The organization has become an instrument of U.S. hegemony that creates confrontation. The NATO Declaration’s statements about China are loaded with bias, stigma and provocation at a time when the world really needs a force for peace and stability.

The United States talks the talk but fails to walk the walk. It is angling to create a mini NATO parallel organization in the Asia-Pacific region by enlisting the Philippines and Japan. Its Cold War thinking only creates conflict and confrontation — hyping security threats and sabotaging peace and stability.

Amidst the India-Maldives dispute, the intricate dynamics of small island states emerge as pivotal players in the evolving maritime power play. As global powers vie for influence, the geopolitical spotlight shifts to these territories, whose strategic significance prompts a reassessment of traditional labels and fosters a newfound assertiveness in negotiating their roles in the international arena.

The Indo-Pacific aims to contain China's influence but struggles with unclear membership and diverse objectives. By contrast, the economic region of Pacific Asia, centered on China, emphasizes interdependence, but grapples with political uncertainties due to concerns about overreliance on China. The member states of both have agency and will pursue their own interests, but China’s behavior will likely determine which grouping has the greater strategic salience.

Southeast Asia’s geographic location and burgeoning economy puts them in the center of strategic plans by neighboring China, and rivalling U.S.-interests. The path forward for the region’s states will demand acute political maneuvering.

China's economic slowdown is no longer the main contributor to global growth, but the rising strength of developing Asian economies offers hope for sustained global economic activity in 2023.

The deepening trilateral collaboration of the United States, Japan and the Republic of Korea is undermining stability on the Korean Peninsula, and recent provocative actions, will only serve to escalate tensions further. In addition, harsh rhetoric erodes the fragile trust of nations and could result in a generalized sense of insecurity.

If a report in the Washington Post is true, the United States is playing politics by blocking John Lee Ka-chiu’s attendance at an upcoming APEC meeting in San Francisco. This must not be allowed to become a spark that starts another prairie fire in China-U.S. relations.

The arms trade market has always been an indicator of the international security situation, and various acquisitions are now clouding the future of the Asia-Pacific region. Several countries are currently engaged in the most significant arms race since World War II.

The summit did not alter the overall direction of the United States or its core group of allies. U.S.-led competition with China only entered a new phase. America’s objectives have not changed, although it now sees the need to make adjustments.