For a decade, the focus of the United States has shown a high degree of continuity, starting with George W. Bush and followed by Barack Obama, Donald Trump and now Joe Biden. But America is now paying greater attention to detail and adding new features to its geostrategic approach.

The United States has been unsuccessful in its attempts to rally Southeast Asia against China. In recent months, it has mounted a transparent effort to curry favor in the region. But nobody wants to choose between major trading powers. They’d rather keep their options open.

The U.S. has seemingly pulled out all the stops to advance its agenda in Southeast Asia, hoping to entice countries away from China. Yet, as members of China’s neighborhood, ASEAN members will find it hard to create distance between themselves and China, literally and figuratively.

They won’t resolve the significant issue of how China and the U.S. should go forward. But at least the talks established a strategic consensus on managing competition. More talks are likely — even amid quarrels.

Counting on the United States to contain China has come at a heavy price. Worse, Australia’s strategic value as a middle power will be eroded dramatically if it continues to bash China in an era of uncertainty in which one can hear faint echoes of the drums of war.

Japan seems developed and orderly, but that’s only its outward appearance. In truth, it is a vassal of the United States, which has adopted chaos as standard diplomatic theory. Now Japan wants to discharge radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear accident into the sea. Who will say no?

On behalf of my family, I would like to thank the Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries and the Institute for Global Cooperation an

The new U.S. president will want to invest hard strategic resources in the Asia-Pacific region, which will require the use of diplomatic and economic measures to maintain its strategic presence in the Middle East. The arrangement looks reasonable, but it is doomed to fail.

The agreement marks the emergence of constructive rules for the entire East Asia region. The parties no longer look to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with its burdensome provisions, as a model template.

It’s true that the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy has brought certain pressures and challenges to China, but these are manageable, given the thinning resources of the United States and the ability of Chinese diplomacy to adapt.