Strengthening Regional Order in the Asia-Pacific： An Analysis of China-Japan-US Perspectives

Shen Yamei

?

Strengthening Regional Order in the Asia-Pacific： An Analysis of China-Japan-US Perspectives

Shen Yamei

The Asia-Pacific region is characterized by rapid economic growth and complex security challenges. It is also a region where the interests of China， Japan and the United States are deeply integrated and the differences between them highly concentrated. As the Asia-Pacific becomes a center of gravity in terms of economic and geopolitical development on the global stage， China， Japan and the United States are all focusing more attention on this part of the world. Some political observers have expressed their suspicion that the region is being overloaded with different and sometimes divergent interests between the three major countries， and that negative trilateral interactions could lead to the vulnerability of the regional order. This article， proceeding from the general picture of the regional strategic landscape， tries to provide an analysis of the commonalities and differences between the three countries. Based on that， the article aims to identify hidden challenges and potential opportunities for their interactions，and to contribute some long-term thinking on how the three countries can cooperate to strengthen the regional order in the Asia-Pacific.

Introduction

The issue of the regional order is of common interest and concern for each and every country in the Asia-Pacific. It refers to a set of concepts， rulesand collective arrangements for dealing with regional affairs. A reasonable order needs to reflect the regional strategic landscape， convergence and the applicability of rules. With the relative rise and fall of power across the region， developing countries in Asia， including China， have achieved prominent economic growth in the past decades. Corresponding with their growing shares of the global economic aggregate， structural changes have taken place in the regional strategic landscape that are propelling the evolution of the Asia-Pacific order at an accelerating pace.

The three countries hold different views on many issues concerning the regional order，and the trilateral relationship is constrained by a high level of complexity and vulnerability.

In terms of China， it is located in a unique geopolitical environment bordering a host of land and maritime neighbors， but has traditionally lacked influence in shaping the Asia-Pacific order. Now China has become the biggest trading partner， the biggest export destination， and a major source of foreign investment for many countries in Asia. As it is not center stage in the region，China is seeking to play a more active role in regional affairs.

In the meantime， the United States economic recovery has picked up steam and it has regained confidence in maintaining its competitive edge to such an extent that it has labeled the 21stcentury the next “American century.”1Joseph S. Nye Jr.， Is the American Century Over？ Polity Press， 2015； Remarks by the President at the United States Military Academy Commencement Ceremony， West Point， New York， May 28， 2014， http：// www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/05/28/remarks-president-west-point-academy-commencementceremony.In order to ascertain a stable security environment conducive to US and Japanese interests over the long term，2Michael D. Swaine， “China’s Military and the U.S.-Japan Alliance in 2030 - A Strategic Net Assessment，” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace， May 2013， p.309， http：//carnegieendowment. org/files/net_assessment_full.pdf.the United States is pursuing a strategy of rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific， and trying to operate a US-centric orbit in dealing with regional economic， political and security affairs.

Japan， albeit with a lower-than-expected recovery rate， has managed to rebound from the global recession. Its power base as the world's third-largesteconomy， plus its economic， technological and intellectual assets， all point to “definite growth potential.”3“Behind the New Abe Diplomacy： An Interview with Cabinet Advisor Yachi Shotaro （Part Two），”August 9， 2013， http：//www.nippon.com/en/currents/d00090/.Proceeding from that， Japan is dedicating itself to what it describes as “an even more proactive role” in ensuring “world peace and stability，” under the slogan of “proactive contribution to peace.”4“New Year’s Reflection by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe，” January 1， 2014， http：//japan.kantei.go.jp/96_ abe/statement/201401/newyear_e.html.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made a speech entitled “China's Role in the Global and Regional Order： Participant， Facilitator and Contributor" at the 4th World Peace Forum， Beijing， June 27， 2015.

As the three biggest economies of the world， with significant military power and prevalent political influence in the region， China， the United States and Japan share common responsibilities and are confronted with common challenges in achieving regional peace and stability. Nevertheless，the three countries hold different views on many issues concerning the regional order， and the trilateral relationship is constrained by a high levelof complexity and vulnerability. When looking ahead， it is important to build cooperation on issues of tripartite agreement， as well as on issues of disagreement in order to promote regional peace and prosperity.

Table 1 Nominal GDP of Asian Developing Countries and Its Share in World's Total （based on PPP）（Billion USD）

Table 2 Nominal GDP of China， the United States and Japan and Its Share in World's Total （based on PPP）（Billion USD）

New Dynamics in the Asia-Pacific Regional Order

In recent years， there have been heated debates among the international community about where and how the post-war international order is going to evolve. In particular， one question often posed about the Asia-Pacific is：Is this region standing at a critical juncture to the future with lessons learned from the past？5“zhong’e di shiyi lun zhanlue anquan cuoshang guanyu di’erci shijie dazhan shengli ji lianheguo chengli qishi zhounian de lianheshengming” ［China-Russia Joint Statement of the 11th Round of Strategic Security Consultation on the Victory of World War II and the 70th Anniversary of the Founding of the UN］， May 26，2015， http：//news.xinhuanet.com/world/2015-05/26/c_127840601.htm.Or is it facing a dangerous moment in the fraying of an aging order？6Michael Fullilove， “The fraying of an aging world order，” Financial Times， October 24， 2015， p. 11.The answer largely depends on how the regional big countries interact with each other and with the rest of regional countries， and how they shoulder the responsibility to maintain regional peace and stability.

Individually speaking， China， Japan and the United States all value the role the regional order plays in shaping the regional strategic landscape and in realizing their respective long-term success.

For China， the neighborhood carries major strategic significance for China's development due to geographical proximity， natural environment and intertwined relations.7“Xi Jinping： China to further friendly relations with neighboring countries，” October 26， 2013， http：// news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-10/26/c_125601680.htm.While China has benefited fundamentally from a favorable regional order in the course of its peaceful development， it is still faced with a tough neighborhood burdened with both disputes left over from history and new realities. The neighborhood can be a reliable source of stability for China's peaceful development if hidden and existent challenges are resolved or managed， and opportunities seized and sustained. In October 2013， China convened its first conference on diplomatic work toward neighboring countries， and put forward the concept of “neighborhood diplomacy，” vowing to work for an “amicable， tranquil and prosperous neighborhood” with adherence to the principles of “amity， sincerity，mutual benefit and inclusiveness，” so as to turn the neighboring areas intoa community of shared destiny. In the meantime， in order to shoulder its responsibilities as a major country， China has on various occasions clarified its basic position about being a participant， facilitator and contributor to the global and regional order. As Foreign Minister Wang Yi pointed out，“Naturally we wouldn't overturn what we had helped to build， nor would we want to start everything anew.”8“China’s Role in the Global and Regional Order： Participant， Facilitator and Contributor，” Speech at the luncheon of the Fourth World Peace Forum by H.E. Foreign Minister Wang Yi， June 27， 2015， http：//www. fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1276595.shtml.

The United States is dedicated to sustaining its supremacy in Asia as it has done for nearly 70 years. In its view， the United States has championed the region as the guarantor of Asian security， arbitrator of disputes， supporter of international law， as well as being the provider of public goods. Therefore，the Asia-Pacific order， based on US military might， economic strength and political commitment has brought about a peaceful regional environment，and allowed Asian countries to focus on economic and political development. Actually， the United States strives to maintain its global leadership not as a favor for other countries， but rather as a strategic imperative for the United States.9“Testimony of Senator John F. Kerry， Nominee for Secretary of State， Statement Before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations，” January 24， 2013， http：//www.state.gov/secretary/ remarks/2013/01/203455.htm.Asia is regarded as being closely bound with United States' destiny，not only does Asia serve US vital interests including maintaining its strategic dominance， it levels the economic playing field and ensures it maintains a military presence to deter conflicts and to prevent aggression against its allies. To illustrate， US interests have been enshrined in its rebalancing strategy， by making sure that everyone follows the regional order “rooted in economic openness， peaceful resolution of disputes， democratic governance， and political freedom.”10Tom Donilon， “President Obama’s Asia Policy and Upcoming Trip to Asia，” November 15， 2012，https：//www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/11/15/remarks-national-security-advisor-tom-donilonprepared-delivery.

Japan's regional agenda has been based on the three pillars of pacifism，economic growth and democratic values in the post-war period. Thesereflected “an acquiescence in American predominance and an assessment of the strategic landscape and the imperatives of Japan's survival and longterm success.”11Henry Kissinger， World Order， Penguin Press， New York， 2014， p. 189.However， the on-going power shift in Asia has exposed Japan to dual shock-waves. On the one hand， it is concerned about the United States' declining willingness for international engagement， which may lead to a dangerous vacuum in Asia. On the other hand， it is worried about the rise of emerging powers such as China and India，which “has undermined to a great extent the core norms of post-war international order.”12Yuichi Hosoya， Tomoki Kamo， et al.， Regional Order in the Asia Pacific and the Role of Japan in 20 Years， March 2015， p. 1.Under such circumstances，Japan would like to “shoulder an even greater responsibility than before for peace and prosperity across Asia as a country which plays a part in the balance of power in this region.”13Report of the Advisory Panel on the History of the 20th Century and on Japan’s Role and the World Order in the 21st Century， August 6， 2015， p.36.Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has made clear on several occasions that Japan wants to be a leading promoter of rules （for trade， investment， IPR， labor，environment and the like）， a guardian of the global commons， and an effective ally and partner to the United States and other democracies.14Shinzo Abe， “Japan is back，” Speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies， February 22，2013， http：//www.mofa.go.jp/announce/pm/abe/us_20130222en.html.

China has on various occasions clarified its basic position about being a participant， facilitator and contributor to the global and regional order.

Seen through the bilateral prism， it is fair to say that harmony in one bilateral relationship spurs the development of another， and discord in one bilateral relationship often spills over to affect the health of another. Each set of bilateral relationship is connected with the third party to the extent that negative trilateral interactions could lead to the vulnerability of the regional order.

China-US relations are the core issue of the regional order. The assumption that there are inevitable tensions between the rising power and the status-quo power seems rather tempting， and from time to time it sharpens the sense of rivalry and confrontation in China-US relations.The difficulties ahead should not be underestimated. To illustrate， China suspects that the United States is determined to hold it back， and that the United States' democratization agenda harbors the ulterior intention of sabotage with regard to the Chinese domestic politics. And in view of the United States， the engagement policy toward China has failed to promote political freedom in China or encourage it to live with the international order. While Chinese President Xi Jinping has proposed a “new model of majorcountry relations，” designed to avoid the classic security dilemma known as Thucydides Trap， the United States has been unwilling to accept the formula because it “not only assumes that the two countries are peers but seems to place them on the same moral plane.”15Andrew Browne， “Can China Be Contained？” The Wall Street Journal online， June 12， 2015.It reveals how deep the divides are between China and the United States that need to be bridged.

China-US relations are the core issue of the regional order.

China-Japan relations could be the most destabilizing element to the regional order if improperly handled. The two countries have territorial disputes， conflicting interpretations of history and they are rivals for regional influence， if not leadership. On the part of China， bitter and wartorn memories become all the more acute when the United States and Japan collaborate to push back against China either intentionally or inadvertently. As an adjacent neighbor of China， Japan bears the brunt of the consequences of China's rise， and it regards uncertainty in the process of China's rise as one of the biggest external threats. In particular， the development of China's naval power and so-called anti-access/area denial （A2/AD） capabilities are perceived to have challenged US-Japan maritime supremacy in the Asian littoral.16Tetsuo Kotani， “US-Japan Allied Maritime Strategy： Balancing the Rise of Maritime China，” Strategic Japan， Center for Strategic and International Studies， April 22， 2014， p.1.Security specialists in Japan are probing how Japan and the United States should coordinate their security strategies.17Noboru Yamaguchi， “A Japanese Perspective on U.S. Rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific Region，”Asia Policy， No.15， Jan. 2013， p. 7.In this way， the China-Japan relationship has turned into a trilateral relationship with an inalienable “USelement.” J. Stapleton Roy， former US ambassador to China， has captured the transformation of the China-Japan relationship into a trilateral one with the United States. He remarked that a major concern of the United States in managing US-China relations has to be managing China-Japan relations， and that China-Japan relations carry much greater significance for regional peace than US-China relations do.18Remarks by Ambassador J. Stapleton Roy at the US-Japan-China Trilateral Conference from October 19-20， 2015 in Beijing， co-hosted by Qinghua University and the National Committee on American Foreign Policy （NCAFP）.

Both the United States and Japan regard their alliance as the cornerstone of regional order as it is critical for the United States to get a firm foothold in Asia. China feels targeted by the US-Japan alliance since its fundamental motivation includes delivering strategic reassurance against the threat of China's future. China thinks that military alliances often draw a line between allies and non-allies when problems occur， without due regard to the merits of the matter. Support will be given to the ally whatever it does，regardless of whether it's right or wrong. And naturally， some members of the alliance will not resist taking adventurous actions with the backing of a strong ally.19Remarks by H.E. Mr. Liu Zhenmin， Vice Foreign Minister of China， at the 2014 ARF Senior Officials’Meeting， June 9th， 2014， Yangon， Myanmar， http：//www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/zyjh_665391/ t1165765.shtml.Military alliances are therefore insufficient to meet Asia's security needs. By being a de facto existence in the Asia-Pacific， the US alliance system needs to find a way of getting more integrated with the regional security architecture.

China-Japan relations could be the most destabilizing element to the regional order if improperly handled.

Consensus on Some Important Issues

The three countries share some common understandings about the regional order. First， they all recognize that the current regional order has achieveda series of success stories. For example， the regional order has successfully prevented a hot war between the big countries in the region from occurring in the past decades； it has promoted the rapid pace of regional economic development and integration， creating one “miracle” after another （see Table 3）； it has led to a variety of institutional arrangements that serve as platforms for regional cooperation； and the existing order has effectively protected the sovereignty of the overwhelming majority of regional countries.

Table 3 GDP and merchandise trade by region， 2011-13 （annual percentage change）

Second， the three countries all agree that there is room for improvements in the regional order. The security concerns of countries in the Asia-Pacific vary， and the level of mutual trust in the region is relatively low. The current order suffers considerable strain from meeting a myriad of economic and security challenges. For example， the northeast Asian security dilemma still lingers on. The unity of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations （ASEAN） as a bloc has encountered centrifugal forces from outside，with the bigger countries competing for relevance. In the economic field， the fragmentation of regional cooperation is under way due to a dizzy patchwork of free trade agreements thriving under different initiatives. Demand for further improvements in the current order provides a strong propelling force for the order's evolution.

Third， each country maintains that the evolving regional order should be based on a set of common principles， and be supported by concrete regimes and arrangements regulating regional affairs. Such principles or elements include the following： no new Cold War in Asia； peace and stability to be valued most； regional hot-spot issues to be brought under control so as to avoid escalation due to mutual suspicion and/or unexpected incidents； an open regional economic order and a rule-based order as common goods； and all countries to play their due role in shaping the regional order.

Major Differences

China， Japan and the United States are different in their national conditions，political systems， ideologies and strategic cultures， and they hold divergent views on the nature and outlook of the evolving regional order. In particular，in face of the rise of China， the United States and Japan have already begun to coordinate their security strategies in an unprecedentedly “seamless” and “robust” way. Differences between the three have profoundly constrained the possibility of in-depth trilateral cooperation on the issue of strengthening the regional order.

On evaluation of the current situation： Stable or not？

The United States reckons that the contemporary times are “full of transitions and turbulences.” In particular， India's potential， China's rise，and Russia's aggression all significantly impact the future of major power relations.20The White House， National Security Strategy， February 2015， p. 24， http：//nssarchive.us/wp-content/ uploads/2015/02/2015.pdf.In its official statements， the United States say it welcomes “the rise of a stable， peaceful， and prosperous China” and that it seeks “to develop a constructive relationship with China that delivers benefits for our two peoples and promotes security and prosperity in Asia and around the world.”21Ibid.， p. 24.However， mainstream media coverage and academics in the United States have repeatedly expressed their discontent that China is “seeking to carve out a leadership role in Asia that is equal to or greater than that of the United States.”22Stapleton Roy， U.S.-China Relations and Regional Order， Wilson Center， June 8， 2015， https：//www. wilsoncenter.org/article/us-china-relations-and-regional-order.

Japan has cautioned that it is surrounded by an increasingly severe security environment and confronted by complex and grave national security challenges. The Asia-Pacific region has become more prone to so-called “gray zone” situations， and there is a risk that these “gray zone” situations could further develop into grave situations.23Government of Japan， National Security Strategy， December 17， 2013， pp.3， 11.Some Japanese analysts refer to the current state as Japan's first-ever Security Deficit since the start of the Cold War，24Nicholas Szechenyi， “The U.S.-Japan Alliance： Prospects to Strengthen the Asia-Pacific Order，”in Strategic Asia 2014-15： U.S. Alliances and Partnerships at the Center of Global Power， The National Bureau of Asian Research， p. 40.wherein the challenges confronting Japan are greater than its capacity to address them. If unwisely handled， the situation could well engulf Japan into a vortex of an unfavorable environment.25Yuichi Hosoya， Tomoki Kamo， et al.， Regional Order in the Asia Pacific and the Role of Japan in 20 Years， March 2015， p. 5.

In contrast with the grim picture interpreted by the United States and Japan， China views the region as stable on the whole. China thinks itsneighborhood is full of vigor and vitality， boasting obvious advantages and development potential， and most of the neighboring countries have a friendly and mutually beneficial relationship with China.26“Xi Jinping： China to further friendly relations with neighboring countries，” October 26， 2013， http：// news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-10/26/c_125601680.htm.Meanwhile， the broader picture of structural problems in the current order needs to be born in mind. As the trends of multi-polarity gain force globally， the Asia-Pacific regional order is still a “closed club.”27Fu Ying， “Under the Same Roof： China’s View of Global Order，” November 11， 2015， http：//www. huffingtonpost.com/fu-ying/china-global-order_b_8537918.html.It has lagged behind the trends of multipolarity， and thus there is much room for improvements.

On perception of threat： Who is changing the status quo？

The United States regards China as presenting challenges to the international order.28Secretary of Defense Ash Carter Remarks on “Strategic and Operational Innovation at a Time of Transition and Turbulence，” Reagan Defense Forum， November 7， 2015， http：//www.defense.gov/News/ News-Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/628147/remarks-on-strategic-and-operational-innovation-at-atime-of-transition-and-tur.There is growing pessimism about the intention of China in general， and in particular what China has been doing with its naval power， what is behind its claims in the South China Sea， and a series of economic and security initiatives it has launched in recent years. Changes are also taking place in the China-watching community. Rhetoric like the “Hundred-Year Marathon” has gained people's attention and aroused suspicions. Meanwhile， there are huge value gaps on issues such as human rights， democracy and basic freedom， which boil down to a dividing line for the United States—“We are not sure that you are one of us.” Some US political mavens have observed that fundamentally speaking， China's efforts to occupy a larger space in the international order have already gone to the extent of affecting the United States' primacy. It is not whether China wants to upset the order， but that it has already upset the order. And the changed status quo has impaired the interests of the United States and its allies in the US-led regional order.

Some Japanese scholars clarified that the general threat perception acrossJapan is not the rise of China per se， but for what purpose is China rising.29Remarks by Professor Matake Kamiya of National Defense Academy of Japan at the CIIS-sponsored “China-Japan-US Trilateral Dialogue on Regional Order” in Beijing on October 18， 2015.People are worried how China is going to use its growing power， and whether China is moving toward revisionism of the international order. If China tries to build a different order， it will be a major source of tension. Japan is also concerned about the staying power of the United States in the Asia-Pacific， or in other words， the sustainability of the United States' rebalancing strategy. Japan's judgment is that the level of uncertainty is increasing in the United States' Asia policy， since the United States is plagued by its persistent financial plight， disturbances in the Middle East， as well as tensions in Eastern Europe. Japan is attentive and vigilant to the United States adopting a policy of accommodation toward China at the cost of Japan's interests.

Proceeding from a relative optimistic evaluation of the current regional situation， China refrains from targeting a certain country as a “threat” in general， but rather targets elements of instability. Some Chinese scholars point out that the discourse on who is maintaining the status quo and who is changing it per se is neither fair nor healthy， because it reflects the pattern of binary opposition in American political thinking， rather than correct reflection on the changing regional order. As a matter of fact， almost all countries in this region， to a greater or lesser degree， have engaged in activities changing the status quo. For example， the United States hails Japan's easing of restrictions on its military， which revises the postwar order. The United States ascribes its economic problems to the existing international economic and trade rules， and is shaping new frameworks such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership （TPP）， and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership （TTIP）， and making a fresh start in regional institutionalization. Some US allies can even find shelter under the alliance system if they have taken unilateral and coercive actions to change the status quo in their maritime disputes with China. In addition， China argues that disruptions and damages to the international and regional order have occurred due to compliance default with regard to the UN Charter and otherrecognized norms governing international relations. And that compliance default， the not good enough implementation of the UN Charter and related norms， is an essential threat to the current order and should be corrected.

On suggested path forward： Cooperation or confrontation？

The United States has based its response to the evolving order mainly on recalibrating its China policy， which has led to three basic schools of thought. The first school wants to maintain the United States' strategic dominance and balance China from a position of strength. This view is widely shared in the government， military and among intellectuals.30John Mearsheimer， “Maintain U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere and prevent China from achieving regional hegemony in Asia，” The National Interest online， August 21， 2015， http：//nationalinterest. org/feature/we-asked-john-mearsheimer-what-should-be-the-purpose-13642； Robert D. Blackwill and Ashley J. Tellis， “Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China，” Council Special Report No. 72， March 2015.The second school stands for a balance of power， calling on the United States to realize the unsustainability of its predominance in the West Pacific and urging an understanding be reached with China on a series of long-term issues such as the Korean Peninsula， Taiwan， the maritime and territorial disputes， and etc.31Michael D. Swaine， “Beyond American Predominance in the Western Pacific： The Need for a Stable US-China Balance of Power，” April 20， 2015， http：//carnegieendowment.org/2015/04/20/beyond-americanpredominance-in-western-pacific-need-for-stable-u.s.-china-balance-of-power/i7gi.The third school appeals to the US government to engage with and accommodate China， invoking that one of the main reasons East Asia has enjoyed peace since the 1970s is the reconciliation between the United States and China.32Jeffrey Bader， “Changing China Policy： Are we in search of enemies？” Brookings China Strategy Paper， June 22， 2015， http：//www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2015/06/22-changing-china-policybader.Therefore， the United States needs to provide an off-ramp exit for China to de-escalate regional tensions， and the two countries should aim for more cooperation.

For Japan， it is a dual-track approach. Internally， it is to put in place the biggest transformation of its security policy， and move toward being a “normal country.” On the regional stage， Japan seeks to reinforce rulemaking and preserve a favorable balance of power without inhibiting China'scontribution to economic and political development in the region.33Interim Report， U.S.-Japan Commission on the Future of the Alliance， July 14， 2014， p.2， http：//csis. org/files/publication/140717_us_japan_commission_Interim_Report.pdf.

Safeguarding its sovereignty and territorial integrity is China's traditional concern in strengthening the regional order. Meanwhile， China maintains that the regional order needs to reflect respect for multiplicity and uphold an Asian way of cooperation， which features mutual respect，consensus-building and accommodation of each other's comfort levels. China has always taken ASEAN as a priority in its neighborhood diplomacy， and supports ASEAN centrality in East Asia cooperation. China thinks the region lacks an effective security mechanism and calls for an adequate security architecture. For the purpose of supplementing the current regional order，China has put forward the Belt and Road Initiative， the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank， the concept of Asian security， and etc.

Hidden Challenges

The differences elaborated above all point to the very complex and vulnerable nature of trilateral relations between China， Japan and the United States. The way forward to strengthen the Asia-Pacific order is still faced with hidden challenges.

First， big countries shoulder greater responsibilities in preserving regional peace and stability， but the moral self-restraint to manage majorcountry differences isn't sufficient yet. Mechanisms of managing differences between major countries must be set up， so as to deal with sensitive issues prudently and properly. In this process， a question that haunts China， Japan and the United States is how to restrict the differences and disputes so they follow a reasonable trajectory and to a reasonable degree， and restrain them from spilling over to other fields.

Second， tripartite experience in building a cooperative architecture needs to be learned and accumulated. Although China has become more willing to play， and capable of playing， a bigger role in international andregional affairs， it has limited experience in this regard. Japan and the United States likewise are not familiar with how to enduringly be on good terms with a rising country. How to incorporate the different initiatives and arrangements proposed by the different parties is therefore a common interest of the region. And it will be helpful to promote coordination and integration between the various arrangements in order to usher in an overarching cooperative architecture for the region.

Third， it is obvious that the maritime disputes in the East and South China seas are not just a legal issue， but rather a political and security issue. They may be difficult to resolve， but they need to be defused or managed， so as to allow room for a peaceful solution to be found. For the United States， the maritime issue is closely related with the right to freedom of navigation， its political credibility as well as its security commitments to its allies. For China， it is essentially about sovereign rights， legitimate interests and providing public goods on the seas. Japan，meanwhile， seeks to play a leading role in regional maritime security cooperation. While pursuing the legitimate rights and interests each has claimed， the three countries are still in the process of fathoming each other's bottom lines， with new norms to be established. The stakes are high that the process should be a peaceful one.

How to incorporate the different initiatives and arrangements proposed by the different parties is therefore a common interest of the region.

Fourth， balanced thinking counts much. Recent years of interactions between China and Japan have shown that conflicting interpretations of history become a barrier in bilateral relations， and often intensify nationalistic sentiments. China-US relations are also periodically faced with rhetorical discords in concurrence with presidential and congressional election campaigns in the United States. And the Chinese popular sentiment toward the United States constantly swings from one extreme to the other，which only creates more fluctuations in bilateral relations. In the age of social media， irrational and biased views can proliferate far and fast， and canbe easily captured by the interlocutors across the table， only to compound mutual distrust or suspicion. The three countries need to develop more balanced thinking with regard to themselves as well as to the other two parties， so as to save trilateral interactions from distractions and obstructions.

Looking Ahead

It is fair to judge from the current trilateral interactions that the regional order in the Asia-Pacific cannot be as it has been， and that China， Japan and the United States all want to improve it while maintaining the nature of international order， with concerted efforts rather than alone. Nevertheless， in light of “the protracted nature of the contest over the international order，”34Xi eyes more enabling int’l environment for China’s peaceful development， November 30， 2014， http：// news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-11/30/c_133822694_2.htm.it is safe to conclude that conditions for Track-1 trilateral cooperation with regard to strengthening the regional order are not ripe yet， and trilateralism on Track 2 has a lot of work to do.

Track-2 trilateral exchanges can be a good platform to discuss differences， dispel distrust and broaden up cooperation. It is suggested that think tanks in China， Japan and the United States play a bigger role in sustained dialogues on the issue of the regional and international order. One subject appropriate for trilateral deliberations can be enhanced compatibility between the US alliance system in the Asia-Pacific and other regional security arrangements. Considering the significance of vital sea lines of communications （SLOCs） passing through the Indo-Pacific waters，the dialogue can also cover issues related to energy transportation security，maritime environmental protection， as well as Humanitarian Assistance/ Disaster Relief （HA/DR）， where everyone feels vulnerable if left alone and rewarded if working together.

Shen Yamei is an associate research fellow of the Department for American Studies at China Institute of International Studies.