Mallory Houlihan
Background
Solidified after the end of World War Two, the rules-based order (RBO) has long been a cornerstone of global governance, providing a necessary framework for diplomacy and conflict mitigation. According to John Mearsheimer, it is international institutions themselves that are responsible for creating rules that stipulate the way in which states interact with each other, thus establishing the RBO. These rules exist because of the survivalist nature of states and their inherent drive to strategize the best way to survive in the anarchic international system. Because of this selfishness, cooperation is hard to achieve without addressing concerns over relative gains and cheating. International institutions exist to mitigate these concerns by providing information, fostering reciprocity, and extending the time horizon of interactions between states. Each of these institutions are designed with specific formats to address unique challenges, and each creates an important structural element of the international order. Considering the individuality and importance of each respective institution, it is apparent that the independence of these institutions is crucial for upholding the RBO. However, the never-ending power struggle among states in the international system can allow for international institutions to be manipulated in selfish ways. As rising powers, like China, assert greater influence over various institutions, the RBO has been put under strain.
How the Balance has Shifted
The United States has long maintained a powerful, norm-setting position in international institutions. However, as China has grown in both its true power and its desire for power, so has its influence on international organizations. Historically, large international organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have promoted Western, democratic values. Though both organizations existed before the Cold War, the post-Cold War system saw a change in their functionality. NATO, which China is not a member of, has evolved to a security-focused democratic organization, while the UN has been severely impeded in its efficacy due to veto power. As the UN is the largest international organization, its decisions can be instrumental in states’ abilities to achieve their goals. China has made many efforts to harness this power. Firstly, China has used its power in the UN to exclude Taiwan, a move aligning directly with Beijing’s objectives. The placing of Chinese officials in senior positions, such as Houlin Zhou as the International Telecommunication Union’s secretary general, has facilitated a push towards authoritarian norms. For example, after his re-election, Zhou immediately shot down claims that equipment from Huawei, a Chinese telecoms giant, was being used for espionage, calling the allegations “not fair”. Subsequently, the ITU has adopted many standards proposals from Huawei. China has also bolstered its personnel numbers within the UN, as well as increasing funding to the UN and other organizations. Examining both China’s increased influence in international organizations and the use of this influence, it can be hypothesized that China’s increased influence on these international institutions has a negative effect on the RBO. It is important to observe both short-term and long-term effects on international order and how it changes alongside this increase in influence.
The Case of the UNSC
The cases of the UNSC and the WHO, respectively, can be tested against the hypothesis that China’s increased influence has had a negative effect on the RBO. The UNSC case exemplifies how China’s use of veto power, specifically relating to the conflict in Syria, has challenged norms and negatively affected the RBO. Firstly, China has only cast 16 vetoes, 13 of which have taken place in the last 27 years. Of these, 10 vetoes targeted drafts addressing the conflict in Syria. These vetoes, and their effect on the conflict in Syria, have directly affected the RBO. The RBO is grounded in liberal institutionalism and is also referred to as the liberal international order. Thus, the order in its foundation promotes human equality, liberal democracy, and international cooperation, important in examining the role of China’s vetoes against drafts intended to aid the conflict in Syria. A veto in December 2019 was against a resolution that would allow humanitarian agencies continued access to populations. Another veto in July 2020 was against a draft calling for Syrian compliance with international law, along with additional humanitarian aid. In February 2012, Beijing vetoed against a resolution that demanded all parties in Syria stop violence. These actions, which have directly impeded the end of the Syrian war, have resulted in loss of civilian life, a massive refugee crisis affecting the infrastructure of other countries, and exacerbation of regional instability, ultimately undermining the RBO.
The Case of the WHO
The case of the WHO examines whether China’s influence on the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic weakened global confidence in the organization and negatively affected the RBO. The function of the WHO, regardless of the pandemic, is to promote global cooperation on matters of health, establish norms, and promote trust through accountability. On January 14th, 2020, the World Health Organization published that, following reports from Chinese officials, there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission of the COVID virus. Taiwan, who is barred from the WHO due to China, warned the WHO of human-to-human transmission on December 31st, 2019. However, due to China’s influence on the organization, this warning was not heeded, and the WHO didn’t acknowledge the transmission until January 23rd. Beyond this, the WHO Director-General (DG) Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus publicly praised Chinese response and handling of the pandemic. In reality, Chinese officials were arresting citizens for posting that SARS was “back”, and controlling content online to reflect the CCP’s desired rhetoric.. Following these instances, a study was published in 2022 that used data from 44,775 participants in 40 WHO countries, concluding a 46% overall decline in reported confidence in the WHO. The RBO depends on multilateral cooperation and norms. The decline in trust after the WHO’s handling of the pandemic undermines their role and influence as an actor in global health governance. States that are members of the WHO can also respond to this lack of credibility by turning inward and developing their own responses to issues, even withdrawing from the WHO, which weakens global governance. Without confidence in the organization, it is also far more challenging to coordinate global health responses. With this lack of coordination and cooperation, trends of nationalism and unilateralism have risen, thus undermining international norms and the foundation of the RBO. Considering this evidence, it can be concluded that China’s influence on the WHO during the COVID-19 pandemic effectively weakened trust in the organization and negatively affected the RBO.
Conclusion
The RBO has been a long-standing framework for diplomacy, grounded in liberal institutionalist theories. This framework was solidified through the creation of NATO and the UN, and has continued to flourish in the post-Cold War unipolar world. However, China’s rising influence has spread to these organizations, affecting their functionality. Through the appointment of senior officials and careful manipulation of information, Chinese influence has changed the way these organizations operate. This led to the hypothesis that China’s increased influence on international organizations has negatively affected the RBO. The first case examined how China’s use of its veto power in the UNSC, specifically pertaining to the conflict in Syria, has affected the RBO. Through research on separate veto decisions and the implications of each, it can be confidently stated that vetoes against conflict resolution in Syria have had detrimental effects on the RBO. The second case tested whether China’s influence on the WHO during the COVID-19 pandemic created a decrease in trust that weakened the RBO. By examining decisions and publications made by the WHO during the pandemic and how China influenced these decisions, this study clarified that China had a large influence on the WHO during the pandemic, which has decreased trust in the organization. This decrease in trust was verified by a study conducted that provides empirical evidence showing a significant decline in trust amongst WHO countries. Based on this research, China’s influence on the WHO during the pandemic has eroded trust, which has negatively affected the RBO by harming the efficacy of the organization and its role in upholding the RBO. These findings demonstrate that there is a correlation between China’s influence on international organizations and negative effects on the rules-based international order.
Comments