On August 20, the website of the Asia Times of Hong Kong published an article entitled “why the Indian Ocean Pacific strategy of the United States will fail”. The article thinks that Trump’s “Indian Ocean Pacific strategy” may fail because it is not in line with the national interests of Member States, including the national interests of the United States. The relevant excerpts are as follows: < / P > < p > since trump was elected president of the United States, he has expanded the Asia Pacific region to include the Indian Ocean, renamed the expanded region as the “Indian Ocean Pacific” region, and renamed the Pacific Command as the “Indian Ocean Pacific” command, which is a military theater extending from the western United States to the Indian Ocean. < / P > < p > the move is aimed at restoring Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s four party security dialogue, which is composed of the United States, Australia, Japan and India, as the “Indian Ocean Pacific strategy” against China. However, Trump’s “Indian Ocean Pacific strategy” is likely to fail because it is not in line with the national interests of Member States, including the national interests of the United States itself. Although they all feel threatened or wary of China’s economic and geopolitical rise in the region, any form of escalation of conflicts will have a negative impact on their economy and may trigger geopolitical instability in the region. < / P > < p > China is a major trading partner of all four countries in the quadripartite security dialogue, which means that the Chinese market is very important to increase and maintain their economic growth. Perhaps it is precisely because of the close economic relationship between China and the United States that Trump’s trade war with China, which is not considered by trump, has pushed the US economy to the edge, raised consumer prices, bankrupted farmers and aggravated poverty. Many of the Chinese goods he imposed tariffs were produced in this Asian country by American companies. Attacking China economically and technologically is already damaging the interests of the United States, and trump can’t imagine how destructive it would be to form a military alliance against China. That explains why he ordered his defense minister to have a 90 minute telephone conversation with China’s defense minister. In short, trump does not want to go to war with China for obvious reasons. < / P > < p > Washington’s quadripartite security dialogue partners may be thinking about the same thing: why risk their own economy and security because of the inexplicable threat? Moreover, China has never indicated that it will strike any of them militarily. In fact, if someone studies the history of territorial disputes in the East China Sea, the South China Sea, and the Himalayan border, it may be that China is not a bad person. < / P > < p > before the United States announced its “turn to Asia” policy in 2012, there was never any “freedom of navigation” issue in the South China Sea. The dispute between China and Japan emerged after the Japanese government decided to buy the Diaoyu Islands from the “Japanese owners” in the same year. < / P > < p > it is absurd for Australia to be on Washington’s side just because of “kinship.”. If China cuts off Australia’s exports and stops sending Chinese students and tourists, it will hit Australia’s economy hard. < / P > < p > in addition, Australia may not be able to withstand attacks on Sydney, Melbourne and other cities because the majority of the population is concentrated in large cities. As a result, Australia may find itself destroyed or seriously damaged in a war between China and the countries of the Quartet’s security dialogue. < / P > < p > although Abe’s government and its right-wing supporters may support the resumption of the quadripartite security dialogue, most Japanese may not, especially Japan’s business community. Japan’s shrinking and aging population has increased the importance of China’s market. As for India, it is also unreasonable to participate in the quadripartite security dialogue because its relatively small economy is in a serious recession. India can’t afford to spend a lot of money to import weapons against China. < / P > < p > it is said that India may not have enough ammunition to fight a war that will last more than six months. Most of its weapons are out of date, perhaps with the exception of a few jet fighters purchased by the country from Russia, France and the United States. On top of that, Pakistan may get involved in the conflict and side with China. Fighting a single line war is difficult enough; multi line operations can be fatal for India.