ZHAO Lei and FANG Changping on Changes and Trends in Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation in the Context of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy
China needs to prevent further fragmentation, enhance ties with Asia-Pacific countries, support ASEAN’s centrality, and join high-level regional agreements.
Welcome to the 15th edition of our weekly newsletter! ChinAffairs+ is a weekly newsletter that shares Chinese academic articles focused on topics such as China’s foreign policy, China-U.S. relations, China-European relations, and more. This newsletter was co-founded by me and my research assistant, ZHANG Xueyu. I am SUN Chenghao, a fellow with the Center for International Security and Strategy (CISS) at Tsinghua University, and currently a visiting scholar at the Paul Tsai China Center of Yale Law School in the United States.
Through carefully selected Chinese academic articles, we aim to provide you with key insights into the issues that China's academic and strategic communities are focused on. We will highlight why each article matters and the most important takeaways. Questions or criticisms may be addressed to sunchenghao@tsinghua.edu.cn
Today, we have selected an article written by MEN Honghua, which focuses on the changes and trends in Asia-Pacific regional cooperation in the context of the U.S. "Indo-Pacific Strategy".
Summary
Regional integration represents the continuous advancement of cooperative mechanisms within a region. Regionalism provides a stable and sustainable framework for cooperation mechanisms among regional actors. Amid the complex institutional nesting and layering of multiple issues, coupled with the intensification of China-U.S. strategic competition, the U.S. has increased its level of intervention in regional cooperation, employing new tactics. After summarizing and reviewing existing research, this paper analyzes the new core elements and methods of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, as well as the new changes in the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation process under its influence.
Based on the principle of containing China, the U.S. drives regional countries to enhance their centrifugal forces toward China and their centripetal forces toward the U.S., through strategies such as the “securitization of economic issues” and the “diffusion of security issues”. Consequently, under the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation process is characterized by the securitization, hybridization and polarization. The collective regional identity is becoming more fragmented, and the regional cooperation agenda is shifting from “soft norms” to “hard constraints”. As the U.S. accelerates its Indo-Pacific strategy, ASEAN’s central role in the region will be challenged, and Japan is more likely to become an active supporter of US. China must take action to resist regional fragmentation, strengthen ties, and appropriately respond to the challenges posed by small multilateral mechanisms.
Why It Matters
This article delves into the effects of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy on Asia-Pacific regional cooperation, offering significant insights into international relations, policymaking, and the future of regional collaboration in this area. Theoretically, by providing fresh perspectives and case studies, it enhances the framework of regional cooperation theories, deepening understanding of power structures, security and economic relationships. Furthermore, it extends the application of international relations theories, such as power structure theory and constructivism, by analyzing the origins, essence, and impact of the U.S. strategy.
Practically, the research offers actionable implications for China and other Asia-Pacific countries. For China, it highlights challenges posed by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy, including the securitization of cooperation agendas and the diminishing centrality of ASEAN. It suggests strategies to safeguard China’s interests while promoting healthy regional development, such as reinforcing economic ties and engaging in multilateral mechanisms. For other Asia-Pacific countries, the study sheds light on shifting patterns of cooperation, aiding them in making informed policy decisions. For instance, ASEAN countries can explore ways to maintain their cohesion and centrality, while Japan might balance its strategies between countering China and aligning with the U.S. Additionally, the article examines trends in regional cooperation mechanisms, such as the intensifying bifurcation of economic and security frameworks, providing guidance for optimizing and innovating these mechanisms. Besides, based on power rivalry and regional cooperation, this article also contributes to studies on the evolving international order.
Key Points
Literature Review: Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation and Dilemmas
Regarding the dilemmas of Asia-Pacific regional cooperation, scholars primarily analyze these issues from perspectives such as economic integration, institutional complexity and regional identity. Most research focuses on the interests and influences of these factors, which drive the Asia-Pacific integration process.
Asia-Pacific regional cooperation primarily centers on economic cooperation and integration.
Although the “10+8” mechanism currently operates at a relatively low level, it remains a key channel for dialogue and cooperation among East Asian countries. Strengthening institutional integration should be regarded as a critical step toward building an Asia-Pacific economic community. At the same time, given the inherent fragility and external complexity of Asia-Pacific regional cooperation, the process requires multi-party collaboration and a flexible, open regionalism strategy. For example, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) has significantly mitigated the “Spaghetti Bowl” effect, presenting new opportunities for Asia-Pacific economic cooperation.
Asia-Pacific regional cooperation is characterized by institutional complexity and fragility.
Asia-Pacific regionalism is characterized by institutional complexity. Amid the resurgence of great power competition and regionalism, the region has become a frontline for geopolitical and economic dynamics. Various institutional agreements, such as RCEP and CPTPP, often compete with one another. Additionally, Asia-Pacific regionalism faces institutional fragility. First, it relies heavily on intra-regional trade; second, it lacks high-level mechanisms to coordinate and advance initiatives; and third, there is a leadership vacuum in promoting regional cooperation.
Asia-Pacific regional cooperation suffers from a lack of cultural identity and collective recognition.
As key players in shaping and leading Asia-Pacific regional cooperation, China advocates for open regionalism and the construction of a shared community of interests, while the U.S. strongly intervenes to prevent potential strategic competitors from gaining leadership in East Asia. Besides, ASEAN holds a central position but faces insufficient momentum within regional cooperation mechanisms, leading to shallow collaboration. And Japan has also played a significant role, though limitations arising from China-Japan relations negatively impact its contributions. Some studies argue that the absence of a cohesive regional cultural identity has caused “stagnation” in the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation process. This absence also results in the nesting of various mechanisms, organizations, and agreements that either cooperate with or compete against one another.
China-U.S. Competition: Adjustments in the U.S. "Indo-Pacific Strategy"
With the intensification of China-U.S. competition, the divergence of major-power relations, the prevalence of geopolitical conflicts, and the ongoing technological revolution, the U.S. has continually adjusted the Indo-Pacific Strategy to contain China. Based on the centric leadership, it has been actively constructing exclusive, small multilateral mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region, urging neighboring countries to “decouple and de-risk” economically from China, while reinforcing its regional agenda-setting. This shift has undermined ASEAN’s central position in regional cooperation, increased China’s cooperative costs, and accelerated the transition of Asia-Pacific cooperation from “soft norms”(软规范, ruǎn guī fàn) to “hard constraints”(硬约束, yìng yuē shù).
Causes of the Adjustments in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy
China's Rise and Power Structural Changes: A comparison of the economic power structures of China, the U.S., and Japan from 2011 to 2023 reveals that China has further solidified its position in terms of total economic volume and trade centrality. Additionally, the trade dependency of Europe, the U.S., Japan, and South Korea on China has declined, with China becoming increasingly integrated with ASEAN in terms of regional trade cooperation and supply chain connections.
The Rising Negative Perceptions: In recent years, there has been growing anxiety within American society regarding changes in the China-U.S. power structure, which has contributed to a shift in the U.S. perception of China. This shift, combined with U.S. decision-makers’ designation of China as its primary strategic competitor, made it inevitable for the U.S. to consider the Indo-Pacific region its top priority for strategic investment.
Key Components of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy
In response to the potential benefits China may gain in certain areas, the U.S. has shown clear signs of “revisionist tendencies”. It seeks to employ frameworks such as the Quad and the IPEF to deeply intervene in regional cooperation, constructing constraints on China through two primary pathways, thereby establishing institutional and geopolitical advantages in the competition.
Expanding Regional Security Issues through Platforms like Quad to Increase “Adhesion Force”(粘合力, nián hé lì) to the U.S. Although the Quad was initially created with a focus on security issues, the increasing intensity of China-U.S. competition has led to a diversification and diffusion of cooperation topics within this mechanism. These topics now span key technologies, digital economy, supply chain security, clean energy, infrastructure, and even academic exchanges. Underpinned by values-driven motivations, this approach has been strategically more targeted towards China.
Securitize Regional Economic Issues through Platforms like IPEF to Increase “Centrifugal Force”(离心力，lí xīn lì) Against China.
Given the high economic interdependence between China and many countries in the Asia-Pacific region, the U.S. has chosen to prompt security-oriented issues. This involves amplifying security concerns to sow discord between China and countries with high economic dependence on China. Additionally, its growing openness to free trade agreements promotes the development of stable expectations and shared benefits among regional members, reinforcing the perception of economic alignment with the U.S.
Bipolar Dominance: The Changing Landscape of Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation
The introduction of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy and its ongoing implementation have become one of the key factors influencing the Asia-Pacific region, bringing about significant shifts in regional cooperation.
Shifting Priorities in Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation
Although regional cooperation continues to be largely driven by economic collaboration and related issues, in recent years, the U.S. has shifted its strategic focus in the Asia-Pacific to a broader agenda of comprehensive containment of China, driving the securitization of the regional cooperation framework.
The Regional polarization of Economic and Security Frameworks in Asia-Pacific Cooperation
Firstly, as China-U.S. competition intensifies, regional cooperation processes and agendas are increasingly being centered around the two superpowers, shifting the region towards a “dual-track” system.
Secondly, the Asia-Pacific region’s pre-existing bifurcated structure of economic and security agendas will likely accelerate, driving a clear divergence between issues related to economic cooperation and security concerns.
Thirdly, in this context, ASEAN, once a central force for regional cooperation, may face greater challenges in maintaining its unity, increasing the “alignment pressure” on its member states. This will likely constrain ASEAN’s strategic autonomy and diminish the practical effectiveness of its initiatives.
Fourthly, Japan is expected to become a proactive supporter of the U.S. strategy, focusing on enhancing its influence in Aisa-Pacific region and preventing China from leading the East Asian integration process. It will also clearly align with the U.S. in balancing China, seeking to embed itself within a U.S.-centered regional framework. These factors will reinforce the polarization of regional cooperation based on ideological and value-based differences.
Cultural Fragmentation of Collective Regional Consciousness in Asia-Pacific Cooperation
As regional production and trade systems accelerate their integration, rising nationalism across countries is beginning to hinder the deeper advancement of a regional community. The complex and unresolved nature of historical and political issues has become a central theme affecting regional cooperation mechanisms. Additionally, the weaknesses in ASEAN’s central role, combined with the stronger intervention of the U.S. in regional cooperation based on a “values alliance”, could further fragment the internal identity of the Asia-Pacific region. Deeper cooperation will face risks arising from value divides.
The Shift from “Soft Norms” to “Hard Constraints” in the Asia-Pacific Cooperation Agenda
In recent years, the U.S. has increasingly used the concept of the Indo-Pacific and related mechanisms to shape and disrupt Asia-Pacific cooperation. The sustained follow-up and coordinated efforts of Japan, India, Australia, and South Korea in pushing the Indo-Pacific Strategy have further complicated the regional cooperation landscape. Correspondingly, the U.S. is shifting towards a more interventionist and exclusionary Asia-Pacific strategy, increasing its degree of strident involvement in regional cooperation processes and preventing China from leading the future trajectory of regional cooperation.
Open Reflections: China’s Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation Strategy
In reality, the process of Asia-Pacific regional cooperation remains uncertain. Even at the lowest level of free trade areas, there exist divergent pathways highlighting the absence of a coherent regional community vision. China's regional cooperation strategy should not aim at overly ambitious integration goals, but rather advocate for more clear and actionable regionalism.
China should maintain an open, inclusive, and comprehensive regional cooperation strategy, opposing binary divisions and factionalism.
In areas such as rule-making and alliance networks, the U.S. continues to hold significant and sustained advantages, and will accelerate the creation of a geopolitical environment that suppresses China’s rise. In this context, China should champion the principles of peace, stability, development, prosperity, win-win cooperation, and civilized progress, rejecting regional orders that lead to confrontation, fragmentation, and polarization. It should uphold an open and inclusive regionalism, supporting ASEAN’s central role in regional cooperation frameworks. Simultaneously, the competitive pressures from China and the U.S. may be alleviated by the growing economic interdependence, institutional diffusion, and active efforts from other regional actors to preserve stability.
China should solidify its economic ties and friendly relations with Asia-Pacific nations, while supporting ASEAN’s central role.
Southeast Asia has become an increasingly crucial buffer zone for China-U.S. strategic competition, and a staunch supporter of Asia-Pacific inclusive multilateralism. This heightens the strategic importance of Southeast Asia for China. Geopolitically and economically, China’s ties with Asia-Pacific countries are deeper and more multifaceted compared to those of the US. In terms of public sentiment, apart from Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and India, there is little to no significant preference for the U.S. over China in other countries. Under U.S. dominance, ASEAN’s role has been marginalized, and national autonomy has been challenged, which calls for deeper and more constructive interaction. Based on a broad overlap of interests in regional cooperation, China should collaborate with neighboring countries with high political trust and close cooperation, to create a demonstration effect, marching to the development of a regional community of shared future.
China should advance an Asia-Pacific regional economic cooperation pathway based on the RCEP agreement, and seek early participation in higher-level regional economic and trade agreements.
Economic cooperation is a major driving force behind deeper regional integration. As the only regional trade agreement that includes China, Japan, South Korea, and ASEAN while excluding the U.S., RCEP’s regional economic benefits and strategic significance for China are becoming increasingly apparent, making it a key agreement for ensuring stable regional supply and production chains. If China can join higher-level agreements such as the CPTPP at an early stage, it would further strengthen regional economic cooperation mechanisms, help overcome the current “Spaghetti Bowl”, and break the existing parallel and competitive framework between RCEP and CPTPP. This would provide a more effective response to the U.S.'s strategic adjustments aimed at containing China and help elevate Asia-Pacific regional cooperation to new heights.
Conclusion
Historically, with the U.S. withdrawal from TPP and other regional frameworks like RCEP and CPTPP, it chose to start anew by using “hard mechanisms” like the Quad and IPEF to lead Asia-Pacific cooperation. The U.S. has also sought to create divisions based on values, fostering a sense of “identity and opposition” within the region while shaping cooperation through the “Indo-Pacific” concept. As China-U.S. competition increasingly impacts regional cooperation, polarization and fragmentation are growing.
Looking ahead, with contrasting power structures and rising strategic investments, both China and the U.S. may strengthen their leadership in regional mechanisms. ASEAN’s central role will face challenges as Japan aligns more with U.S. strategies. Economic cooperation will remain driven by RCEP and CPTPP, while security and economic securitization will focus on U.S.-led mechanisms, with Japan and some ASEAN countries participating. China must act to prevent further fragmentation, enhance ties with Asia-Pacific nations, support ASEAN’s centrality, and join high-level regional agreements to counter U.S.-led small multilateral initiatives.
About the Author
Zhao Lei(赵磊)：Doctoral student in International Relations, School of International Relations, Renmin University of China.
Fang Changping (方长平)：Professor of the Department of International Politics, School of International Relations, Renmin University of China, and doctoral supervisor of international relations. At present, he mainly serves as the Vice Chairman of the International Political Research Professional Committee of the Chinese Association of Higher Education; Director of the Chinese Association of Higher Education; Member of the National Guidance Committee for Graduate Education in International Affairs; Member of the International Political Evaluation Expert Committee of the Evaluation Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; Director of International Strategy Research Center of National Development and Strategy Research Institute of Renmin University of China, a national high-end think tank, and a specially employed researcher. He have visited and exchanged ideas at the East Asian Studies Center of Cornell University in the United States. His research focuses mainly on international relations theory, Chinese diplomacy, China's neighboring security, and soft power research.
About the Publication
The Chinese version of the article was published by Southeast Asian Studies(《东南亚研究》). It was founded in 1959, initially titled "Compilation of Economic Materials on Southeast Asian Studies". In 1960, it was renamed "Southeast Asian Studies Materials". It was suspended during the Cultural Revolution and resumed publication in 1979. In 1987, it was renamed Southeast Asian Studies (quarterly). From 1992, it was changed to a bimonthly publication. In 2002, it was approved to establish the Jinan University Journal of Southeast Asian Studies. It timely and comprehensively reflects the achievements of China Southeast Asia research, especially the current situation research, and plays a positive role in organizing and cultivating the strength of China Southeast Asia research. It is an important platform for publishing Southeast Asian research results and enjoys a good reputation and wide influence at home and abroad.
