Major-Country Relations, Global Governance and China’s Foreign Strategy in the Post-COVID Era
No one is quite sure when COVID-19 will come to an end, but the harm it inflicts on people and its ramifications on the international landscape, major-country relations and global governance system are playing out. An analysis on the impacts of the coronavirus from the perspective of major country competition and global governance can help us better understand what the pandemic means for China, and what new circumstances and challenges China’s strategic community may face in the postpandemic era.
COVID-19’s Profound Impacts on the International Landscape and Major-Country Relations
All large wars since modern times, especially the two world wars in the 20th century, have accelerated the reshuffling of balance of power and major-country relations. Following the defeat of the German Empire in World War I, and the collapse of the Russian Empire, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, the US outgrew Europe in 1919, six years sooner than expected. After the defeat of Germany, Japan and Italy in World War II, the UK and France were weakened, and the Cold War broke out marked by the US-Soviet confrontation.
The onslaught of COVID-19 in 2020 was like an invisible war without guns or cannons, but with far-reaching impacts. No country was immune. The loss of life and wealth and the psychological shocks were indeed grave. Countries fought hard to bring the virus under control. It was like a world war of a different form, one between man and the virus instead of between people.
In a nutshell, COVID-19 has three strategic ramifications. First, it has accelerated the reshuffling of power dynamics. Due to different response measures, countries, major ones in particular, do not bear the shock squarely. So far, Western countries have been hit much harder than East Asian countries like China and Japan. According to statistics from the PhoenixNet, as of 25 October 2020, six members of the G7, namely the US, the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Canada, whose total population account for less than one tenth of the global total, had registered 35 million COVID-19 infections and 740,000 deaths, or one third of the global total. By comparison, the number of infections and deaths in China, Japan and other East Asian countries was much smaller. Economically speaking, quarterly GDP of most Western countries experienced a double-digit negative growth. Since autumn last year, Western countries have witnessed a serious rebound, with consequences hard to assess. In the post-epidemic era, the balance of power will change against the favor of Western major countries.
Second, changes in major-country relations have paced up. After the end of World War II, a bipolar world order dominated by the US and the Soviet Union gradually took shape. Since the Cold War ended, the US has aspired for hegemony in a unipolar world, while China and Russia have strived for a multipolar world. Competition between the two has been intense. With China rising to the second largest economy in 2010, new changes have ensued. Over the years, China has been growing at a considerable speed. Its economic aggregate has become three times that of Japan, larger than the gap between the USSR and the third largest economy decades
ago. Despite the shocks of COVID-19, China was among the first to bring the epidemic under control, and the only major economy with positive growth in 2020, further consolidating its composite national strength. China’s GDP may well catch up with that of the US earlier than 2027 as predicted by Goldman Sachs, and will add more certainties to the world.
Third, unprecedented changes are taking place concerning political values, development concepts, global perspective and governance, which will shift power dynamics between China and Western countries, and reshape global governance. In terms of political values, the defects of the Western system have become obvious under the epidemic. Western countries have been hit the hardest. Rather than taking the responsibility to lead global response, they have scrambled for anti-epidemic materials and shifted blames in a beggar-thyneighbor approach, laying bare their selfishness. Their proud democratic system featuring separation of powers and one person one vote, and the value and cultural propositions centering on absolute individual freedom are like the emperor’s new clothes. In terms of development concepts, the vulnerabilities of developed countries revealed by COVID-19 have led to profound reflection of the international community: does the development mode long advocated by the US fit future development of humanity? In terms of global perspective and governance, as all countries regardless of their sizes, wealth, races and geography stand to suffer from the pandemic, the international community should abandon the logic of the strong bullying the weak and the law of the jungle upheld by the West for hundreds of years, and embrace a new type of global governance featuring solidarity and mutual support to jointly address global challenges.
Post-COVID World Needs a New Type of Global Governance Led by G20
According to the Commission on Global Governance, “governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs”. Global governance covers a wide range of issues including the environmental and ecological crisis, sustainable development, prevention of nuclear proliferation and transnational crimes, food and energy crisis, universal human rights, prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases, and the fight against terrorism.
The concept of global governance originates from the West, represented by President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points and President Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms. Since the end of the Cold War, the US and Europe have taken a high-profile stance on global governance. Yet, what they advocate does not focus on addressing global challenges, but aims at imposing their political system of separation of powers and their values centering around absolute individualism onto others to “Westernize” or “Americanize” them, and to turn them into economic, political and cultural dependencies of Western countries. The ultimate goal is to perpetuate control of the global order and the whole world. In other words, global governance advocated by the US and Europe since the end of the Cold War has not answered such questions as “what and how to govern” and “governance by and for whom”. Their so-called governance is in essence governance by Western countries on non-Western ones. Therefore, the West-led global governance is widely criticized in terms of its model, results and leading forces.
Major Western countries have performed poorly in response to COVID-19. The pandemic has hit the US, the UK, France, Poland, and the Czech Republic particularly hard where the democratic system of one person one vote, the value of absolute individualism and the Western-style market economy are
most practiced. It speaks to the failure of the concept and practice of global governance advocated by the West, and the failure of the economic, political and cultural system of Western civilizations that tend to extol and glorify themselves.
The international community has learnt the lesson from COVID-19 the hard way: in a world of increasing mutual dependence and mounting global challenges, humanity must hold high the banner of global governance, and pool the wisdom and strength of all to tackle global challenges, pandemics included. Meanwhile, we should guard against the touting of Western democratic system, culture and values, and attempts for political, economic and cultural control on non-Western countries in the name of global governance.
The world today is a diversified place where different civilizations, cultures, ethnic groups, races and countries coexist and prosper together. Each may have its own history, cultural tradition and development path. In the postCOVID-19 world, we should all recognize the diversity of the world, and the right of countries and nations choosing their own political and economic system and development model in light of their history, culture and tradition. On that basis, we should pool the wisdom and strength of mankind to serve our common interests, and address global challenges like pandemics, food crisis, wealth divide, development gap, populism, trade protectionism, nuclear proliferation, international terrorism, drug trafficking, and transnational crimes that threaten world peace, development and security. To this end, the international community needs to adjust the governance mechanism, with the G20 taking up the leadership role instead of the US and other Western countries controlling and misdirecting the goals, substance and direction of global governance.
G20 members enjoy the broadest representation, as they account for 70% of global population, 80% of international trade and 90% of world economy. Its members include G7, EU and Australia, as well as 11 non-Western countries including China. Its authority comes from the reflection of the new reality of the international landscape and balance of power. Apart from China, the US and the EU, the other 17 members also enjoy considerable influence in one or more regions, and can play an important role in regional issues. China and its neighbors Russia, India and the ROK, as well as Indonesia, Saudi Arabia,
Turkey, Brazil, Argentina and South Africa all have their own stance when it comes to global governance, and do not blindly follow Western countries. In light of that, non-Western G20 members like China can effectively ensure that the G20-led global governance is free from the manipulation of Western countries like the US, or the governance by some countries on others.
China’s Role in Global Governance After COVID-19
History has shown once and again that the rise of an emerging power needs both its own efforts and historical opportunities. The rise of the US as the superpower, for instance, is attributable to its success in the two world wars.
Similarly, the coronavirus has brought both daunting challenges and strategic opportunities to China. Despite a negative GDP growth of 6.8% in the first quarter of 2020, China registered a positive growth of 3.2% and 4.9% in Q2 and Q3, reversing the downward trend. Its economy grew by 0.7% year-on-year for the first three quarters and 2.3% for the whole year. It is safe to say that China is capable of turning challenges into opportunities by meeting new demands for harmonious development and global governance in the post-epidemic era. Through active engagement in global governance, China can speed up its development while increasing its international influence and standing.
To begin with, on power dynamics between major countries, just as the two world wars have shifted the balance of power in favor of the US, the pandemic has also reshaped the balance of power. Western countries had yet to walk out of the shadow of a double-digit negative growth when the second wave hit, making economic recovery even more difficult. By contrast, China’s economy has been growing again. If the trend continues, China may well surpass the US in terms of economic aggregate earlier than expected, and its economic comparative advantage compared with other Western countries may further expand.
Second, on soft power, China’s soft power and international standing have been greatly enhanced thanks to the solidarity of the Chinese people and
major strategic outcome in fighting COVID-19. Since the outbreak, China has wasted no time in its response from three aspects, making great contribution to the global fight. For one, China has leveraged the strength of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. With a people-centered, sophisticated community management system, a well-established medical system and the dedication of medical professionals, the whole country has been rallied together to support those in need. Besides, the 1.4 billion Chinese people have demonstrated the spirit of collectivism and carried forward the fine tradition of mutual help. With self-discipline, the Chinese people have observed COVID-19 protocols. Lastly, the production capacity and economic strength accumulated since the founding of the People’s Republic some 70 years ago have provided material and technological guarantee to epidemic response at home, and medical supplies to other countries. China has shown the world that the pandemic is not invincible. The strong leadership of the Communist Party of China and China’s institutional and cultural advantage and production capacity are there to see. By contrast, the raging pandemic and the inability of Western countries have demonstrated their institutional and cultural unadaptability.
Last but not least, on global governance, the pandemic and its disastrous consequences have sounded the alarm and called for global response to global issues. They have also revealed the incompetence of the US and other Western powers and their absence in leading global governance. Instead of G7, the WHO, G20 and China have played a leading role in the global fight against COVID-19. With all these, the leadership responsibility of global governance should be handed over to G20, with China playing a bigger role in it.
Conclusion
The book A Study of History by the British historian Arnold Toynbee published in the 1960s gives a systemic assessment of the Western civilization and its inferiority, and praises China for exploring an escape from the shortcomings of Western civilization and its industrialized model, and seeking a path of harmony for humanity instead of selfdestruction. China in the post-COVID era is likely to turn the vision depicted by Toynbee into a political reality. For that to happen, China should do the following. Firstly, it should take a more active role in global governance and put forward propositions in accordance with the shared interests of humankind and with Chinese characteristics. Secondly, it should promote G20 as the main platform for global governance. Thridly, it should strengthen coordination with both non-Western G20 members as well as Germany, the UK, France and the US to gain extensive support. Fourthly, it should be mindful of its tactics in competing with the US. For quite some time to come, the US will remain as the superpower and will compete with China in areas like the military, economy, trade, technology, development models and, most intensely, social system (namely, soft power and dominance in global governance). China should take up courage, keep its strategic composure and deal with the US with proper tactics and strategies. Fifthly, it should stay to the top priority of development, follow the guidelines of the 5th Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee, and strengthen its economic, technological and military might to meet the material and technological needs for more active and extensive involvement in global governance.