It was only with the Clinton Administration in 1992 that official U.S. policy was willing to acknowledge a security role for multi-lateralism in Asia. Doubters remain, citing the absence of a commonly perceived threat and cultural and historic animosities as fundamental impediments. China's endorsement of multilateral fora is also a relatively new development. Previously such venues were viewed with suspicion as another opportunity for others to attack China's policies. Clearly, however, Beijing came to the realization that China could no longer afford to isolate itself from regional meetings if it was to argue its own case.
China prefers a multilateral approach that is oriented toward discussion without commitment.
It prescribes a a non-binding approach in which all participants have the opportunity to air views, but absent consensus, does not bind the participants to a specific course of action. In broad terms, both China and the U.S. also believe that CBMs reduce uncertainty, misperception and suspicion and reduce the possibility of incidental or accidental war. From the U.S. point of view, transparency is the concept behind most CBMs. While China is suspicious that transparency is an attempt by others to expose their military capabilities, as a general proposition they support CBMs that are voluntary and facilitate dialogue. As alluded to, the most fundamental disagreement in concepts of security between the Chinese and U.S. is the area of bilateral military alliances.