Reform for equality

Only by effectively addressing the non-neutral shaping of global governance led by the US can China create a favorable external environment upholding global fairness

Editor's note: The world has undergone many changes and shocks in recent years. Enhanced dialogue between scholars from China and overseas is needed to build mutual understanding on many problems the world faces. For this purpose, the China Watch Institute of China Daily and the National Institute for Global Strategy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, jointly present this special column: The Global Strategy Dialogue, in which experts from China and abroad will offer insightful views, analysis and fresh perspectives on long-term strategic issues of global importance.

The global order is facing numerous uncertainties and global governance is stalling because of the increasingly complicated world situation and the three years of COVID-19 pandemic. As the current dominant power of the international order, the United States not only shows no intention of advancing reform of the global governance system, but also undermines the existing multilateral rules system, only to safeguard its own interests.

By reinforcing exclusivity and discrimination within the international rules, the US has intentionally deepened the fragmentation of global governance. These approaches have increased institutional non-neutrality in global governance, eroded its basic principles, and accelerated a systemic crisis.

Specifically, the US has adopted the strategies of "decoupling" and "confinement" against China and other relevant developing countries.

In most cases, decoupling happens with elements in trade, industries and technologies. But institutional decoupling has also occurred. The interplay of these two types of decoupling has led to an international system that is even more complex, exclusive, competitive and fragmented.

Confinement refers to how a hegemonic power uses high-standard rules to constrain and regulate the behaviors of rising countries in economic or other fields. The aim is to lock down the potential growth of rising countries, so they do not threaten or challenge the hegemonic power's continued dominance.

Meanwhile, the US is continuously strengthening its dominance and influence by shaping exclusiveness, securitizing issues, and linking issues with ideologies.

First, the US excludes developing countries from the benefits of globalization. With the East rising and the West declining, the US has begun to reevaluate the benefits which developing countries, especially China, gain in the global value chain. There is now a consensus within the US that its advantageous position in the global value chain and comparative advantages in technology and trade should be used to restrict the development of target countries.

To achieve this, the US frequently "weaponizes" asymmetric interdependence, brazenly promoting unilateralism and protectionism. Its trade protectionist policies, such as the Inflation Reduction Act, not only directly harm the economic interests of other countries, but also undermine the multilateral rules of the World Trade Organization. Moreover, while cutting off the benefits that rising countries gain from the established economic and trade systems, the US also attempts to use exclusionary arrangements to present China as an "anomaly" or "challenger" to the existing international order and security.

From the May 2022 Quad summit to the CHIPS Act released by the US Department of Commerce in March 2023, the Biden administration has implemented a set of exclusive rules targeting China in technology-related trade and investment. The intention is to create a higher blockade against China in areas such as imports and exports, market operations, investment and technology cooperation. For a hegemonic power, maintaining its monopolistic position is the persistent driving force. When international rules are unfavorable, the hegemony ignores, evades or changes them.

Second, the US elevates specific issues to the security level. The first approach it takes is to internationalize national security, which means escalating specific issues to "national security threats", thereby extending domestic laws to address international issues. By frequently using national security as a pretext, the US has enacted domestic laws, enhanced domestic security reviews, and constructed exclusive international technology standards, to cut off the supply of core technologies and critical components to China. The core of its policies is to build high walls around critical technologies to prevent other related countries and actors from accessing them.

Another approach is to expand the definition of security problems to include neutral governance issues, thereby seeking to reset rules. Examples include onshoring, friendly shoring and nearshoring outsourcing, as well as the so-called supply chain resilience and security. In fact, severing global supply chains only increases global economic risks. Under the guise of safeguarding national security, the US places highly politicized technology double standards above global industry rules, and prioritizes its domestic laws over global multilateral rules.

Third, by leveraging ideological consensus, the US seeks to rally allies and enhance institutional non-neutrality in the global governance system. The US has established alliances across multiple domains and with multiple countries, with the aim of continuing its hegemony and suppressing competitors.

For example, the US links ideology with digital governance, labeling countries such as China and Russia as "digital authoritarian states", creating a global confrontation between so-called two types of countries.

Additionally, the US, together with its allies, has established and expanded high-standard rules under the pretext of ideology. From its Build Back Better World initiative to Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity, the US and its Western allies attempt to extend "democracy, high standards and transparency" to various fields in global governance, seeking to contain the competitiveness of developing countries.

The US uses the so-called ideological differences to disrupt the cooperative environment of the international community, and limit the communication and mediation between emerging powers and third-party countries. This not only fails to promote the democratization of global governance, but will also lead to more severe fragmentation in institutions and rules, exacerbating the crisis in global governance.

The current crisis is only temporary. The interaction between countries will determine the future direction. Only by effectively addressing the non-neutrality shaping of global governance led by the US can China, as well as other developing nations, create a favorable external environment for development and uphold global fairness and justice.

China needs to actively participate in reform of the global governance system to help create an inclusive and diverse order. This involves leveraging platforms such as the United Nations and the G20 to promote reforms through cooperative discussions.

It should also prioritize basic research and development, enhance technological innovation, ensure the security of industrial and supply chains, achieve high-level independence, and continuously build up new strengths in international economic cooperation and competition.

China's reform and opening-up should continue to expand to align with international standards. Regardless of the challenges facing global governance, institutional openness and benchmarking international standards provide a key for China to solve the difficulties.

Ren Lin is a researcher at the National Institute of Global Strategy at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Meng Siyu is a research assistant at the Institute of World Economics and Politics at the CASS.The authors contributed this article to China Watch, a think tank powered by China Daily. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

Contact the editor at editor@chinawatch.cn.