relevance/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWQ_SMSs7oM ) .

The need for this ‘NATO type US-Indo-Pacific Alliance’ has arisen mainly due to (i)- Military threat being posed by China in Pacific region where China is obstructing free navigation and is claiming territory on so-called islands  (against international laws) in Pacific which has brought China in direct (even military) conflict  / tension with many countries of the Pacific region (ii)- Chinese efforts to assimilate free democratic country Taiwan in authoritarian Communist China  (iii)- Incursions on Indian territory by China in Eastern Ladakh which has brought the region on the brink of war in which Pakistan is also bound to join China due to Kashmir factor.

But the main reason for the need of this ‘NATO type US-Indo-Pacific Alliance’ is that the economically humble countries of this region are unnecessarily required to spend huge amounts on military equipment, arms, ammunition etc separately in order to tackle the military threat emanating mainly from economically & militarily powerful China.

For example India whose economy was already in bad shape before Corona - pandemic and which has further deteriorated after pandemic is now constrained to rush in the military supply market (in the face of military aggression by China at Eastern Ladakh) which is putting unbearable financial burden on already economically humble India. Similarly Taiwan is reportedly spending $ 7 billion for military needs in the face of military threat from China. This list goes on and on in Indo-Pacific region due to military threats from China and its ally North Korea. Hence if the USA can provide ‘NATO type US-Indo-Pacific Alliance’ then all its member countries can contribute as per their GDP and their national security can be ensured collectively not only at much cheaper cost but effectively too because the USA (the economic & military super power) will lead it.

But the USA will not succeed to the extent feasible & desirable if it keeps it merely ‘NATO type US-Indo-Pacific Alliance’. Rather the USA should make it ‘Human-Rights-Friendly US- Indo-Pacific Alliance’ the HRFUSIPA (and not even merely QUAD or extension of QUAD). This HRFUSIPA should use military force in favor of its member countries only when the requirements about human rights and rule-of-law (international) are fulfilled by the concerned member countries, as mentioned below by giving some examples: -

“[In this HRFUSIPA the member countries can give financial contribution proportional to their GDP and put their boots on ground proportional to their population. Because on both these counts India will be the most important country of HRFUSIPA (due to its larger GDP and population), the USA will have to be extra careful about India so that the USA does not fall in the trap of mischievous & fallacious propaganda of India  for using the military power of the HRFUSIPA, unnecessarily]”

(1)- For example HRFUSIPA should not intervene militarily against Pakistan (if it is not a member of HRFUSIPA) on the issue of J&K unless it is needed for the purpose of carrying out plebiscite in the united J&K as mandated by the ‘Instrument of Accession’ which reads as -“[the question of Accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State, it is my Government's wish that, as soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir, and her soil cleared of the invader, the question of the State's Accession should be settled by a reference to the people. Yours Sincerely Sd/- Mountbatten of Burma]”.

(2)- If Pakistan and Bangladesh are not members of HRFUSIPA then the military of HRFUSIPA should be used against these countries only when they refuse to grant dual citizenship to the displaced people (about 80 million which is ~ 20% of their present population) who were violently  expelled  through illegal population transfer during partition of India.

(3)-  The Indo-China border dispute is a legal dispute unlike India's dispute with Pakistan (which is a political dispute about united-J&K). Hence this Indo-China border dispute should be referred by India to the ‘UN Judicial Commission’ which China cannot refuse as a permanent member of the UN. [It is like resolving a dispute between two parties in a country. In India the Executive Magistrate maintains status-quo of disputed property and directs the contending parties (under section 145 of Criminal Procedure Code) to get the title decided by civil court which will justify the possession]. If China obstructs it through veto etc then HRFUSIPA should intervene militarily to get territories to India from China which India has been claiming as its own.

(4)- For ensuring free navigation in Pacific (including East & South China Sea) and for addressing the issue of various island which China is claiming its own against the protest of other countries of the Pacific, the HRFUSIPA should ask China to refer it to UN appointed Court (or any such international judicial body) including a review petition in China-Philippines dispute which was decided in the favor of Philippines in July 2016. If China refuses to refer these disputes to this international body or refuses to abide by the final verdicts of this international body then and only then the HRFUSIPA should use military force for compliance of these verdicts against China.

(5)- In case of use of military force (as mentioned above) by HRFUSIPA against Pakistan or Bangladesh or China, not only for  making its military success easier but also to punish these offending countries the HRFUSIPA can dismember these countries and make the dismembered part of these countries as member of HRFUSIPA (some like Tibet, Xinjiang etc in China which are complaining against China about violations of their human rights and like Balochistan in Pakistan which is aggrieved the way Pakistan procured its Instrument of Accession through military force).  In other cases than mentioned here for making warring enemy country weaker, the military power of HRFUSIPA should not be used for bringing freedom to any part of the non-member countries of the HRFUSIPA.

(6)- The USA should also not bring its prejudices to influence the decision of using the military force of the HRFUSIPA. For example the USA is unnecessarily prejudiced against China regarding its ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ (BRI) including CPEC. Any rising economic power will need infrastructure for its raw materials and finished products. This is what the West also did. The USA even used military force in 1904 to get access of  Eastern coast of the USA to Pacific through the shorter route of the Panama canal . At least China is not using its military force overtly for developing its transport facilities. Moreover in this age of globalization better connectivity is good for the entire world including for countries of Indo-Pacific region. Hence when China tries to establish military assets in the member countries of HRFUSIPA through BRI etc then and only then the HRFUSIPA should oppose China, including militarily. 

Notwithstanding so many things said against Trump in national & international media about his unpredictable nature, one thing is certain that Prez Trump abhors unnecessary loss of lives & blood which is evident from the Iran episode where he took-back in June 2019 his orders to attack Iran because he did not want to kill about 150 Iranians in lieu of unmanned drone of the USA. Hence it should not be difficult for Trump to take his humane nature to such dizzy heights where as a true Christian he would be an unprecedented peace-maker through HRFUSIPA.

It is hoped that President Trump will  see to it that the said ‘Human-Rights-Friendly US- Indo-Pacific Alliance’ (HRFUSIPA) is achieved which will bring peace, justice and prosperity to this region which is having about 40% population of the world. This may or may not bring a Nobel Peace Prize to Prez Trump but the entire mankind would certainly remember him as a peace-maker the likes of which the world has not seen throughout the history of mankind.