It is still early days, but something truly remarkable has happened as the negotiations between Republic of Korea President Moon Jae-in and the leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kim Jong-un, succeed. Never before April 27 had a DPRK leader stepped on ROK soil. After over a half-century of tension, one of East Asia's most persistent instabilities may finally be resolved. Then Kim made a special trip to China to meet with President Xi Jinping again within 40 more days, after his visit in March for the first time since coming to power six years ago.

And on May 4th another first: President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe spoke on the phone, and reports from both countries suggest that developments on the Korean Peninsula were at the center of the call. Abe was quoted in the Japanese media as saying that he showed his "respect for China’s efforts" in the DPRK’s move toward resolving the nuclear issue.

Adding to that was the seventh China-Japan-ROK leaders' meeting in Tokyo on May 9, during which Premier Li Keqiang, Abe and Moon pushed for the region's integration. You could say that we are witnessing the dawn of a new era of Asian diplomacy.

What is most interesting is that the United States is playing almost no role in this process, even if US President Donald Trump typically claims undue credit for it.

But the prospect that the US is not responsible for the stunning headlines and photos of the past week seems to have confused many international commentators. Some conservative commentators have even called for Trump to win the Nobel Peace Prize, which is a sad indicator of how low the bar is these days and how tarnished the award has become.

When it comes to the DPRK, Trump oscillates between thundering belligerence and diplomatic entreaties, threatening rockets one day and accepting summit invitations the next. He has even promised to walk out if he does not like what is said by the other side. Interestingly, his attitude toward the ROK is much more consistent, between attacking the country for "exploiting" the US through "unfair" trade and mooting the possibility of paying for American military protection. Interestingly, one expert estimate has it that it actually costs less to station US troops overseas than at home.

Trump also openly considers military options that would devastate the ROK without ever, it seems, considering what Seoul might think. For the moment at least, Trump does not seem to treat the ROK with the respect expected of a close ally. If one has to admit that Washington is responsible for these negotiations, the simplest answer is that Trump's belligerence encouraged and provided the impetus for a newly elected and popular Moon to take matters into his own hands and launch a charm offensive, which has seemed to work better than the threats and preconditions that too often mark American "diplomacy".

And it now looks as if the US' involvement may just end up making negotiations more difficult. Any plausible solution to the Korean crisis would include a reduced, if not removed, American presence. The justification for having them there in the first place was to defend the ROK from a hypothetical DPRK attack; reduce that possibility, and US troops would not be needed. What is interesting is that no ROK president has ever asked the country's citizens about the US presence, even for fear of an American backlash.

Some Americans have realized this. For example, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis has stated his openness to discussing the US presence on the peninsula as part of negotiations. But if Washington decides that the presence is being reduced too drastically, we must understand that this decision would come at the expense of a peace agreement.

If the DPRK is no longer a security issue for the ROK, then Beijing and Seoul's relationship would be much simpler. And it will hopefully also trigger a rethink in Japan such that it begins to take a more proactive approach — independent of the US — to its relations with its three key neighbors, rather than simply supporting an outdated doctrine of relying on US military protection.

There are important lessons for the US and Asian countries in the Korean talks. Washington may need to accept that its involvement in every problem around the world is unnecessary. History shows that it's even counterproductive at times. Some problems may end up resolving themselves with diplomacy without threats and conditions set by the US. Nor can it assume that it has the "veto power" in world affairs. From the U as saying US perspective, taking a "my way or the highway" approach may increasingly backfire, and there are ample examples of this outcome in many international hot spots.

But more importantly, Asian leaders should learn from Moon's example and be bold enough to take the initiative to solve geopolitical problems on their own. By talking to each other in the region their collective wisdom and strength will reduce the need for an overwhelming presence of foreign forces and diplomats.

And the recent meeting between Xi and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the end of April, which has mainly gone unnoticed in the international arena, is hopefully another sign of the growing confidence of Asian nations to broker agreements between themselves without needing the approval or mediation of Western powers who may be more interested in maintaining the status quo.

The author is founder and CEO of the Global Institute For Tomorrow, an independent pan-Asian think tank based in Hong Kong. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Watch.

All rights reserved. Copying or sharing of any content for other than personal use is prohibited without prior written permission.