The US rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific is a strategic choice against the background of a changing global environment. This strategy began in 2011, and we have already seen its effects in the Asia-Pacific region.

Politically, the US has used its comprehensive strength and strong network to promote its democratic values.

After US President Barack Obama was reelected, he paid several visits to the Indo-China Peninsula, and the one to Myanmar was especially prominent.

By loosening its economic sanctions on Myanmar and increasing assistance, the US is pressuring the Myanmar government to reform its current political system, speed up the process of democratization, and grant the opposition party more freedom and rights.

Economically, although the US-backed Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations have not yet finished, it has already influenced the economic cooperation within the Asian region, and has weakened the driving forces for regional cooperation in East Asia.

As a result, more non-economic factors such as politics, security and strategic competence now burden attempts at regional cooperation, which dims the prospects of the region's economic cooperation.

Militarily, the US has been playing its role as a traditional security ally and has further strengthened bilateral military alliances.

In November 2011, the US reached an agreement with Australia on the deployment of marines in the country. And in November 2012, the US Senate passed a bill, stating that the Diaoyu Islands fall within the scope of the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Co-operation and Security.

US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has clearly stated that "by 2020, the navy will reposture its forces from today's roughly 50-50 percent split between the Pacific and the Atlantic to about a 60-40 split between those oceans," and that more military exercises will be carried out in this region. All these actions show that the US rebalancing has made concrete military progress.

Diplomatically, intervening in Asia-Pacific affairs through multilateral mechanisms, including the East Asia Summit, is one of the US strategies in the region. For instance, the US, together with Japan, wooed countries that are involved in the South China Sea disputes to bring up the disputes at the East Asia Summit.

The US actively uses regional powers as leverage for its strategy of rebalancing. To balance China's rise, the US has strengthened its cooperation with India and even accepted the concept of an "Indo-Pacific" as a replacement for the "Asia-Pacific."

As the US continues to target China, it integrates different powers, such as Australia, South Korea, India and Southeast Asian countries that support the US.

The US also eliminates any doubts from its allies and partners about its Asia-Pacific strategy. Just two months ago, then US secretary of state Hillary Clinton warned Australia against the "false choice" of an alliance with either China or the US.

In a short time, the US Asia-Pacific strategy has achieved some successes. It has realized some positive aims such as promoting relationships with its allies and security partners and influencing regional organizations such as the East Asia Summit.

But the strategy has also generated negative impacts such as slowing the cooperation between East Asian countries and hindering the rise of China's regional influence.

What strategic effects the Asia-Pacific strategy will generate in the future is worth attention. The core task of the strategy is to confront China's rise so as to avoid China dominating the East Asian region. Whether the US will achieve the goal depends on the long-term competition of strength between the two countries.

If the US cannot solve its own financial problems, its strategy will not be sustainable.

In the mid and short terms, as the US has already made use of the strategic opportunities in the Asia-Pacific region, the marginal effects of the strategy will decline.

In the long run, the US has to handle its strategic relationship with China. Directly coordinating with China might be more effective and sustainable.

The author is head of the Branch of China's Regional Strategy, National Institute of International Strategy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn