Australia’s alignment to the West and its trade barriers with China has entrenched tensions between the two Asian countries.

War would be a disaster for all. And as Washington policymakers seem to be moving further in that direction, China and the U.S. must contemplate the consequences of military conflict and remember that it would not be their leaders who pay the price, but their people.

Will the Asia-Pacific chart a course forward? Or will it return to the status quo of the Cold War? Mentality matters, and the old thinking inevitably leads to misjudgments. The U.S. sees China through the same prism it once saw the Soviet Union but neglects the fundamental differences of two hugely different ages.

We need to learn how to respect differences and live harmoniously, because not all people or cultures are alike. It’s not healthy for the new Indo-Pacific concept — which works against open regionalism — to replace the traditional notion of the Asia-Pacific.

The region has maintained overall security and stability for more than 40 years, largely because of the strategic rationality and sobriety of governments in the neighborhood. Major powers that want to interfere should take note.

Not so long ago, Australia was known for its booming economy and balanced foreign policy. Today its economy is stagnating, while the U.S. Big Defense casts a dark shadow over its foreign policy - as evidenced by nuclear escalation.

The rapid decline in understanding between China and the U.S. has sparked concerns over the peaceful transition from one dominant power to the other.

Positive trade mechanisms have emerged. China remains committed to developing its relationship with the U.S. The recent tension over Taiwan was controlled. Such things and others are a basis for optimism, not despair.

NATO’s global hegemony has gone unchallenged since the fall of the USSR decades ago. Now, with China’s rise to global prominence and arguably the second most powerful nation in the world, can NATO avoid another Cold War-style showdown on the global stage?

What has evolved is a sort of pseudo-multilateralism in Europe and Asia. After the Cold War, ASEAN developed into a mature community. But with the increasing hype of regional tensions came the idea that Asia can only be safe when relying on a NATO-like military grouping featuring live ammunition.