Do read the article and see the maps:
In addition to its military strategy, the US is using an economic strategy. It wants countries to see the economic benefits of cooperating with the US. As the largest economy in the world, the US used its economic power very effectively in the past.
And yes, the economic and security pieces are meant to be complementary. But there is friction.
Not only between our poles but with allies who also have economic reasons to have good relations with China even as they need American economic and security links.
So these factors shape our options. I know there was hyper-ventilating over Trump's statements on Taiwan, but there has been hyper-ventilating at 11 on everything he does.
President Trump didn't really back down over Taiwan by reconfirming our one-China policy.
He just got the Chinese to be relieved that we didn't change it. Like he did a favor to Peking. Which makes it more difficult for China to push for concessions on the issue since it already looks like Trump did make a concession.
Plus we have the advantage of being reminded that our policy is actually one of acknowledging that the Chinese and Taiwanese think there is one China--not that we agree with that statement.
And honestly, if China falls into chaos as they do on occasion, the Chinese might not be happy to have reminded everyone that the Taiwanese could govern China as legally as the mainlanders.
Northern Expedition 2.0, anyone?
I also think we should review our practices to see if we've gone beyond our formal commitment to acknowledging "one China" under the pressure of China over the decades to ratchet up our formal stiff-arming of Taiwan.
For all that China demands we live up to the agreement, they can hardly object to America living up to only the agreement and not any unofficial additions China has gotten over the decades.
