Illustration: Liu Rui /GT

China was the focal point of this year's Shangri-La Dialogue. It dominated the whole discussion on the wide range of topics including maritime and land issues, aerospace and even cyberspace.

At the meeting, US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter took a soft tone that sounded more like that of the state secretary. Still, his emphasis was on principles and he warned Beijing against building a Great Wall of self-isolation with further controversial actions. The US, he said, has been the guarantor of regional security and is committed to its role as the underwriter in the future.

Also, as can be seen from the speech delivered at the dialogue by Admiral Sun Jianguo who led the Chinese delegation, China seeks due recognition of its status and prestige on the international stage. But China is a latecomer, not a first-mover, in most of the regional security issues. It has no solid alliance like the US, and a few friendly states are reluctant to be too explicit about their ties with Beijing.

It was evident that Washington is stuck in a paradox: The more it stresses the importance of regional security, the more it reveals how dissatisfied it is with the current US-led order or how desperate it is to keep its worries under control.

China's rise, Carter said, can be accepted only when it joins the region's principled security network. Time will tell what the "principled security network" is, yet Carter stressed the region truly needs a principled security network as the next wave of Asia-Pacific security. Meanwhile, China would indeed seek for its lead in the regional order. If China believes now is not the right time to pursue this goal, it must prove itself to neighboring states that it does share and improve regional security. The expression "G2" results in the Chinese word jidu, or jealousy. This jealousy toward China's rise from its rivals and regional states is what China must strive to minimize.

The US and China will vie fiercely for their lead in the regional order, but they cannot decide the playing field. This is rather determined by the silent majority, namely the less influential regional players that cannot make a dramatic rise. A best-case scenario would be where a great power with appropriate leadership and capability contributes to regional security. If there are more than one of such nation, they can ideally sacrifice their own interest and work together for the common good. If this is not possible, an alternative option is required.

If the rivalry between existing and emerging powers is inevitable, we should make wide-ranging efforts to encourage a healthy rivalry and to establish a better regional security architecture. Most regional states have a different perspective from an existing hegemon that wants to maintain the current status quo, or an emerging power that seeks to create a new architecture. Their wish is to build a better mechanism.

A better architecture should consider at least four factors. First of all, it should meet the needs of participants. Powerful nations should not tailor the security architecture to their own taste, but instead, design it in a way that can satisfy everyone. Their focus should be on what kind of architecture participants would want the most.

The architecture should be able to satisfy participants' security needs and set them free from security threats. It should serve for its fundamental purpose: to ensure peace of mind for participating nations. Great powers should refrain from making an ill-informed guess or a hasty conclusion about members of the architecture during and after collaboration on an improved architecture.

And last but not least, no security architecture can work properly or stay in place over the long run without a good design and proper functions. Without an enduring mechanism, a successful architecture is only an unrealistic dream. How can we tell our children and grandchildren that we have failed to build a well-functioning security architecture and security mechanisms in our era? Should we just say that "back then, things were so messy?"

A better security architecture is a step toward a completely new era. We can utilize existing mechanisms, or we can just make up something new. Either way, it must be equipped with the structure and functions that satisfy the needs of regional states.

A better architecture should be something that even God will find attractive, just as a quote from chapter 23 of the Confucian classic The Doctrine of the Mean goes: "Only those in the world who are perfectly genuine to the utmost can transform things."

The author is a professor at the Division of International Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul, South Korea. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn Follow us on Twitter @GTopinion