Reviewer: 1    Comments to the Author  This study suggested that the AMO modulates the relationship  between the ISMR and ASMR, making this relationship weaker during the period  1932-1966. This conclusion is very interesting, and the results shown in the  paper may be helpful for a further understanding of the remote impacts of the  AMO. However, I found there are some problems, mainly on the presentation, in  the current version, which are listed below.         Reply     Thanks for  your valuable comments. We have revised manuscript carefully based on your  comments and detailed responses are presented below.               1. The correlation between 10-m zonal winds and wind speeds  shown in Figure 2 seems to serve no purpose. It is surely be positive for  westerlies and negative for easterlies. It seems to me that Figure S1, for both  SON and DJF, can be merged into Figure 2.             2. How to draw Figures 7 and 9? The method should be given in  more details. Is the AMO index same as that shown in Fig. 1? AMO is an  interdecadal variation, and thus it would be hard to interpret the regression  onto the AMO index during each sub-period. It seems to me that the anomalies  for each sub-period from the 1903-1992 averages, rather than the regression  onto the AMO index, can be simply used to illustrate possible impact of the AMO.    3. Figure 8 is not clear, especially for the geopotential  anomalies. And in this figure it is hard to see “the upper level wave flux  upstream of Australia can be traced back to a geopotential anomaly center in  the Atlantic region”, and “During sub-period 2, we can see a relatively  concentrated and strong wave flux over the north Australia as compared to the  sub-period 3”, as argued by the authors.    4. There are many bugs in the manuscript. The authors should  carefully revise the whole manuscript.      Reviewer: 2    Comments to the Author    The paper sets out to explore the reason why the  inter-monsoon connection between Indian and Australian summer monsoons weakened  during the 1932-1966 period, and suggests that the AMO plays a potential role  in weakening this connection, via abating the impacts of ENSO on the ASMR. I  find that the results of the paper and their interpretation interesting and  convincing. However, the paper need some revisions before it can be considered  for publication. The detailed comments are listed in the following.  1.      As illustrated by authors, the  positive AMO is related with the enhanced ASMR, and decreases the ENSO’s  effect. Both of the ISM and ASMR have a negative relationship with ENSO. Many  studies have suggested that there is a positive connection between the AMO and  the ISM. Authors should give some analysis and interpretations about the  relationships among the AMO, ISM and ENSO. And please show the ISM and ASMR  indices in figure 1. I think it helps us understand this question better.  2.      Data quality is the limitation of the  paper. Authors should check the results from another data sets, such as ERA-20C.  3.      The AMO has got into its positive  phase after the mid-1990s. What about the relationship between the ISM and ASMR  during this period?  4.      Line 169, the term “spatial  correlation” is not accurate.  5.      Line 209-210, “Similarly, we can  observe positive and negative wind anomalies in Fig. 6a;”. I don’t think they  are similar.  6.      Figure 8 is not clear. Please redraw  this figure and show the results of the Northern Hemisphere.