But it should protect Taiwanese interests at all possible affordable cost avoiding war through diplomacy till end. The US should accept and agree with China that Tibet is an autonomous but integral part of China and should use its influence to make Tibetan monks and other Buddhists understand that the region needs to accept the reality of the present.
Tibet region and Tibetan people require growth and development other than they attaining spiritual and religious goals. For that to matter settlement of some Han Chinese should be accepted by the locals.
In Hong Kong the US needs to make sure that some form of freedom and democracy is maintained in the special administered territory (SAT). Though Chinese authorities have promised an elected Hong Kong governor next time, the US along with the UK needs to see that Chinese do not drag their feet on the matter.
As of now the US should promote peace with stability in the Korean Peninsula and should not insist on resolution of Korean dispute immediately. It should make sure that the two Koreas do not fight with each other and should leave it to hermit kingdom to decide its own fate.
Taiwan is very critical to US interests in Chinese Seas and Pacific Ocean. It matters as much in the East Asia as Israel matters in the Middle East. Granted that Israeli state has denied rights to Palestinian people since its inception but Israel is the lone symbol of democracy, freedom, human rights and capitalism together in the region.
Now, Taiwan is very critical to US interest of promoting some kind of secular political and economic convergence in the East and the South East Asia. While the US should promote peace between Taiwan and the mainland China but it should oppose vehemently the former merger with the latter. Neither should it dilute its support for freedom, democracy and capitalism in Taiwan.
The most important thing for the two countries other than protecting intellectual property rights is that they should not invest into each other’s problems, meaning thereby that both should not act against each other, not even under distress and during souring relations between the two giants.
This is particularly true for China: it should make sure that its state institutions and Chinese people are never involved in any act against the US state and its people; even if they feel it urgent, required and legitimate as per their law.
The best thing for both the nations is to contain somewhat inflations, hopes and ambitions instead of fighting because of them. In particular both the US and China should lower down their non-economic expectations (NEE).
Better the US not invest more in China and better still that China not seek investment from the US, if increasing economic interactions lead to more conflicting world because of mismatch between expectations of and results for the two countries and their people.
The same is true with regard to transfer of critical and other dual-use technologies. If Chinese authorities cannot check the non-economic inflation (NEI) because of imports of critical technologies, both the US and China should desist from interacting on these matters. Minimally, they should show some restrain.
China being a derivative second producer economy should make it sure that when it invests in other secondary, tertiary and even quaternary markets, it does not export its outdated and self-rejected economic ideology.
Instead it should export localized versions of Anglicized American beliefs. Such would help it in keeping more symbiotic relations with the US. It should carry primary and derivative American interests wherever it takes American expertise and capital along with it.
Now relationship between India and the US is based on India seeking American capital and technical expertise to bolster its economic and strategic interests and also use the partnership with the US to strike a balance in its foreign policy worldwide.
While the US needs India as a market and also as a nation to counterweigh China in the region and in the rest of Asia. Other than strategic, the US has deep economic interests in India. The India diaspora is doing very well in the US contributing to its economy thus strengthening relations between the two nations.
Earlier the US policy in the South Asia was to play a zero sum game so as to balance India and Pakistan. The time has moved on and at these times India is aspiring to become a major global Asian power. The US institutions and companies provide some or even significant assistance to Indian defense and space programs.
There is nothing wrong in it as long as India guarantees and both the Pentagon and the CIA verify that the former would use these missiles and weapons only for defensive purpose and not for showing aggression to any country, including Pakistan. The enhancement in Indian defensive capabilities while it keeping dovish policies help stabilize the whole of Asia.
There is nothing wrong either in the US investing in China’s strategic assets by extending civilian nuclear agreement with China, as long as the latter does not go overtly and explicitly against the former interests on strategic matters.
Only additional required thing is to make sure that NEI is scaled to appropriate measure. While the US official can think that by investing in strategic assets of the two major Asian giants, they can have indefinite but defined leverage with the two nations over many matters but the fact is that despite of that the US may not be able to intervene in Indo-China relations so explicitly.
The fact is that Indo-China relations have more bilateral dimensions and aspects than they having multilateral ones. The same is not true of Indo-Pakistan relations. China would like to deal with India on its own.
The US should never give option to India of choosing between itself and China. Instead, it should give options to choose between varying degrees of friendly alignments, none of them making India a front-state against China in the American pursuit of containing rising and almost exploding China.
The Indo-China relations should be based on mutual respect and tolerance. India and China should base their relations on the principle of asymmetric but equal relation (AER), whereby India would consider China as more powerful neighbor while China considering India’s size would treat it as its equal.
Both India and China should defer a resolution of border dispute for a while but should continue having deep economic engagement with each other.
While it is true that both the nations are principal competitors for access to natural resources, markets and also for influence in Asia-Pacific region, the derivative nature of their economies also give them opportunity to cooperate and segment.