(LifeSiteNews) — On his arrival in Moscow yesterday the Chinese President Xi Jinping immediately reaffirmed the commitment of China and Russia to “uphold the UN-centric international system.”
Whether this is a sincere commitment to the United Nations, or an attempt to supplant the influence of the United States over the UN is arguable. What is not in question, however, is the Sino-Russian dedication to “safeguard the world order based on international law… relying on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.”
The Chinese leader has come to Moscow at the invitation of Vladimir Putin, nominally in congratulation on Xi’s historic third term as president. This is seen as an affirmation of his personal power, making him the most significant Chinese head of state since the revolutionary leader Chairman Mao.
How does Xi intend to use this power? According to Russian news agency Tass, who reported his initial remarks, he wishes to work with Russia to “…promote multipolarity in the world, democratize international relations and promote global governance on a more just and rational track.”
The cooperation towards a global governance model with Russia builds on Xi’s announcement published yesterday. Issued by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, it contains Xi’s assertion that deepening ties with Russia represent an unstoppable – and global – trend, whose outcomes are inevitable.
The historical trend of peace, development and win-win cooperation is unstoppable. The prevailing trends of world multi-polarity, economic globalization and greater democracy in international relations are irreversible.
For the Chinese and the Russians there is no going back from globalization. This is not quite business as usual, as the question is upon whose terms it shall be done in future. Globalization is a trend the Chinese seek to accelerate, hoping to capitalize on the opportunity presented by a growing sense of crisis in the West.
“The world today is going through profound changes unseen in a century,” says Xi, in an oblique reference to the reshaping of diplomatic ties and allegiances undertaken by the Chinese and the Russians. Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran have all taken remarkable steps towards a rapprochement deemed formerly unthinkable.
It is true this alliance is redrawing the map of influence in the Middle East. With the expansion of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, Indian, China and South Africa) bloc – headed by China and Russia – these two nations are advancing their project of a parallel globalism to rival that dominated by the US. There has been talk of moving off the dollar to do so.
Titled, with typical communist brevity, Forging Ahead to Open a New Chapter of China-Russia Friendship, Cooperation and Common Development, this document authored by Xi sets the agenda for this three day meeting, as well as indicating the aims towards which China is working in partnership with Russia – and with a growing list of other nations.
The language is crafted to appeal to an international audience weary of perpetual war, and uncertain of their own future. It is a message of peace, cooperation and hope, but one which glosses over the “models of governance” on offer around the world – such as those supported by a social credit system.
The international community has recognized that no country is superior to others, no model of governance is universal, and no single country should dictate the international order.
The agenda of the Chinese is to announce, with the Russians, that the unipolar world order led by the United States has come to an end. It is their intention to present themselves as rational peacemakers, and the champions of a new arrangement between nations.
“No single country should dictate the international order” admits the possibility that a group of them might do just that. It is also a statement which would sit well with a commitment to the kind of world envisaged by the architects of Agenda 2030, to whose goals China remains committed.
Neither the Russians nor the Chinese object in principle to the kind of posthuman future presented by the Neo-Malthusian Green movement. For them, it is a question of whose flag may fly over their sector – that of the rainbow, or that of their own.
The statements of joint commitment to the kind of goals celebrated by the World Economic Forum should not surprise anyone who remembers Putin’s visit to China during the winter Olympics of 2022. Following this meeting, which took place immediately before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a joint Russian and Chinese statement was issued by the Kremlin:
…in order to accelerate the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the [Russian and Chinese] sides call on the international community to take practical steps in key areas of cooperation such as poverty reduction, food security, vaccines and epidemics control, financing for development, climate change, sustainable development, including green development, industrialization, digital economy, and infrastructure connectivity.
Following his meeting with his “dear friend” President Putin today, Xi Jinping released a further statement outlining the importance of Sino-Russian cooperation, and referring once more to supra-state institutions as a means of cementing their influence and power.
The two countries should further deepen practical cooperation in various fields and strengthen coordination and collaboration on multilateral platforms such as the UN to boost their respective national development and rejuvenation, and be a bulwark for world peace and stability.
The idea that the moment has come to announce a new multi-polarity in world affairs is not reserved to the Chinese and the Russians alone. In the West, there is a growing realization that the sanctions regime has not destroyed Russia. It has hurried the Russians into the arms of China, to create a rival power bloc whose industrial base, global supply chains and command of mineral resources is now being leveraged into increased diplomatic power.
The Chinese leader’s visit to Russia is a showcase for a new, multi-polar world order. It is not so much the nature of the orders which is changing – it is simply a matter of who will be giving them.