At first glance, the Ukraine conflict has some loose parallels to 1958, when the People’s Liberation Army shelled Kinmen without notifying Russia in advance. But while rumors of intrigue may raise eyebrows, the comparison falls apart quickly.

At the gathering in Washington, China was the elephant in the room. While it’s too soon to say which side has the upper hand in Southeast Asia, the summit offered a glimpse of how the competition will unfold.

Thirteen countries in the Indo-Pacific region have joined the initiative, which indicates interest. But there are problems with the framework as presented that raise questions about its ability to succeed and endure.

Lacking concrete detail, the framework is burdened by great uncertainty. Moreover, the United States seems to be sending a decoupling signal to China — a questionable strategy. If the U.S. continues along this line, it will be hard to win confidence and cooperation from countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

Geopolitical risk, sanctions, and covid in China are redefining how we think about the future of global supply chains. Nations must start considering how to better secure their supply chains through regional trade partnerships, reshoring essential manufacturing capabilities, and sourcing goods from multiple nations and regions.

Besides tackling COVID-19 and climate change, a unifying force within the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue is undoubtedly the member countries’ response to China. As the May Quad summit is underway, analysts must assess both how the Quad will react to China as well as how China will respond to the Quad alliance.

With the shadow of the Russia-Ukraine crisis looming in the background, America’s midterm elections will be a test of voters’ mood. Donald Trump’s sway over the Republican Party will be reinforced or repudiated. But economic factors may be the decisive factor.

Views differ on what triggered the current conflict. But whatever the pros and cons of NATO expansion, the conclusion must be that China, not Russia, is the greater long-term, structural and potentially lethal challenger to America.

The $150 million packages are a good start for America’s regional vision, but what the U.S. does next will be decisive. In Southeast Asia, actions always speak louder than words.

Judging the summit from an American perspective would be misleading. Rather, it must be scrutinized from the ASEAN point of view. From that position, the summit can be seen as beneficial not only to ASEAN but to all state-to-state relations in the region.