Sino-Australian Relations: A Triangular Perspective

A ‘Soft’ Balancing Ménage à Trois? China, Iran and Russia Strategic Triangle vis-à-vis US Hegemony

“…Thus, the present contribution argues that the strategic triangle between China, Iran and Russia is a ‘ménage à trois’ that maintains balance and provides incentives for continuous collaboration at a low cost (Dittmer, 1981) due to complementary interests that vouchsafe their cooperation as indicated by triangular logic (Dittmer, 2012). Moreover, the description of China–Iran–Russia naval cooperation as ‘the new triangle of power in the sea’ 9 echoes this categorisation in the three countries’ political and military rhetoric.…”

“…However, the formation of such a triangle takes place under certain circumstances in which all the involved sides should realise the prominence of the triangle, and each player has to be ratified and recognised by the others in an equal term, and the relationship between any two will be affected by each player’s relationship to the third. Thus, ‘complementary interests may vouchsafe continued cooperation’ (Dittmer, 2012, p. 663).…”

“…Accordingly, a ‘strategic triangle’ forms under certain conditions, such as when three participants are sovereign, rational actors who pursue foreign policies based on national interests while taking into account the interests of the other members (Dittmer, 2012). In the case of the China–Iran–Russia triangle, all three states are either great powers (China and Russia) or regional powers (Iran) 6 with distinct foreign policies and are deemed politically significant actors both at the regional and international levels.…”

“…There have been several conceptual considerations on what the term strategic triangle entails (Dittmer, 2012;Hsiung, 2004;Shambaugh, 2005). The 'strategic triangle may be understood as a sort of transactional game among three players' (Dittmer, 1981, p. 485).…”

“…Thus, 'complementary interests may vouchsafe continued cooperation' (Dittmer, 2012, p. 663). Dittmer (1981Dittmer ( , 2012 has introduced a variation in strategic triangles as a function of the rules of the game and exchanges of the players: the 'menage a trois', consisting of symmetrical amities among all three players; the 'romantic triangle', consisting of amity between one 'pivot' player and two 'wing' players, but the enmity between each of the latter; and the 'stable marriage', consisting of amity 4 between two of the players and enmity 5 between each and the third' (1981, p. 489). A menage a trois represents the most desirable pattern providing incentives for all three to continue their cooperation at a minimal cost; however, it is also 'a relatively unstable and transient configuration' (Dittmer, 2012, p. 665).…”