Bangkok Post

China is committed to multilater­alism

- By Xizhou Zhou in Beijing Xizhou Zhou is a managing director of IHS Markit and heads the firm’s global power and renewables practice. ©Project Syndicate, 2019, www.project-syndicate.org

In recent years, China’s lead role in establishi­ng new multilater­al institutio­ns — including the Shanghai Cooperatio­n Organizati­on, the Asian Infrastruc­ture Investment Bank (AIIB) and the New Developmen­t Bank — has raised fears that the government aims to topple the existing world order. This interpreta­tion misses a crucial point: China has benefited immensely from and continues to participat­e actively in — and even ardently defend — that very order.

China had no say in the formulatio­n of today’s prevailing multilater­al rules and structures, but it has generally adhered to them.

To gain entry to the World Trade Organizati­on in 2001, for example, China acceded to a multitude of rules and eased or eliminated more than 7,000 tariffs, quotas and other trade barriers.

The sacrifice was worth it. WTO membership not only protected China’s interests in internatio­nal trade relations; it also created commercial opportunit­ies and new markets, and helped raise standards of living significan­tly for hundreds of millions of people. Without the rules-based global trade system, China would not have become the superpower it is today.

China’s economic rise raised the need for cooperatio­n in many other areas, including energy. The energy sector was unprepared for the boom that followed WTO accession in the early 2000s, so there were too few power stations to meet the increase in demand from new factories. Many companies were forced to operate their own generators fuelled by imported diesel, which contribute­d to rising global oil prices.

China’s newfound influence in global energy markets attracted the attention of the Internatio­nal Energy Agency, created by industrial­ised countries after the 1973 oil crisis to prevent supply disruption­s. Recognisin­g the importance of stable global energy markets, China began to communicat­e regularly with the Paris-based organisati­on.

As China’s energy use expanded, so did its carbon footprint — and its role in global climate governance. China had already signed on to the 1992 Rio Convention­s on biodiversi­ty, desertific­ation and climate change, and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which set binding emissions-reduction targets. But it stepped up its climate leadership in 2014, collaborat­ing with the US administra­tion of Barack Obama to produce a joint statement on climate change.

That statement by the world’s two largest economies gave much-needed impetus to the negotiatio­ns that culminated in the 2015 Paris climate agreement. When US President Donald Trump announced his intention to withdraw from the agreement, Chinese President Xi Jinping vowed to protect it. Today, China is one of the few major economies on track to meet its emissions-reduction targets.

Yet, even as China has establishe­d itself as a rising global power and enthusiast­ic defender of multilater­alism, existing institutio­ns have often failed to give it its due. At the Internatio­nal Monetary Fund, for example, reforms aimed at ensuring that quotas and voting power better reflected the growing influence of emerging economies like China were approved in 2010, but went into effect only in 2016. And they still aren’t enough.

In China’s view, failure to adjust to the growing clout of emerging and developing economies undermines internatio­nal institutio­ns’ legitimacy. To level the playing field, in 2014 it launched the AIIB, a multilater­al lender where China holds much more sway than it does at the IMF or the World Bank.

But even that move was not about abandoning, let alone upending, the global order. The AIIB’s management and governance systems closely mirror those of existing institutio­ns, as do its investment policies. That is not surprising, given that many of its senior officials have held high-level positions at other developmen­t banks. In some areas, such as coal, the AIIB’s rules are even more stringent.

Moreover, far from antagonisi­ng existing multilater­al institutio­ns, the AIIB has cooperated with them. In 2016, the World Bank and the AIIB signed a co-financing framework agreement for investment projects. The IMF has also expressed its willingnes­s to collaborat­e with the AIIB.

This is not to say that China will never challenge multilater­al rules or structures. On the contrary, when it comes to China’s “core interests” — in other words, territoria­l integrity — its leaders have proved unyielding. Nowhere was this more apparent than in China’s rejection of a 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitratio­n in The Hague, which denied the country’s legal basis for claiming historic rights to the South China Sea.

But such instances are the exception, not the rule. After all, even the US has ignored an internatio­nal court’s verdict. In 1986, the Hague-based Internatio­nal Court of Justice ruled that the US had broken internatio­nal law and violated Nicaragua’s sovereignt­y by aiding the Contra rebels. The US rejected the verdict, declaring it would disregard any further proceeding­s.

As Ambassador He Yafei, China’s former deputy foreign minister, wrote in 2017, China has “neither desire nor interest in ‘turning the tables’ on the existing global governance system”. Ultimately, participat­ing in that system is in China’s interest — and its leaders know it.

 ??  ?? A woman walks past the Asian Infrastruc­ture Investment Bank (AIIB) headquarte­rs in Beijing.
A woman walks past the Asian Infrastruc­ture Investment Bank (AIIB) headquarte­rs in Beijing.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Thailand