At a time when Beijing seems inclined to turn inward economically, emphasizing state control and punishing foreign investors, American firms should point out the obvious economic benefits of attracting outside capital. American and other foreign firms could create some of the jobs necessary to employ Chinese workers who have come to expect a better life—and are likely to protest if that future does not materialize.

The bubbles in both finance and property are growing too big. The ordinary real economy is increasingly unable to bear the over-expansion of finance and property of the past 10 years. And NASDAQ is the most precarious bubble of all.

In the past, analysis of the evolution of humanity’s worldview has tended to focus on the West. Now, however, this narrative is being revised. The global economic crisis that originated in the United States in 2007 exposed the fragility of the advanced-country model, giving rise to a new, more multipolar worldview, in which the emerging economies, led by China, India, and Russia, have increasingly challenged the status quo.

China’s efforts to propose a series of new ideas and concepts to improve global governance and stimulate globalization are showing the world a positive way forward as Western powers step away from their post-war leadership roles in shaping those arenas.

When the United Kingdom, France, Germany and other U.S. allies decided to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in 2015 amidst clear opposition from Washington, some questioned whether it meant the transatlantic relationship was weakening in the face of a rising China. In terms of risk, rebalancing, and reward, however, the AIIB was not a situation that pitted Europe’s relationship with the U.S. against its relationship with China. Such a case may offer insight when considering the Paris Agreement and Europe’s actions if faced with choices between Washington and Beijing.

Integration, not isolation, is the key to sustainable development in a world bound ever closely together by information and transportation networks. While trade with the U.S. remains strong, a post-TPP world will require Chile to build bridges with TPP stakeholders and new partners, such as China.

A less alarmed view of China’s Belt and Road Initiative finds first of all that the whole project is much overhyped. Figures about investments include projects that had been previously launched. Although China is likely to increase its influence in the region, its growing influence should not be equated with aggression. In determining how to react to the Silk Road initiative, the West should draw on a major strategic consideration: Do the U.S. and its allies plan to block any and all increases in Chinese influence—or merely contain those moves that entails China’s use of force to dominate other countries?

Against a background of global economic gloominess, China’s Belt and Road Initiative injects a fresh spirit of multilateral cooperation and truly win-win opportunities. There is reason to expect a more vibrant regional and global economic recovery to be stimulated by this partnership initiated and led by Beijing.

The global economy now appears to be shaking off its deep post-crisis malaise, but the overhyped idea of a “new normal” for the world economy overlooks an extraordinary transformation in the global growth dynamic over the past nine years. It raises profound questions about the efficacy of monetary policy, development strategies, and the role of China.

The debate about “world order” and “China’s new leadership role” is attracting more attention especially when China has more loudly expressed support to the economic globalization and free-trade at a time when these ideas are under criticism in the Western world. Many in China who are also interested in the debate find the concepts behind these terms are not as clear as they may look.