The Quad must formalise through a permanent secretariat and expand to include South Korea and New Zealand to remain relevant to Indo-Pacific security. Now is the time to assess whether the group’s current structure is sufficient to meet the region’s challenges, as leaders prepare for a summit later this year.

As China’s coercive behaviour increases, the Quad’s flexible arrangement risks being seen as weak. A secretariat would enhance policy coordination, while expansion would strengthen collective resilience and legitimacy without being overtly provocative.

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, known as the Quad, consists of Australia, India, Japan and the United States. The group first came together in 2004 following the Indian Ocean tsunami, but remained dormant before a revival in 2017. Since then, the Quad has expanded its focus to include issues such as climate change, critical and emerging technologies, infrastructure, cyber and space. The Quad is not without its critics. China has been largely dismissive of the Quad and views it as a direct effort to contain its power and ambition.

The inclusion of South Korea and New Zealand would help address China’s uneven balance of influence in the region. These nations have the same concerns of and vulnerabilities to Chinese coercion as Quad members, particularly as China is the largest trading partner of South Korea and New Zealand. Having a formal network connecting these six nations would increase coordinated responses to China’s coercive actions. Such coordination would help deter increased Chinese aggression.

Expanding the Quad to include other democracies with shared goals would strengthen the group’s regional standing in many areas. Key issues the Quad is starting to address include technology, infrastructure, health and climate change. In all these areas, China’s approach often contrasts sharply with the Quad and threatens the security and stability of the region.

There may be little interest in expansion due to member nations’ goal of solidifying existing ties before forming new ones. There is also the risk that an expanded Quad would further destabilise the region by invoking China’s sharp criticism. We have already seen China attempt to sow division by repeatedly diminishing the Quad, calling it a ‘small clique of nations’. But bringing democratic, like-minded nations who are also susceptible to Chinese coercion, such as New Zealand and South Korea, into the Quad would demonstrate unity that could actually deter China.

Currently, the Quad suffers from its lack of institutional structure. A secretariat could be modelled on existing regional architectures such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or NATO. This would strengthen member states’ efforts to coordinate policy initiatives and further the Quad’s shared strategic vision, including by solving bandwidth issues that some members face. The lack of organisation has led to operationalisation and implementation issues. While some argue the current working-group format is sufficient to implement the Quad’s vision, inconsistencies between member nations’ bureaucracies impede cooperation. A secretariat would help solve this problem.

The creation of a secretariat would also increase the credibility of the Quad, proving it to be more than a mere flexible arrangement. In addition, it would fortify the Quad’s goal of being a foundation of shared democratic values and principles in the Indo-Pacific. It’s vital to signal to the region, and most importantly China, that the Quad is committed to a peaceful, stable Indo-Pacific, free from coercion. Establishing a secretariat would not only institutionalise an already united group of nations; it would affirm the Quad as a key part of regional architecture.

Member nations have been vocal in their support of the Quad remaining flexible. However, China can easily mistake this flexibility for weakness. China regularly dismisses the value and power of the Quad, describing the group’s effect as ‘sea foam in the Pacific or Indian Ocean: they may get some attention, but soon will dissipate’. A formal organisation with a secretariat would limit China’s ability to disregard the group’s importance.

A more formal and expanded group of nations would make it easier to deter China’s growing assertiveness without direct confrontation, allowing the group of six to counter China in a cooperative manner. The world will be watching the upcoming Quad summit in India. In an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific, strong alliances, not flexible arrangements, will ensure lasting regional stability.