China’s Quest for a New World Order
Last week, with some thirty world leaders, President Xi Jinping once again took the global center stage to reaffirm China’s position as a global power and its determination to challenge the US-dominated world order.
In his address of Commemoration of the 80th Anniversary of the Chinese victory against Japan, he said, “Today, humanity again has to choose between peace and war, dialogue and confrontation, win-win cooperation and zero-sum game. The Chinese people firmly stand on the right side of history and the progress of human civilization. We will remain committed to the path of peaceful development, and join hands with all peoples around the world in building a community with a shared future for humanity.”
For years, the “rules-based international order” has been a recurrent theme in Western foreign and security policy statements. It is still mentioned, but not as often as before, because, especially with the Trump presidency, many must be aware that it has lost whatever appeal it had.
The phrase, according to the West, comprises the body of rules, norms, and institutions that govern relations. Among those are treaties, international law, formal structures and institutions, and values that have developed around and through these, such as the promotion of democracy, equality, and human rights.
China, while prioritizing multilateralism, also underlines the importance of respect for international law and expresses its support for the UN, which it calls “the banner of multilateralism”. In other words, China accepts and even defends many principles of the existing order, but not all of them.
During the May 2021 “Virtual UN Security Council Open Debate on Multilateralism”, China’s State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said, “International rules must be based on international law, and must be written by all. They are not a patent or a privilege of a few. They must be applicable to all countries, and there should be no room for exceptionalism or double standards.” Although he did not name any country specifically, it was obvious who he had in mind in the context of exceptionalism.
As for the Western emphasis on democracy as a tenet of the “rules-based international order”, China says that every country has its unique history and culture and needs to take a path of development suited to its own realities.
Russia, as China’s strategic partner, has similar views. However, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine constitutes a problem for Beijing’s and Moscow’s diplomatic discourse on a new global order.
The West has also violated its “rules-based international order”.
In March 2021, in an analytical paper titled “China Wants a ‘Rules-Based International Order,’ Too”, Professor Stephen M. Walt said,
“But the distinction between the United States’ supposed commitment to a system of rules and China’s alleged lack thereof is misleading in at least three ways. First, it overlooks the United States’ own willingness to ignore, evade, or rewrite the rules whenever they seem inconvenient. If we are honest with ourselves, we have to acknowledge that Washington sometimes thinks it is perfectly okay for might to make right and for winners to take all. The collapse of the Soviet Union, when the United States took full advantage of a weakened post-Soviet Russia, is a perfect example.”[i]
One might add that endless regime change projects in the Middle East, such as the invasion of Iraq under false premises, which brought nothing but devastation, have not taken those countries closer to democracy. One might also ask, “How compatible with international law is Washington’s total support for Israel in the war in Gaza?” More European countries have now recognized the Palestinian state, and more are on the way to do so, but the world knows that this is only public relations.
Moreover, with President Trump, countries targeted by his tariff wars now see him as an unpredictable adversary who is trying to prove that he is the world’s master.
By contrast, they regard President Xi as a steadier, more predictable leader, if not an outright ally. They see the difference between his statements and Mr. Trump’s endless press gaggles and social media remarks.
In late July, the 50 percent tariffs President Trump imposed on Brazil were the highest he has applied on any country as he tries to reshape the global trading system he deems unfair to the US. Actually, the US has had a trade surplus with Brazil for over a decade. However, Mr. Trump is targeting Brazil largely for the prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro, his ally, who is accused of plotting a coup after he lost the last Brazilian presidential election. He is thus raising questions about the US commitment to democracy.
US tariffs of 50% on goods from India took effect last month, as Mr. Trump sought to punish Delhi for buying Russian oil and weapons. Many in the US believe this has undermined the relationship that former administrations sought to build with New Delhi. Surprisingly, these tariffs came as the Trump White House continues to seek a “peace deal” with President Putin to end the war in Ukraine.
As a result, China’s President Xi Jinping and Indian PM Narendra Modi met on the sidelines of the Shanghai Co-operation Organization in Tianjin, where the former told his guest that China and India should be partners, not rivals.
The months ahead are likely to witness the further closing of ranks among the members of BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
Are the EU countries happy with the trade deal they reached with Washington? No. Are they happy with Mr. Trump’s search for a deal with Mr. Putin in Ukraine? Despite their commitment to support Kyiv, “as long as it takes”, yes. Thus, they would continue to appease him and put up with him for another three years. After all, the EU is not the “United States of Europe”, and on both sides of the Atlantic, the West has leadership problems.
President Erdoğan joined other leaders in Tianjin. With Turkish democracy and the economy at their worst in decades, there was hardly anything positive to project to the global audience, thus nothing to accomplish. At present, the AKP government’s top priority is to tear apart the CHP, the main opposition party, and send it to the dustbin of history, in cooperation with likely partners from within the party. Would this throw the country into turmoil? Definitely, but AKP’s sole objective remains the perpetuation of its rule.
Yesterday, the Turkish national team won the silver medal in the FIVB Women’s Volleyball Nations League. Their success has ignited a rare moment of joy in our days of doom and gloom. Türkiye is grateful to them.
[i] https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/31/china-wants-a-rules-based-international-order-too/