Presently, public sentiment to minimize the risk of terror is on the rise, one of the factors prompting the US to reassess its strategic goals in the Middle East. The result is a more united front in the war against terrorism.

While China’s action falls within common international legal practice, Manila’s unilateral pursuit of its claims violates the rule and spirit of its agreements with Beijing on how to resolve such disputes, and threatens the peaceful order of the region. China and other claimants are all developing countries with economic and social uplift as their main task, and should settle their disputes with direct negotiation as outlined in ASEAN agreements.

Both countries should promise not to carry out attacks on financial institutions and entities that underpin the global economy, share information on third-party threats to the financial sector, encourage and incentivize the banking industry to make the strictest rules for ensuring information safety, and strengthen resilience against various forms of cyber attacks.

The global community needs the participation of countries where the IS and other terror groups have made their bases, with the help and backing of the broad masses of Muslim people in the region. Outside force has proven to be inadequate to eliminate the violence and the root causes behind it, and serious nation-building is required.

In Tokyo, the Abe government is creating a new base in which the use of any U.S. air, sea, or ground forces will be unrestricted. Part of the Obama administration’s aim to maintain unchallengeable American military supremacy in East Asia, the construction of this base is already increasing tension throughout the region.

While outside interference in Middle Eastern affairs has done nothing to improve the employment situation, build strong and efficient political structure, and prompt a solid union against terrorism, a kind of regional security structure including major regional powers and external powers is urgently needed. In this regard, the U.S. can do a lot, and China’s Belt and Road Initiative should be another opportunity for a fresh approach.

Manilla’s arbitration requests in the South China Sea concern the standing of “historic rights”; the status of certain land features in these waters and the maritime entitlements they are capable of generating; and the lawfulness of certain Chinese land reclamation and law enforcement actions. Likely neither Beijing nor Manilla will walk away dejected, however.

Manila’s just-completed Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) consisted of two parts. The official summit agreed on the need to fight terrorism, enhance economic growth, reduce poverty and increase climate change resiliency. Unofficially, the huge political gulf between the U.S. and China over the South China Sea was on display.

The U.S. must shoulder the responsibility of uniting the civilized world against terrorists and extremists, leading an effort to set aside differences among allies so that they can focus on a whole-hearted effort to eliminate this global threat.

The Chinese government believes that development is key in solving all problems in China: Development is the foundation for security, and security is the guarantee for development while China seeks political solutions through peaceful consultations, opposes intervention into other countries’ internal affairs, and promotes the global governance system to be more equitable and reasonable.