President Obama will be visiting South Pacific Asian countries next week. The President is trying to pivot our foreign policy in Asia to build new economic and military alliances , from strengthening our relations with India to new ties with Vietnam and even re-activating military bases in Australia and Philippine. Are we encircling China as a precaution in case of military conflict? Or are we wooing china to start a Cold War and follow the same script as we did with Soviet Union that bankrupted it?

China and USA has a different mindset, and not just in its form of Government, but how to proceed in international affairs. China does not have any ambition of spreading its ideology and does not want to interfere in any other country’s internal or external affairs. It establishes its relations with foreign countries on stand-alone basis. It does not have any expansion designs except quarrels for the disputed territories with its neighbors. China is establishing relations with democratic as well as oppressive regimes in search for natural resources and does not want to pass judgment on their method of governance. Its relations are mostly limited to economic ties and do not come with political strings attached. Despite international pressure, China does not want to become a major stakeholder in international conflict solving endeavors, including international humanitarian crisis.

By contrast an American relation with a foreign country is a wholesome game. We get involve in foreign country’s internal and external affairs both directly and indirectly. Our economic as well as military alliances come with ideological and political strings attached, which are dependent on our own internal politics. Once involved in other country’s affairs, our main goal becomes our own national interest and mutual interest takes a back seat. We get involved in international conflicts with good intentions, because we want to spread our ideals and want to be world leader, but again our national interests take precedent over the interests of the countries involved and the outcome is not always in the best interests of the countries involved. However we are exceptional in organizing and helping in international natural disasters and humanitarian crisis.

During the cold war with Soviet Union, we were competing with Soviet Union on same terms-arms race as well as busy in spreading competing ideologies and sphere of influence. Russia was supporting many communist countries both militarily as well as economically and ultimately went bankrupt both ideologically as well as economically and that lead to disintegration of Soviet Union. USA was economically strong and able to afford the cost of this cold war.

China is a different breed with different mindset and most likely will not take this bait, because historically China is neither interested in expansionism nor spreading of any ideology. China will continue to arm itself to leave no doubt that any ill designs on China’s sovereignty will be ill affordable. Despite territorial disputes with neighbors, China’s main focus is economy and trade with its neighboring countries. Today Vietnam’s main trading partner is China and trade is increasing 20 % per year. In 2013 it rose to $ 60 billion. China will not follow the course of old Soviet Union.

There is an inherent danger of misunderstandings in developing our military ties with countries surrounding China. These countries counting on American help, may start a war with China over territorial dispute, and that can lead to a bigger war which neither country can afford. We are already involved in many military conflicts and our resources are stretched. We encircled Russia with NATO alliances and have taken economic as well as military load of many of these corrupt and economically basket countries. We are doing some of the things which made Soviet Union bankrupt. China has not and most likely will not play the same game. It will be a mistake to view our relations with China with the same old mindset of Cold War with Soviet Union and it may backfire. China is more focused on economic future than anything else, and that is where our focus should be.