當地時間4月11日，美國、日本、菲律賓三國領導人在華盛頓舉行“歷史性的”首次峰會，會後發表的《日菲美領導人共同願景聲明》備受各方關注。在亞太地區安全局勢日趨複雜之際，美日菲峰會表明，三國關係不再滿足於時下現狀或以美國為支點的單方連接。美國催生的又一“小多邊”架構，主旋律依舊是加強對華遏制，競贏對華戰略競爭，這成為烏克蘭危機持續和新一輪巴以衝突延宕半年背景下美國在亞太地區戰略投入不減反增的“真實寫照”。

近年來，美國操控北約將中國視為“系統性挑戰”，藉此加速染指亞太事務，竭力推動“北約亞太化”，同時美國還通過印太戰略加緊拉攏亞太地區的日本、韓國、菲律賓等國加速建立地區盟伴體系，極力打造“亞太新北約”，不斷加劇陣營對抗。“亞洲新北約”“亞洲版北約”“亞洲小北約”“亞太小北約”等都是對這類行動計劃的描述，泛指美國試圖在亞太地區建立的一個相當於北約的平行組織。

拜登任副總統期間就“致力於”美日韓共同建立牢固的三角軍事同盟，但囿於韓日歷史隔閡和領土紛爭等諸多因素交織，遲遲未能達成。韓國保守勢力重新掌權後，韓日關係得以大幅度改善。2023年美日韓三國領導人舉行戴維營峰會，旨在將美日、美韓軍事同盟整合，促成美日韓三邊軍事同盟。儘管各方矢口否認此舉是美日韓企圖打造“亞洲新北約”的重要步驟，但從定期聯合軍演、磋商機制、情報共享、協調應對等內容來看，其合作深度甚至超過了美國主導的“奧庫斯”（AUKUS）和“美日印澳四方安全對話機制”(QUAD)。值得一提的是，日本首相岸田文雄和韓國總統尹錫悅7月將再度聚首華盛頓，在北約峰會期間舉行美日韓三國首腦會談，加速美日韓三邊同盟落地。

可見，美國整合亞太盟友，鞏固和加速打造“亞太新北約”的勢頭高漲，不僅可彌合美國大選帶來的不確定性影響，同時有望提升拜登競選的支持率。但正如觀察人士所言，不論是“北約亞太化”，還是“亞太新北約”，其底層邏輯都是秉持冷戰思維，製造衝突對抗，渲染安全威脅，破壞亞太地區和平穩定。

此次美日菲三方聯合聲明還宣布將啟動所謂“呂宋經濟走廊”（Luzon Economic Corridor）等系列計劃，試圖重構地區產業鏈，構築經濟排華圈。這與在美國在亞太平衡戰略、印太戰略之下推出的跨太平洋夥伴關係協定（TPP）、印太經濟框架（IPEF）如出一轍，目的是從安全和經濟層面鞏固領導力，構築同盟圈子。

然而，美國主導推進“小多邊”機制看似一路高歌，實際上也並非鐵板一塊，美國與其印太盟友的安全合作也存在現實張力。美國大選已拉開帷幕，“籌款大戰”更是進入白熱化階段，一旦美國對盟友的所謂“堅如磐石”（rock-solid）承諾無法兌現，它們相互間存在的諸如安全威脅認知、經濟利益訴求、地區戰略目標等分歧就會不同程度顯現。例如，菲律賓小馬科斯宣稱同美日的安全合作“進展非常順利”的同時，就大力推行“強硬外交”加快對外安全合作步伐。3月，菲律賓國防部稱，過去一年多來菲律賓已至少與18個國家簽署或計劃討論新的安全協議，其中包括澳大利亞、加拿大、瑞典、德國、意大利、捷克等國，目的是使菲律賓成為亞洲“最強大的安全網絡國家”之一。這其中不乏迎合美國印太戰略之舉，但顯然馬尼拉的有些行動也超出了華盛頓的範圍。

此次美日菲峰會以“為和平與安全結伴而行”為旗號，將中國周邊海洋問題列為討論對象，其中南海議題更是競相成為境外媒體報道峰會的不二標題。這些報道刻意渲染和污衊中國對菲律賓採取的“咄咄逼人”的行為，強調《美菲共同防禦條約》適用於南海爭端，“敦促”中國遵守南海仲裁“裁決”，為菲律賓侵權行動搖旗助威。4月18日起，中國外長王毅出訪印尼、柬埔寨、巴布亞新幾內亞三國，他在首站印尼雅加達指出，要高度警惕本地區形成的“小圈子”，反對製造任何對立，應珍惜來之不易的和平穩定，將南海建設成和平之海。王毅的講話正是對近段時間美國試圖通過“小多邊”加劇陣營對抗的回應。

去年11月以來，中美進行了元首舊金山會晤、兩國元首通話、高層互訪、首輪中美海洋事務磋商、重啟海上軍事安全對話等種種“互動”，各界也都期待中美關係出現企穩跡象。但現實是，美國財長耶倫訪華結束後隨即對華髮起301調查，中美防長視頻通話後美國P-8A反潛巡邏機飛越台灣海峽並公開炒作。倘若華盛頓繼續說一套做一套，中美關係將難以出現實質性改變。

On April 11, leaders of the Untied States, Japan and the Philippines held what was touted as their “historic” first summit in Washington. Their joint vision statement attracted wide attention. As security conditions become increasingly complex in the Asia-Pacific, the U.S.-Japan-Philippines summit showed that the three countries are no longer content with the status quo — individual connections, with the U.S. as the pivot point. The U.S. has created another mini-multilateral framework, the main theme of which remains strengthening containment of China and winning the strategic competition.This illustrates the significant truth that against the backdrop of the ongoing Ukraine crisis and Palestine-Israel conflict, U.S. strategic inputs have not decreased but rather increased in the Asia-Pacific region.

In recent years, the United States has managed to influence NATO to see China as a systemic challenge, and accelerated intervention into Asia-Pacific affairs. While striving to promote NATO involvement in the Asia-Pacific, it has intensified efforts to induce such allies as Japan, the Republic of Korea and the Philippines to form a regional alliance regime by means of its Indo-Pacific Strategy, making every effort to forge an “Asia-Pacific New NATO,” by escalating bloc confrontation.

This Asian edition of NATO, under various names, represents an attempt by the U.S. to build a NATO-like parallel organization in the region.During his tenure as vice president, Joe Biden had been dedicated to a solid trilateral military alliance comprising the U.S., Japan and the Republic of Korea. That mission was not accomplished, thanks to the historical feud and territorial disputes between Japan and the ROK. Their relations improved significantly after conservative forces in the ROK regained national leadership.Leaders of the U.S., Japan and the ROK held a summit meeting at Camp David last year, the goal of which was to integrate the U.S.-Japan and U.S.-ROK alliances into a U.S.-Japan-ROK trilateral military alliance. Although the parties denied that this was an important step toward building an Asian New NATO, judging from their regular joint military drills, consultation mechanisms, intelligence-sharing and coordinated response, the depth of trilateral cooperation surpassed that of AUKUS and the Quad.It is worth mentioning that Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and ROK President Yoon Suk-yeol will travel to Washington again in July for another meeting of the three countries' leaders on the sidelines of the NATO summit there. This will accelerate the implementation of trilateral alliance mechanisms.

The momentum of U.S. efforts to consolidate ties with its Asia-Pacific allies and accelerate the formation of an Asia-Pacific New NATO will not only make up for the uncertainties of the coming general election in the U.S. but may at the same time boost Biden's approval ratings on the campaign trail. As many have observed, the underlying logic of an Asia-Pacific NATO involves Cold War thinking, creating conflict and confrontation, hyping security threats and sabotaging peace and stability in the region.

It deserves mention that such projects as the Luzon Economic Corridor, which was announced at the summit, are meant to restructure regional industrial chains and build a circle that excludes China economically. In the same way as the TPP and IPEF, which the U.S. proposed under its strategic pivot to the Asia-Pacific and Indo-Pacific Strategy, they are aimed at enhancing leadership and forging alliance circles at the security and economic levels.

Despite the impressive momentum of U.S. endeavors for building mini-multilateral mechanisms, there are practical tensions between the U.S. and its Asia-Pacific allies when it comes to security cooperation. The curtain on U.S. general elections has been raised, and a fundraising war has entered a white-hot stage. Once the U.S. fails to honor its alleged “rock-solid” commitments to allies, their different security threat perceptions, economic interests and regional strategic goals will present themselves to different extents. This is understandable, as Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. claimed that security collaboration with Japan and the U.S. is proceeding “very smoothly.” He has gone a long way in executing “tough diplomacy,” and accelerating overseas security cooperation.In March, the Philippine Ministry of Defense declared that over the past year it had signed or aimed to discuss new security agreements with at least 18 countries, including Australia, Canada, Sweden, Germany, Italy and the Czech Republic. The goal is to make the Philippines a part of the strongest security network in Asia.

Under the banner of “peace and security,” the U.S.-Japan-Philippines summit discussed maritime affairs involving China, with the South China Sea attracting particular interest in overseas media reports. They hyped up and stigmatized alleged “aggressive” Chinese actions against the Philippines, emphasized that the Mutual Defense Treaty between the U.S. and Philippines applies to South China Sea disputes, urged China to abide by the South China Sea tribunal arbitration and cheered for Philippine infringements in the disputes.Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi began a string of visits to Indonesia, Cambodia and Papua New Guinea on April 18. In Jakarta, Indonesia, he highlighted the need to be highly vigilant to the “small circles” emerging in the region. He expressed opposition to any moves to instigate confrontation. He said China cherished the hard-earned peace and stability and wanted to build the South China Sea into a “sea of peace.” Wang's remarks were a reply to the recent U.S. attempts to escalate bloc confrontation via mini-multilateral mechanisms.

Since November, Chinese and U.S. leaders met in San Francisco and later talked on the phone. The two governments have resumed high-level visits, held the first round of bilateral consultation on maritime affairs and resumed dialogue on maritime military security. People from all walks of life expect China-U.S. relations to show signs of stabilizing. Yet Washington has launched 301 investigations on the heels of Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's China visit, and a U.S. Navy P-8A maritime patrol aircraft carried out a high-profile overflight above the Taiwan Strait immediately after Chinese and U.S. defense chiefs talked via video-link. If Washington continues talking the talk without walking the walk, how can there be substantial changes in China-U.S. relations? Nobody knows.