(This is the second part of a two-part article.)
In a word, the international relations talked about by the West are essentially relations within the West, which finds it increasingly difficult to escape the historical cycle. Faced with the rise of the non-Western world, they put forward remarks such as the “China threat theory,” the “tragedy of great power politics,” and the “Thucydides trap.” The root cause is that the Western-dominated international relations system cannot accommodate the rise of the non-Western world and the accompanying profound changes it brings about. The hierarchical structure and confrontational inequality that took shape during the West-dominated historical cycle led to multipolarisation in its old form; what China advocates is a system restrained, and peaceful international relations between equals. An equal and orderly multipolar world conforms to the principle of “from the inside out”—only when domestic governance is effective can we avoid the spillover of troubles and reduce negative externalities. Western international relations are an extension of domestic competitive logic. From the original civilisation shaped by resource scarcity to the modern expansionist Judeo-Christian civilisation, combined with capital expansion in the era of globalisation, that competitive logic will inevitably lead to a conflictual and disorderly multipolarisation.
In summary, “equality” must not only solve the problem of unequal dependence within the system but address the reality that calls for sovereign equality become empty talk due to unequal capabilities; “order” must not only safeguard the post-war international order based on the purposes of the UN Charter and international law but also remedy the insufficient representation of Global South countries (accounting for more than 80% of the world’s population) in the international community, and address the need to enhance the authority and effectiveness of the United Nations. This order, depicted in the I Ching‘s “a group of dragons without a leader” metaphor and adhering to true multilateralism, is the core connotation of a community that strikes to secure a viable common future for mankind.
II. Why Advocate an Equal and Orderly Multipolar World Order?
An equal and orderly multipolar world order specifically prevents three chaotic phenomena: “unequal but orderly,” “equal but disorderly,” and “unequal and disorderly,” while exposing the “three Cs hypocrisy” of Western views on equality: Created (divine endowment), Capital-driven (capital-driven), and Coalition of like-minded countries (ideological alliances).
(I) Equality: From the Equality of All Beings and Gods to the Equality of All Countries
Equality in the Chinese context includes three dimensions:
1.Equality of origin: Extending from the Buddhist concept of “equality of all beings” and the Chinese world view of “equality of all gods” to the “equality of all countries” in modern international relations. Take the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as an example. The original draft by the United States began with “all men are created equal.” Indian scholar Dr. Hansa Mehta revised it to “all men and women.” Chinese scholar Pengchun Chang changed “created” to “born,” establishing the core principle of “born equal” and abandoning the religious overtones of “divinely created equality.
“2.Equality of process: China advocates that all countries should participate in decision-making “at the table,” and problems are contained “in the menu” to be solved together; rather than some countries occupying the “table” while others are restricted to the imposed “menu.
“3.Equality of outcome: Pursuing equality in sovereign capabilities, rather than mere formal sovereign equality in legal terms. For this reason, China promotes common modernisation of the world through the Belt and Road Initiative, practicing the concept of “Three Impartialities” from The Book of Rites·Confucius at Leisure—”Heaven covers all without partiality, Earth bears all without partiality, the sun and moon shine on all without partiality. Upholding these three, one serves the world.”
(II) Order
From order and sustainability to fairness and rationality, China opposes empty talk about a “rules-based order.” The key is to clarify three questions: What are the rules? Who formulates the rules? How to implement the rules? The world order advocated by China is essentially open and inclusive, a fair order truly belonging to the whole world—not confrontational conflict, not starting anew, let alone replacing the United States as a new hegemon, but ending hegemony itself. In particular, it is necessary to abandon the U.S.-led alliance system, which often creates problems: NATO should have been dissolved after the Cold War but continued to expand eastward, ultimately leading to the Ukraine crisis; the dependent relations under the alliance system also make the so-called “strategic autonomy” empty talk.
What is “orderly”?In terms of origin, order is not a “Pax Americana” or “Pax Occidentalis,” but an inherently generated, fair and reasonable order, not an externally imposed one.In terms of procedure, order emphasises extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, improving norms in the process of development and promoting development in the process of standardisation. It is different from the U.S. logic of “winner-takes-all” and the EU’s “normative power” model of “norms first.”In addition, an equal and orderly multipolar world must be based on inclusive economic globalisation and guaranteed by diverse and harmonious cultural diversity. Therefore, China has successively proposed the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilisation Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative. In accordance with the five-element philosophy of “metal, wood, water, fire, and earth,” China will propose the Global Ecological Initiative in the future to jointly promote the building of a community planning a shared future for mankind.
Behind this lies the wisdom of a community with a shared future intertwined with political multipolarisation and economic globalisation.
III. How to Build an Equal and Orderly Multipolar World Order?
Building an equal and orderly multipolar world order is a gradual reform process, not a radical revolution. Just like hatching a chick: if the egg is broken from the outside, it will only become food; only when the shell breaks naturally from the inside can a new life be nurtured.
In 2006, I wrote an article titled “Preventing the United States from Declining Too Fast,” and the evolution of the world order today has confirmed this judgment. The policies of the Trump administration have accelerated the breakup of the old order from within, and we need to guard against the impact of this process.
The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) proposed by China is a good example of an equal and orderly multipolar world. AIIB President Jin Liqun once stated that “there has never been a veto (No to no)”—China holds the veto power but has never used it; although China is the largest contributor, the headquarters is located in Beijing, and the first president is Chinese, major beneficiaries of the AIIB are countries such as India. Its operation fully follows the rules of international multilateral financial institutions, and even deliberately shuns any tendency towards “Sinicisation”. Similarly, China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the “BRICS Plus” and “SCO Plus” models, as well as the concept of “AI Plus,” all adhere to this core logic, always involving extensive consultation, joint contribution, and aiming at shared benefits,while rejecting hegemonic dominance.
Add comment