I'll probably draw from China-specific examples, because I feel as though this committee is particularly interested in those. To preface my comments, I'm not a China expert, but there are a lot of really good ones in this country whom you should be tapping into beyond the immediately digestible but perhaps not as nuanced type of analysis that has fed into the IPS so far.
When it comes to China, any serious research that really narrows in on the actual granularity that you're describing will identify a broad spectrum of patterns, even within particular issue areas. In some ways, China will be, of course, trying to shape the rules in accordance with its own interests and values in ways that will clash with our own—that's for sure—but there are also particular aspects of China's current positioning as a global power where it is actually upholding the rules against other actors—I'm thinking of the U.S., in particular—who may be attempting to revise or usurp those.
It's important to make room and have the cognitive flexibility to allow for those possibilities. Of course, in between those, you'll have a full array of grey areas in terms of particular strategies and tactics. If we're able to better distinguish the facts from the noise here and really pinpoint exactly where we should be coordinating with others to either ward off or find ways to actually coexist or even co-operate with China, I think that is the way we should be approaching the relationship.