The latest moves by Trump’s administration are a sharp pivot into new, seemingly accommodating foreign policy. Would less U.S. presence around the world embolden China to make aggressive moves into contested spaces?

The grand strategies of Sun Tzu and Thucydides converge on a central idea: true victory lies in avoiding direct confrontation. In an era of nuclear deterrence and global challenges, their wisdom underscores that great powers must prioritize strategic restraint, internal resilience, and measured competition over reckless escalation.

Donald Trump’s return to the White House puts the Indo-Pacific at the center of U.S. foreign policy, but restoring American dominance won’t be easy. While his first term laid the groundwork for a strategic shift, China’s expanding economic and military influence has only grown stronger. To compete, Trump must recalibrate U.S. engagement—strengthening military alliances, reviving economic initiatives, and leveraging technological advantages—before Beijing cements its leadership in the region.

As wildfires raged through Los Angeles in January, the infamous American conspiracy theorist Alex Jones posted on X (formerly Twitter) that they were “part of a larger globalist plot to wage economic warfare & deindustrialize the [United] States.”

The new U.S. secretary of state will emphasize stemming the tide of immigration, with discussions likely involving law enforcement and economic cooperation, particularly with Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, which are significant sources of migrants. But as the Global South awakens generally, U.S. dominance will not be well-tolerated.

The incoming U.S. administration poses significant challenges, with repercussions extending beyond bilateral relations with China. Finding the proper balance between international exchanges and national security will unlock the door to scientific progress and the greater good of humanity.

Despite their differences, both China and the United States benefit from constructive connections and suffer from continued antagonism. The next few years will determine whether relations will develop into a new cold war or move toward a more equitable form of coexistence.

While the Western outlook on global governance reveals defects and weaknesses, the new outlook proposed by BRICS countries has attracted broad international attention.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently stated that multipolarity is not only the preference, but the norm in the Trump administration—a dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy. But unlike China’s globally engaged model, Rubio’s approach prioritizes U.S. interests, reflecting a more transactional and less globally engaged stance.

Former Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh’s pragmatic diplomacy shaped Sino-Indian relations, balancing engagement with restraint despite domestic criticism. His legacy highlights the tension between economic cooperation and strategic caution in India's China policy.