Amid rising geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific region, the Biden administration orchestrated a significant breakthrough by fostering closer relations between South Korea and Japan. This shift is underscored by a recent trilateral summit involving the U.S., Japan, and South Korea, where leaders addressed shared challenges posed by China and North Korea. This collaboration signifies a critical step towards regional security, economic resilience, and a unified approach to navigating the dynamics of the Indo-Pacific.

The ongoing Second Thomas Shoal incident could trigger misjudgments and a wider conflict. Keeping the peace will require a comprehensive approach to crisis management, especially where foundational principles are involved.

America’s Indo-Pacific Strategy is not only at odds with the regional vision to which ASIAN is committed but it affects the region’s development environment. As a result, ASEAN will steer a middle course to protect its central role.

The Biden administration recently wrapped up two important state visits with President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea and President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines. The meetings signify that Biden is on a trek to improve and affirm ties with key Indo-Pacific countries, but it must continue this trend if the U.S. wishes to remain relevant in the region.

The summit did not alter the overall direction of the United States or its core group of allies. U.S.-led competition with China only entered a new phase. America’s objectives have not changed, although it now sees the need to make adjustments.

The Indian Ocean, as a maritime crossroads of international trade, is a key area of competition between China and the United States.

Success or failure is closely linked to China’s ability to influence its own neighborhood, as America’s real purpose is the creation of a NATO-style regional alliance. For the U.S., much depends on whether it can accommodate the concerns of countries that don’t want to take sides.

As the Philippines shifts its foreign policy strategy, it has become a pivotal player in both the Indo-Pacific and the West. While India has diverged from its Western partners, the Philippines is moving in the opposite direction, not taking “sides” by building stronger relations with other countries and seeking a strong positioning and cooperation with key nations.

Europe’s trade relationship with the Indo-Pacific region is the highest valued of any in existence, and yet its leaders are moving surprisingly slow when it comes to their announced ambitions in the region. This is partially due to geopolitical concerns as tensions mount between China and the U.S.

The strategy is based on 20th century thinking in a 21st century environment. It will therefore inevitably run into problems. This design flaw is its Achilles heel: It has improper strategic goals, an imaginary competitor and an ineffective and misguided approach.