Heightened U.S. military deployments on the Korean Peninsula will only exacerbate the regional security dilemma that affects China, Russia and the DPRK. Meanwhile, exclusivity between the United States and ROK in some trade sectors will be hard to pull off.

The United States does not rule out cooperation with China on particular issues, but the prominence of cooperation in principle has dropped significantly. Indications are that areas of possible cooperation are narrowing and the difficulty is increasing.

Thirteen countries in the Indo-Pacific region have joined the initiative, which indicates interest. But there are problems with the framework as presented that raise questions about its ability to succeed and endure.

There was nothing new revealed in the U.S. president’s visit, other than launching Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Roping in Japan and South Korea and declaring that the U.S. would “intervene” in a Taiwan conflict, all amounted to old news.

Lacking concrete detail, the framework is burdened by great uncertainty. Moreover, the United States seems to be sending a decoupling signal to China — a questionable strategy. If the U.S. continues along this line, it will be hard to win confidence and cooperation from countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

The goal of the United States in creating the IPEF is to gain an asymmetric technological advantage over China and to create an environment for long-term competition. It wants a new rules-based Indo-Pacific order forged in its own image.

The IPEF as yet has no real content, so people are understandably mystified. America wants to drive a wedge between regional countries and China. But this won’t work, as China is already embedded. Supply chains will not be altered on a whim.

India and Pakistan share a deeply intertwined and embattled history. And now that India sees China entering the picture to back Pakistani development, the thought of two neighboring rivals growing closer has put India on notice.

Washington is looking to shore up its Indo-Pacific strategy by further roping in South Korea and Japan. Its strategy is alive and well despite the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and China’s peripheral diplomacy will continue to face thorny challenges.

Besides tackling COVID-19 and climate change, a unifying force within the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue is undoubtedly the member countries’ response to China. As the May Quad summit is underway, analysts must assess both how the Quad will react to China as well as how China will respond to the Quad alliance.