Regional conflicts stress GCI relevance

President Xi Jinping has proposed four global initiatives in recent years — the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative and the Global Governance Initiative — and all four are particularly timely at this juncture of human history.

The most fundamental one, however, must be the Global Civilization Initiative. If we were more civilized, we would be sharing the fruits of development together, we would ensure that the sovereignty of every country is respected, we would treat each other as brothers and sisters, and no political leaders, whether those of stronger or weaker nations, would abuse their powers. Public powers would never be exercised for private gains and would only be exercised to build a better world, not only for one's countrymen but also for everybody.

Sadly, however, many political leaders of the world do not know what "civilized" means. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, at the Munich Security Conference, said,"We do not live in a perfect world, and we cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens and endanger our global stability to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate."

Rubio accused others of routinely violating international laws. Does he not know that the United States has been routinely violating international laws? The bombing of Iran last year and the current joint military action with Israel, called a preemptive military operation, have been considered blatant violations of international law, according to experts such as Donald Rothwell, a professor of international law at Australian National University.

Recently, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the heads of UN agencies condemned the joint Israeli and US attacks on Iran and called on the two nations to "respect their obligations under international law, including the Charter of the United Nations", which prohibits" the threat of the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations". The bombing of Venezuela and the seizing of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January also are not acceptable in a civilized world.

The US and Europe, Rubio said, are part of a single civilizational bloc linked by shared history, language and Christian faith. Sadly, Rubio is not talking and acting like a Christian should. Jesus taught that we should love our neighbors as ourselves and should not say one thing and do another. Christian values would not condone slavery, colonialism and inflicting suffering on other people.

The post-World War II international order is built on good faith, in the belief that having gone through so much suffering, humanity finally stood together to defend our universal values. That was the background for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter. If Rubio calls these abstract "because our world is not perfect", what is the "civilization" that he espouses? From what the US has done and what he said in Munich, it cannot be Christian values.

Truly civilized people must act according to what they preach. They must respect facts, science and reason. They must put down their discrimination and treat all humans as equals. The US Declaration of Independence has these words: "All men are created equal." Sounds nice, doesn't it? But we all know that humans have never been born equal. However, we need to respect one another as equals. That is civilization. The law of the jungle is not civilization. Might is not right.

Civilized nations must respect the sovereignty of other nations. Humans of course make mistakes and do wrong things. But civilized humans understand their limitations and want to learn from the wrongs done in the past. Civilized people keep their word and honor mutually agreed-upon contracts. Civilized people have empathy. Civilized nations will not inflict undue suffering on innocent people simply because others do not yield to their demands. Civilized people are willing to make sacrifices to build a better future. Uncivilized people have eyes on their private short-term gains and ignore the costs over the long term.

The UN offers a platform to examine whether a proposed military action is justified. The US attack on Iraq in 2003 was not approved by the UN, but the US launched the invasion anyway and called it a "preemptive" action to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. In the end, no such weapons were found in Iraq. This shows that if the US had respected the UN approval as a precondition for the military action, many lives would have been saved.

Clearly, then, if we uphold the Global Civilization Initiative, we will respect developing countries' right to develop, respect other countries' sovereignty, and curb blatant power abuses. Can we stand together for civilization and a better tomorrow?

The author is an honorary research fellow at the Pan Sutong Shanghai-Hong Kong Economic Policy Research Institute of Lingnan University, and an adjunct professor at the Academy for Applied Policy Studies and Education Futures at Education University of Hong Kong.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.