US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton published an article in the Foreign Policy magazine last month and then delivered a speech in the East-West Center claiming that the Pacific Century was the US century.

She said the United States was standing at a pivot point. As the war in Iraq winds up, the Asian-Pacific region has gradually become the global strategic and economic center in the 21st century and will become the focus of US diplomatic strategy.

The United States not only says like this but also does this way. President Obama has billed himself as "Pacific President" since he took office and America the "permanent state" in the Asian-Pacific region.

The major reason for the scenario is that the Asian-Pacific region is the world's most dynamic economic region and the United States needs to share the dividends of economic growth in this region.

Most of the top 10 trading partners of the United States are in the Asian-Pacific region. It's hard to imagine how the United States can achieve its ambitious "multiplying exports" program when leaving the Asian-Pacific region.

Another important factor is that a mature mechanism has not been established in the Asian-Pacific region.

America tries to use its comparative advantages to shape and build institutional arrangements in its favor. It not only continues to strengthen the construction of its traditional security architecture but also control the negotiation on TPP (Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement) with a high profile, claiming to build a higher level of "next generation" of free trade area.

Lobbied by the United States, Japan announced it had jointed the TPP negotiations and the U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement was passed in the US Congress after years of delay, which not only helps America to make up its economic shortcomings in the Asian-Pacific region but also makes its strategic economic and trade plan here more aggressive.

In fact, the current mechanism construction in the Asian-Pacific region is once again at a crossroad and roles played by China and the United States here are crucial, which will determine whether the future Asia-Pacific is a split or a complete one.

It should be noted that the US version of Asia-Pacific idea is not completely out of the stereotype of the Cold War mentality. Everyone knows that what the Atlantic system brings Europe is division. Will history repeat itself this time?

Hillary Clinton also said that the United States also should "deepen relations with emerging countries including China", so as to expand investment in the Asian-Pacific region. This shows that the United States realized that pushiness probably not worth the candle and it had to consider and adapt to the new situation in the Asian-Pacific region. In general, the United States' new Pacific strategy will be restrained by multiple internal and external factors and the prospects are still unclear.

In this regard, China should make Chinese version of Asian-Pacific program, that is, to build an open, tolerant and complete Asia-Pacific on the basis on of mutual benefit. The Pacific Century belongs to all the countries along the coast of Pacific, which will be the essence.