By Jeff Smith, The National Interest: ““A great deal of ink has been spilled dissecting the failure of the first QSD but its great flaw wasn’t its underlying purpose, agenda, or membership; it was its timing. In 2007 Beijing was still effectively marketing a soft power offensive while the four democracies struggled to reach internal and external consensus on the nature of the challenge China was posing and the appropriate response.””
By Derek Grossman, RAND: “Since the Trump administration's announcement that it seeks a “free and open” Indo-Pacific, observers have spilled much ink on the revival of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, to achieve this objective.”
By John Powers, The Strategist (ASPI): “When you order ham and eggs, you can be sure the pig is committed. The chook, well, it’s interested, but not like that pig. The same could be said about the Pacific region. By specifically calling out the Indo-Pacific geographic seam, Mattis is keen to show U.S. allies, and potential peer competitors, that despite the White House’s ‘America First’ rhetoric, the Defense Department will maintain its relationships and presence in the region.”