China—EU Strategic Partnership and the Transformation of Global Governance

At this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue held in Singapore， Federica Mogherini， the newly-appointed High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy， pointed out that the European Union had ten strategic partners globally as of the end of May 2015， four of which are Asian countries： China， Japan， India and the Republic of Korea. Global governance is vital to the present， but also to the future. Whether and how China and the European Union can become real strategic partners and strengthen global governance has great significance.

It is internationally recognized that global governance， embodied in international organizations established and operated globally after World War II， is going through a period of great transformation after the end of the Cold War， especially the outbreak of the global financial crisis in 2008. This transformation is still underway， and is full of uncertainties.

From the West’s perspective， the rise of emerging powers such as China， India and Brazil represents the historical shift of international power. These countries demand more representation， voice and even decision-making power in the existing international organizations.

From the view of emerging powers， they are expressing increasingly more ambition and providing the world with new international norms. For example， instead of accepting the concept of Responsibility to Protect （R2P）， which was proposed by Western countries as a new international norm， Brazil modified R2P into Responsibility while Protecting. This modification reflected Brazil’s intention of participating in shaping new international norms.

Even without the demands from emerging powers for reform， the global governance arrangement dominated by the West is facing difficulties adjusting to the changing world. Therefore， reforming global governance and its organizations is also in the long-term interests of the West. Otherwise， these organizations will be eliminated by history sooner or later. The European Union was the first major member of the West to recognize the importance of reforming the current international organizations， and it is promoting their reform.

The establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank （AIIB）， which was proposed by China， is a positive and major development in the transformation of global governance. It is also a huge contribution made by China to global governance. In contrast to the United States and Japan， major countries in the European Union have welcomed the AIIB and many applied to be founding members， writing a new chapter in the history of global governance.

There has been considerable debate about the European Union countries joining the AIIB， both internationally and domestically. But joining the AIIB is a visionary decision for them， especially as they have always presented themselves as role models for obeying international rules and playing a central role in global governance. This decision reflects that the European Union views China as one of the key elements in determining the future of global governance.

In the past few years， especially since 2008， the relationship between China and global governance has become a key issue for the European Union with regard changes to the global governance system. Many European scholars and politicians are involved in this heated discussion.

Among them， Javier Solana， the European Union’s former high representative for common foreign and security policy， and NATO’s former secretary-general， pointed out in his paper “China and Global Governance” that： “It is safe to say that the most consequential geostrategic development of the last two decades has been China’s rise. Yet the West has failed to accord China—not to mention the other major emerging economies—the degree of influence in today’s global governance structures that it merits. This may be about to change.”

Solana’s perspective is representative of many in Europe. But in the eyes of some European people， China’s arrangements with other developing countries do not adhere to the best international practices as defined by the West. For example， China does not attach political strings to its loans to other developing countries. The West has therefore urged China to meet international standards， and recommended that China should move toward multilateral， instead of unilateral or bilateral， processes， considering that multilateral organizations will help China accept higher international standards， namely international code and norms， which are obviously mainly regulated by the West.

Solana revealed the main motivation for the European Union members seeking to join the AIIB and other international organizations initiated by China as such multilateral institutions are the expectation of European countries. In the past the European Union welcomed China to the table of global governance. Now China is creating new organizations， and the European Union continues to welcome and even support China， even though the multilateral organizations China initiated could be a challenge for the European Union. This is a totally different reaction from that of the United States and Japan. By joining the AIIB， the European Union countries hope to influence China to “take the correct path”. Besides， they believe they can prevent the new bank from getting into unhealthy competition with international financial organizations such as the World Bank. This may ensure that the new institutions created by the emerging powers only complement， rather than rival， the existing Western-led institutions.

Based on these considerations， Solana appealed to the West， especially the United States， to welcome and encourage China to take multilateral approaches in its interaction with the world. As a Distinguished Fellow at the Brookings Institution， Solana called on the United States and Japan to welcome China’s support on multilateralism as the European countries have done， to give China a role in global governance commensurate with its economic might.

However， while focusing on China’s impact on global governance， the European Union itself is at a turning point. European integration， built on significant and long-lasting political decisions that have lasted for more than six decades， now finds itself in a dilemma. The EU skeptics and even anti-EU forces seem to keep increasing. Half-hearted member countries such as the United Kingdom are seeking to renegotiate their membership of the European Union. One of the United Kingdom’s negotiating strategies is to hold a national referendum to decide whether or not to remain an EU member.

A “Brexit”， short for Britain’s exit from the European Union， is not just a strategy the United Kingdom has adopted in its negotiations with the European Union. Many influential European commentators believe that in long term， the possibility of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union is real. Of course， the pro-EU forces within the United Kingdom should not be underestimated. For instance， Scotland， which voted to stay in the United Kingdom in the 2014 referendum， is a strong supporter of the European Union and would not want the United Kingdom to leave. If the United Kingdom’s negotiations with the European Union cause more member states to follow suit， it will trigger a huge earthquake within the European Union. Meanwhile， the tough situation in the European Union’s negotiations with countries， such as Greece， that are deeply tortured by debt crises has also caused domestic resentment toward the European Union. To many in these countries， the European Union is no longer as attractive as it used to be. The possibility of Greece exiting from the eurozone has not been eliminated， and there are many countries in a similar situation to Greece. The domestic politics in Spain， for example， are becoming a great challenge to the European Union’s political process.

Such serious problems aside， the European Union still promotes its Common Foreign and Security Policy （CFSP） and is trying to gain more influence in global affairs. However， the European Union’s ability to influence world affairs cannot match its ambition.

The “Belt and Road” initiative that China currently advocates is not against any power in the world， especially not against the geopolitics of the West. Instead， this initiative is aimed at promoting peace and development， and realizing order and governance. This major initiative indicates that China’s opening up has entered a new stage. By taking the initiative to “go out” and encouraging other countries to build connectivity with its economy， China， one of the world’s largest economies， will be able to breathe new life into global economic growth and globalization， leading the world economy to rise to a new level.

Some European elites seem to have accurately and promptly understood the nature and long-term significance of China’s “Belt and Road” initiative. Dominique de Villepin， former French deputy prime minister， is one of them. In his view， “The ‘Belt and Road’ initiative is a diplomatic initiative， but also an international policy of profound significance. It embraces the future in a very active manner. It is a constructive as well as an open layout for the future and will bring more security， stability and development to many important regions of the world.

“Most foreign policies nowadays are designed to adapt to the current situation and try to solve problems or address crises， while the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative is a more visionary and a positive gesture to change the current international architecture.”

In an earlier interview， de Villepin held the view that China was becoming the main driving force for globalization， while European society commonly doubted or even resisted globalization in its present form and content. “Trapped by the outdated idea of globalization in Western liberalism， France and the rest of Europe still stick to the old conventions in finance and the economy， failing to see the fact that the development and focus of globalization have been changed. What can really reflect the new trend of globalization is the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative， the economic and diplomatic strategic priority proposed by Chinese president Xi Jinping. This initiative is aimed at reviving the prosperity of East-West communication during the Tang Dynasty （AD 618-907）， and providing China with a flexible framework to address a series of challenges， from internationalizing its economy， promoting the renminbi’s position in global trade， developing its inland provinces， boosting domestic demand， and strengthening international cooperation to address the disturbances in the Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region.”

However， not all Europeans view China’s desire for influence in global governance in the same way Javier Solana or Dominique de Villepin do. The “Belt and Road” initiative and the establishment of the AIIB have also caused concern to some. The “Belt and Road” and the AIIB are viewed by some as signature moves of China’s international strategy， and they link them with a change in the world order or international rules. They even consider these actions will lead to the change of current global architecture that is at present dominated by the West.

The participation of EU countries in the AIIB and their different reaction toward the “Belt and Road” initiative and the AIIB than the United States do not mean that they have solved the so-called China Challenge. In this respect， two aspects of the European Union’s stance toward China and the transformation of global governance are worth attention.

First， the European Union believes that China will stay in the current order， while still pursuing change or reform to that order and the introduction of new international rules. With this in mind， Western countries need to decide whether to become stakeholders in another country’s plans. If the European Union joins the plan， does it mean that it accepts China’s leadership or dominance to some degree？ If not， does it mean that the European Union is preparing for conflicts with China over global governance？

Second， the European Union has struck up the same old tune to warn China of the consequences in the matter of international rules. High Representative Mogherini pointed out in her Shangri-La speech that the European Union upholds freedom of navigation and therefore it too has a stake in the maritime disputes in Asia. She urged the relevant countries to behave according to the common code， namely international law and norms， and underlined that the European Union seeks to maintain a maritime order based on international law， including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. “We are resolute， as Europeans， on how they （the disputes） should be resolved—that is， peacefully， without use or threat of force. We support the ASEAN–China negotiations for a Code of Conduct， and we hope they can be concluded soon.”

The European Union has reacted to China’s recent participation in global governance and interacts with China in a totally different way from the United States. This represents a new difference between the European Union and the United States in dealing with China. Both the Obama administration and US think tanks conducting research on foreign policy basically view China’s initiatives such as the AIIB as “a threat to the United States’ leadership”， and believe “China is seeking to side-step the current international order and create a rival system that would challenge American leadership and divide the West”.

What does this difference between the European Union and United States mean to the transformation of global governance？ In 2015， which is the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties between China and the European Union， the AIIB was established in Beijing. Most of the EU countries became founding members of the AIIB despite the resistance and objections of the United States and Japan.

Solana said at the end of his paper “China and Global Governance”， “China’s move into the multilateral process is good news for the world”. How should we evaluate this statement？

Global governance originated in Europe. The European Union is a success story for global governance on the regional level. On the global level， the European Union advocates pursuing new approaches to strengthening binding multilateral cooperation based on rules， jointly facing global challenges and seeking global solutions. The thoughts and actions of the European Union are mainly based on its judgment of the global situation—it believes that the world is in a post-hegemony （specifically the post-US hegemony） era. In this era， international institutions （such as the World Bank） built on hegemony are less and less efficient or representative， and they are continuing to lose international legitimacy. The European Union will not expect or accept a new hegemony to replace the US one， or a few powers forming a joint hegemony， because this will contradict the core values of regional governance in Europe since World War. The Western European countries have managed to establish， maintain and expand the European Union through regionalism and multilateralism since World War II. This is a new thing， different from previous world systems.

The European Union’s welcome and support of the China initiated AIIB shows that multilateralism is a fundamental basis for China-EU cooperation. If both sides manage to strengthen this foundation， it will be the pillar of global governance based on multilateralism.

In 2016， China will assume the rotating presidency of G20 and host the G20 Summit in Hangzhou， Zhejiang Province. Actually the G20 only has 19 member states， including five EU countries. Only by including the European Union does the group comprise 20 members. The European Union， as a non-state special international actor， has a Common Foreign and Security Policy and diplomatic mission （that is the European External Action Service and its delegations dispatched to countries globally）. The European Union is a member of the WTO and many other international organizations. The G20 was born in Germany， a European Union member， in 1999. Since 2008， when the G20 was upgraded to leaders’ meeting， the United Kingdom and France have been the G20 presidency country， in 2009 and 2011 respectively. The G20 Hangzhou Summit will provide a historic opportunity for strategic cooperation in global governance between China and the European Union. It is suggested that China and the European Union build a G20 cooperation framework and jointly promote the G20 to realize the goal of it becoming the “premier forum for our international economic cooperation” as stated in the G20 communiqué of the second 2009 summit held in Pittsburgh.