Depending on military might to preserve US dominance of the globe is a strategic error on four counts, and that approach is oblivious to both China’s peaceful rise and the real desires of China’s neighbors.

Beijing employs economic and diplomatic tools to promote security in Africa while Western countries tend to rely on military means. While international pundits often anticipate Chinese military action in Africa, the country believes in non-interference in external affairs, with officials citing history’s record that military interventions generally become part of the problem, not the solution.

With the deployment of advanced weaponry and coupled with extensive media coverage, the US military has put on a show similar to a Hollywood blockbuster. But war is not imminent: The US simply hopes to increase China’s costs for such sovereignty-defending activities through military, political, diplomatic and media tools – and embarrass China diplomatically.

At this year’s Munich Security Conference, the focus was clearly on the relations between Russia and the West and the dire consequences for international peace and security.

The Chinese policy towards the DPRK was not made purely out of ideological considerations but developed its shape today due to geopolitical factors. Unforeseen aggression and expansion by Western powers led to a popular Chinese belief that the Korean Peninsula was a ‘strategic security shield’ for China. Over the years as China's political prowess has only grown North Korea is no longer a 'shield' but rather the 'shielded.'

The US promise of promoting peace and stability in the South China Sea may sound familiar to regional players as they have heard very same slogans many times in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. All regional countries have to make concerted efforts to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

China has neither the military infrastructure nor the political will to strike IS forces on the ground in the Middle East. But China continues to build its military capacity and is by no means looking for a “free ride” in the Middle East.

Pyongyang should pay a price for its violation of Security Council resolutions, but punishment by itself will not magically solve the nuclear problem. If sanctions could not be translated into a strategic rethink, they will only add more pain to the ordinary North Koreans' already miserable life.

At a time when the conflict within Islam has sharpened between Sunnis and Shias and between fundamentalists and reformers, the House of Saud — the world’s No. 1 promoter of radical Islamic extremism — is increasingly playing the sectarian card, even at the risk of deepening the schisms. This aggressive activism carries significant implications for U.S. interests, from the Middle East to Asia.

This US defense installation would offer no real protection from the North’s usable weaponry, and would surely provoke the DPRK into a new, vicious cycle of action vs. reaction. The idea has already stirred strong protests from the Chinese and Russian governments, which believe THAAD, if deployed, will threaten their security interests. The idea of deploying THAAD on Korean soil is a bad example of how anger and angst can overpower and replace rational response.