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.

Trump’s election campaign promises and and the executive orders the new president signed after he came into the White House reveal a narrow-minded, conservative and selfish United States. It’s a startling reversal of the country’s outlook for six decades, and completely outdated.

President Xi has expressed a desire to uphold and develop the world order. President Xi has expressed a desire to uphold and develop the world order. If Xi is up to the challenge and prevents a breakdown in global trade, China will have will have saved more than its own skin.

If the US wants to control the global value chain again, it should further open its market and integrate into the global value chain, rather than rely on the “return home” and “America First” policies to pull the chain apart. Only by restructuring the global value chain and by allowing the free movement of production factors can the world create new trade.

If you ignore the dragon, it will eat you. If you try to confront the dragon it will overpower you. If you ride the dragon, you will take advantage of its might and power.