International Organization and China-US Strategic Competition
The Evolution of China-US Strategic Competition in International Organizations
China and the US are major countries with global influence. Strategic cooperation and competition marked China-US relations in international organizations. The strategic competition between the two countries can be divided into two stages.
The first stage is from the founding of New China in 1949 to the end of the Cold War, a period in which China-US relations went from strategic confrontation to strategic reconciliation and then to strategic cooperation. Although the “lopsided leaning toward Soviet” foreign policy adopted after the establishment of the new Chinese government has given it development opportunities, it also caused diplomatic imbalances that resulted in the longterm strategic confrontation between China and the United States. The Korean was the manifestation and result of this confrontation. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, significant changes in the international environment and new external threats faced China and the United States, which pushed the two countries toward strategic reconciliation. From establishing diplomatic ties in 1979 until the end of the Cold War. China and the United States moved toward the comprehensive development of bilateral relations. They carried out strategic cooperation at the regional and global levels.
The second stage started at the end of the Cold during which China and the United States experienced a process from strategic friction to strategic cooperation and then to strategic competition. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the common strategic rival of the two countries disappeared, and the foundation for strategic cooperation was missing. In adopted Resolution 2758, which decided to restore all the rights of the Peoples Republic of China in the UN. Before 1971, the US was obviously in a position of strength in the strategic competition between China and the US in the UN over the Korean and Chinas seat in the UN, while China was weak. Although returning to the UN is significant to China, the co un try s influence in the UN is still limited, with the US and Western countries dominating much of the decision-making and agenda. The US also embargoes and restricts trade with socialist countries, including China, through international organizations such as the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (COCOM) and contains China by establishing the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization,
Second, the contests in the UN Commission on Human Rights. After the end of the Cold War, human rights became an important area of strategic competition between China and the US at the UN. The two countries struggled over human rights issues on sanctions and countersanctions, most-favored-nation treatment, and the US State Departments human rights report, with the Human Rights Commission becoming the main battlefield. Since 1990, the UN Human Rights Commission has adopted many Country Resolutions on Human Rights against developing countries. The United States and other Western countries often proposed draft resolutions on the so-called “human rights in China5 at the UN Human Rights Council, mainly concerning the rights of citizens to personal freedom, political freedom and religious freedom, as well as the rights and interests of ethnic minorities, women and children. The Chinese government opposes the politicization and instrumentalization of human rights issues and adheres to a comprehensive view of human rights. It believes that what the United States has done is “an attempt to use human rights issues to interfere in Chinas internal affairs out of domestic political needs.It has proposed a “no action” motion against the United States’ draft resolutions, China has also engaged in human rights dialogue with other Western developed countries and gained support for its initiatives from developing countries.
Third, the competition in WHO. The struggle between China and the US in WHO after the outbreak of COVID-19 reflects the reversal of the strategic competition between the two countries in international organizations. As the specialized agency responsible for international health affairs under the UN framework, WHO is the main platform for international health cooperation and the main mechanism for global health governance. Since the pandemic, WHO has highly commended Chinas epidemic prevention policies and achievements. China firmly supports the work of WHO and its leading role in global cooperation against COVID-19.
On the contrary, the US has constantly accused WHO of a lack of transparency and improper handling, demanded a comprehensive review and reform, and at one point “cut off” relevant supplies and announced its withdrawal from WHO. In WHO, China has played a constructive and leading role, actively advocated the concept of a global health community for all, and contributed to building this concept by sharing experiences, innovating mechanisms and providing assistance. China has taken an active part in international health cooperation under the guidance of the WHO. It has carried out multilateral cooperation with the Group of 77, ASEAN, the African Union and other organizations of developing countries in trans-regional international organizations such as the G20, BRICS cooperation mechanism and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and strengthened international health cooperation partnerships. China is also working with WHO to build a “Health Silk Road,” which opens up new space for cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative and provides new ideas for improving global public health governance.
The evolution of the strategic competition between China and the US in international organizations during and after the Cold and since the 21st century reveals the great changes in the balance of power and the international status of the two countries. The changes reflect the important changes in the roles and functions of the two countries in international organizations and also show that the relationship between the two countries has greatly influenced the reform of the international system. During the
In contrast, China upholds the international system with the UN at its core, the international order based on international law, and the basic norms governing international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. China has not only promoted the establishment of new international organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the BRICS Cooperation Mechanism and its New Development Bank, the United Nations Global Geospatial Knowledge and Innovation Center and the UNESCO Teacher Education Center, put forward the Belt and Road Initiative, the Global Development Initiative and the Global Security Initiative, but also has carried out practical and fruitful cooperation with international organizations. The moves contributed positively to multilateralism, and the country became the most important pillar of multilateralism. The strategic competition between China and the US in international organizations has, Cold War China was a typical developing country with a weak state and poor people. The United States is a developed country and a superpower in international politics. Although China and the United States are both permanent members of the UN Security Council, they differ greatly in status and influence in the UN and international organizations and in capabilities to use international organizations for strategic competition. Since the end of the Cold War Chinas national strength has increased, and its contribution and influence on international organizations have also been greatly improved. While Americas ability to control and dominate international organizations has declined, its use of international organizations to achieve its national interests and strategic goals has also become less effective. Since the 21st century, especially in the last decade, Chinas rise and Americas fall on strategic competition in international organizations have become more obvious. During the Trump administration, the United States withdrew from more than ten international organizations, mechanisms and treaties covering international security, economy and trade, human rights, culture and education, and climate change. The country has become a negative factor for multilateralism.undergone a qualitative change.
The Dynamics of China-US Strategic Competition in International Organizations
The strategic competition between China and the US began after the Trump administration took office. Under the Trump administration, the strategic competition mainly focuses on the bilateral level. The United States focuses on competition with and decoupling from China in trade, science and technology, finance, public opinion, diplomacy and other fields. Although international organizations did not become the focus of strategic competition between the two in this period, the United States began to take action. At the regional level, the United States began to pay attention to and strengthen the Quad; At the global level, US withdrawal from international organizations is also for Chinas reasons.
During this period, the United States used international organizations to compete strategically with China in three ways. The first is withdrawing from international organizations on the pretext that China controls them. A typical example is that the United States announced its withdrawal from WHO and Human Rights Council. The second one is to stop Chinas so-called “infiltration” into international organizations, such as opposing the appointment of a Chinese candidate as Director General of World Intellectual Property Organization and preventing ideas initiated by China from being incorporated into relevant documents of international organizations. The third one is to interfere in Chinas internal affairs in international organizations, mainly making groundless accusations against Chinas policies and actions in Hong Kong and the South China Sea,
Biden generally inherited the previous administrations policy of strategic competition with China, but the strategies for international organizations have changed. The first change is that the US returned to international organizations and competed directly with China. Contrary to Trump administration, which keeps withdrawing from international “home turf” and a force multiplier for the interests and values of the US. Around 2018, Chinas growing influence in the United Nations began to arouse attention and alarmed some Western countries. Some European scholars started researching Chinas interests and influence in the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the UN Development Program, the UN Industrial Development Organization, the Secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the UN Security CounciL American scholars believe that China uses the UN to pursue its goals and that China has enough money and diplomatic will to fill the vacuum left by the US, so they advocate that the US should compete with China in multilateral organizations and strive to win.
After Biden took office, one of the priorities has been to restore the USs leadership at the United Nations and other international organizations. Since then, the US has reasserted its influence in the global fight against COVID-19 and climate change by hosting the global COVID-19 Summit and pushing the Security Council to adopt a resolution on climate and security. The United States has also returned to several United Nations agencies and has successfully run for some leadership and management positions, including Catherine Russell as executive director of the UN International Childrens Emergency Fund.4 Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine crisis in February 2022, the United States has taken a series of actions, either alone or with other countries.
Third, in the strategic competition between the two countries in international organizations, the United States still occupies a dominant position, while China has recently gained some specific advantages. The Russia-Ukraine crisis has temporarily shelved and eased the internal differences and disagreements between Western countries. The Western countries led by the US have strengthened unity and coordination to jointly impose and escalate sanctions against Russia. Under the advocacy of the US, an international organization network has been formed to counter China, which is led by the US and is composed of bilateral alliances, the AUKUS, the Quad, the Five Eyes Alliance, the G7, and NATO. The cohesion of G7, NATO and other traditional US-led and Western international organizations has strengthened. In Europe, NATO expanded eastward by accepting traditionally neutral countries Sweden and Finland. In Asia, NATO extends its reach to Chinas neighboring regions. In April 2022, Japan and South Korea were invited to the Meeting of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs for the first time. South Korea became the first Asian country to join NATOs cyber defense organization. In this context, NATOs “globalization” and ‘Asia version of NATO” are accelerating, and even NATOs “Asia Division” is on the horizon. Also driven by the aIndo-Pacific Strategy/’ small multilateral groups led by the US, such as AUKUS and Quad, tend to expand and deepen. In May 2018, the US Pacific Command was renamed the US Indo-Pacific Command, and the US has also set up a special post of Indo-Pacific Affairs Coordinator. In May 2022, during Bidens visit to South Korea and Japan, he launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity as the economic pillar of the Indo-Pacific Strategy, which has become a new tool for strategic competition with China. The US Trade Representative Katherine Tai said this move would effectively counter China. In addition, the US is also actively enlisting the European Union and ASEAN countries to participate in the Quad.
Facing the anti-China international organization networks promoted by the US, China proactively developed strategies and built networks for direction of China-US strategic competition. The impact of the pandemic and the continued strategic competition among major countries have made bilateral interaction between China and the US increasingly difficult. Though both countries face many pressing domestic issues, multilateral affairs remain important in the foreign policies of the two largest economies and global powers. International organizations are not only the venues and mean for the strategic competition between the two but also the key factor determining whether the strategic competition will lead to cooperation or conflict.
Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific is the different focus of China and the US in their strategic competition in international organizations. China is a typical Asia-Pacific country, with its back to Eurasia and facing the Pacific Ocean. Due to this geographical feature, China attaches great importance to and actively participates in international organizations and mechanisms in Asia and the Asia-Pacific region, such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, ASEAN, the East Asia Summit, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Boao Forum for Asia. In addition, China led the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, joined the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), and applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA). As a two-ocean country, the United States has always balanced the Asian land powers mainly through bilateral alliances. Its participation in the Asia-Pacific international organizations is mainly the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, supplementing it by strengthening the Indo-Pacific concept, drawing in India, integrating its traditional Allies in the Asia-Pacific region, enriching the cooperation areas of the Indo-Pacific strategy, and accelerating its systematization and institution buildup are the main purposes of the US’ strategic competition with China through international organizations or mechanisms.
The BRI and the Indo-Pacific Strategy reflect the different logic o featuring partnership instead of an alliance and cooperation instead of confrontation, China has established comprehensive strategic partnerships with ASEAN and the African Union. The RCER the latest and largest regional trade agreement in which China actively participated, is also a partnership agreement.
The Consequences of China-US Strategic Competition on International Organizations
China and the US are the worlds two largest economies and permanent members of the UN Security Council; the strategic competition between the two carries significant global implications. Strategic competition around international organizations directly affects international rules, order, leadership, and governance.
First, the strategic competition between China and the US in international organizations affects the compliance and reshaping of international rules. International rules are codes of conduct observed by all members of the international community, mainly reflected in international law, treaties, and agreements. The international rules system builds on the premise of international order and the foundation of global governance. The existing system of international rules is mainly formulated and dominated by Western countries led by the US. With the evolution of international relations and new global issues, unreasonable parts of existing international rules must be reformed and improved in public health, international trade and other areas. Also, new international rules must be formulated for new technologies such as artificial intelligence, digital technology and the Internet of Things. In addition, and emerging issues over governance in the polar region, deep sea, network and outer space. Therefore, observing and reshaping international rules is integral to international cooperation and global governance. The idea of new rules formulation is that international rules should not be formulated and interpreted by a few countries but should be decided and implemented by a major beneficiary of existing international rules but is more impartial in adopting them. China has acceded to 490 multilateral treaties and is a depositary for 13. At present, Chinese voices and influence on international rules are increasing. The difference between China and the US is mainly manifested in the US trying to maintain its privilege and leadership in existing international rules-making and implementation, while China is trying to reform and improve the existing international rules in a bid to reflect better the interests and aspirations of developing countries, including China.
China and the US compete for a leadership role in formulating new international rules. Rule-making competition is an advanced form of international competition. A leading voice in international rules formulation reflects a countrys soft and hard power and is an institutional guarantee for safeguarding national interests and improving international status. Competing for the leading role in formulating international rules in new technologies and emerging fields will become an important new battlefield in the China-US strategic competition. In key emerging technology areas, the US maintains advantages in talent, capital, and innovation; the key to maintaining these advantages is to take the lead in making international rules. China has maintained a strong catch-up momentum to narrow the gap with the US and is on the cutting edge in some areas. There are deficits in rules in new technology frontiers such as the Internet, outer space, the deep sea, and polar regions. Whoever leads and dominates the formulation of international rules will enjoy a significant first-mover advantage in these new areas. In the past decade, China has actively formulated governance rules in many emerging fields, such as formulating global digital rules and constructing international rules in the global public domain, such as cyberspace and outer space. In emerging areas such as cross-border payments, outer space technology cooperation, internet domain name assignment, and development-oriented finance, China competes with the US in the international system through such reform paths as substitution, superposition, transformation, and evasion. The US has a disproportional sole superpower. Still, it failed to assume the leadership responsibility of maintaining, improving, and rebuilding the international order to make it more equitable, reasonable, and effective. On the contrary, the hegemonic and unilateral actions of the United States and its containment of emerging powers have seriously damaged the foundations of the international order. To become the leader of the international order, the US must set an example in observing international law and rules, takes on responsibility as the major country in safeguarding international security and promoting global development, work with other major countries to provide more and better public goods to the international community, and provide more support and assistance for the development of small and medium-sized countries.
China wants to improve the international order. The UN has transformed the international order from one based on power to one based on both power and rules. The transformation manifests human progress and civilization. However, it cannot be denied that there are some unfairness in the present order, such as hegemony often transgressing and superseding rules, unfair distribution of power, lack of voice of small and medium-sized countries, and failure to respond to global challenges effectively; Therefore, on the one hand, China upholds the international system with the United Nations at its core and the international order based on international law; on the other hand, China has put forward a series of initiatives, proposals and plans to reform and improve the global governance system and build a more just, reasonable, stable and effective international order. Visions like a community of shared future for mankind and the new type of international relations, as well as initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative, the Global Development Initiative and the Global Security Initiative, all reflected Chinas efforts and contributions to promoting the transformation of the international order.
Some scholars believe that due to the decisive advantages of some Western countries represented by the United States in international rules, systems and power distribution, “Sino-US strategic competition runs counter to multilateralism.
To maintain its global hegemony and leadership, the United States regards China as a major threat and challenge. Under the Trump administration, the United States launched a trade war to decouple and compete strategically against China. However, the ‘America First” strategy and unilateralism policies to safeguard its interest have undermined the international leadership of the US. After Biden took office, the US resumed multilateral diplomacy, returned to several international organizations such as the WHO and the Human Rights Council, and more actively participated in UN affairs; the moves restored the US international leadership to some extent. At the same time, the United States used the opportunity of sanctions against Russia to strengthen the internal unity of traditional Western international organizations such as the G7 and NATO. In addition, by constantly enriching and enhancing cooperation under the aIndo-Pacific Strategy” framework, the United States competed fiercely with China to demonstrate its global leadership.
Unlike the United States, Chinas foreign policy never aimed at becoming an international community leaden In April 1974, Deng Xiaoping attended the UN meeting as the Chinese leader for the first time. He told the international community that China would not be a superpower and would never seek hegemony; In December 1990, Deng Xiaoping pointed out that awe must not seek hegemony, and this is a fundamental state policy.” 5 During these two critical moments in Chinas relations with the outside world, Deng Xiaopings two statements set the tone for Chinas diplomacy. They pointed out the right direction for Chinas relations with the world. As China grows into the worlds second-largest economy, its contribution to the world is increasing, and its influence in international organizations is also growing. Chinas contribution and performance are exemplary on such major UN agendas as peacekeeping operations, sustainable development agenda and climate.
Global security governance after World II is mainly reflected in the Security Council and its authorized deployment of peacekeeping operations. The Security Council has expanded from 11 countries to 15, with five permanent members having veto power on any Security Council resolution. During the Cold cooperation was the norm within the Western and Eastern camps, yet the confrontation between the East and the West was still the mainstream order of the day.
After the Cold there was a trend of change and transformation in global governance system. An important feature is the decline of hegemony and the rise of cooperation, or the shift from a power-based global governance system determined by strength to a cooperative global governance system oriented towards solving problems. Major progress has been made in global governance promoted and led by the UN, as represented by the Millennium Development Goals, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and climate change governance. Such cooperation is neither led by some Western countries nor decided by the five permanent members of the Security Council. Rather, it is carried out through extensive consultations among Member States, multiple negotiations by many groups of countries and the active participation of non-state actors. A large number of emerging governance organizations and mechanisms, ranging from organizational and institutional governance mechanisms such as the G20, the BRICS and its New Development Bank, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, to protocol-based and partnership-based governance mechanisms such as RCEE CPTPE and DEPA, are characterized by the absence of hegemonic state dominance and is driven by inter-state negotiations to solve a certain type of problems or deal with governance deficits. Even in global security governance, there is a trend of de-emphasizing hegemony, and traditional UN peacekeeping operations are transforming into governance-based peace operations. Conflict prevention, peacebuilding and peacekeeping require more “non-power” resources, capabilities and means than <cpower-oriented,, military and economic strength, and the Against the intensifying strategic competition among major powers, international organizations have increasingly become a special and new battlefield of Sino-US strategic competition. The strategic competition between China and the US in international organizations reflects the two countries5 differing national interests and strengths and has the characteristics of competition in system and value. Compared with the bilateral and regional competition, Sino-US strategic competition in international organizations presents many new features. In the strategic competition, the US is still in a dominant position in terms of comprehensive strength. Still, with Chinas rising power, the advantage of the US is relatively declining. This change in the balance of power has been reflected in international organizations. In response, the US began to limit Chinas growing influence in international organizations and compete strategically with China through international organizations role of non-state actors is also increasingly prominent. In the governance of non-traditional security issues, the willingness and ability of all parties to cooperate are more important than the willingness and ability of hegemons themselves.
The strategic competition between China and the United States in international organizations determines the future trend of hegemonic governance and cooperative governance in a certain sense. “China is increasingly using its economic, political and institutional power to change the global governance system from within,” a US academic argues. However, the fact is that the United States is used to hegemonic governance and strives to preserve this governance model in its strategic competition with China, while China continues to explore and develop cooperative governance and seeks to achieve this governance with the United States in the context of non-conflict oriented, non-confrontational and win-win cooperation.
Conclusion
The strategic competition between China and the US has serious global implications. Under the dynamic shift of power balance in the international environment, how to conduct oneself in the strategic competitions in international organizations over rules, order, leadership and governance is a common challenge for China and the US. To sort out and analyze the strategic competition in international organizations, and conduct forward-looking research and judgment on its future trend, are not only a major topic that needs in-depth discussion in academic circles but also an urgent issue for major country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.
Based on the above analysis, China should adhere to genuine multilateralism and support the reform and improvement of the UN and other international organizations to keep the rules-based order while playing a leading reformer role to construct a better working international organizational order. At the same time, China and the US should commit to handling bilateral relations from a global perspective. On the one hand, China and the US should use the unique advantages of international organizations in consultation and cooperation, actively manage competition, minimize potential damage from unnecessary competition, and avoid zero-sum, destructive and bottomless vicious competition. On the other hand, China and the US should actively use the limited space for cooperation to build a healthy relationship of benign competition and active cooperation to improve global governance jointly. China and the US share the same fundamental interests in addressing many global challenges. The two sides should use international organizations to respect each others core interests to keep China-US relations healthy and stable in such areas as fighting the epidemic, tackling climate change, and strengthening economic and trade cooperation and people-to-people exchanges. Working for more cooperation space and actively minimizing competition is not only conducive to the development interests of the two countries and the two peoples and favorable for the overall stability and prosperity of the world.