By 2028, China will surpass The United States as the world’s leading economy in terms of GDP, according to major economic experts and forums. This great transition will disrupt the whole Western monopoly maintained since the arrival of colonial rule in Asia, where the exploitation of natural resources, human labor and uneven markets paved the way for The European dream. Through the adoption of market Leninism, the term was coined in 1993. During 2000-2020 The Consumer Price Index of China remained at 2.3%, where the housing price inflation rate hit 8.3%, Stock market returns were 11%, while mutual fund returns were 17%.
These figures give a glimpse of the unprecedented economic growth China has witnessed. Nevertheless, in the realm of climate, China is recorded as the largest carbon emissions producer, which is quite concerning, consuming 26% of the global energy to sustain its Nation. However, when we scrutinize the numbers, two majors’ biases we face;
China’s Per capita electricity consumption is 5,331-kilowatt hours, according to Statista, which is significantly lower compared to the United States, which is around 3800 kWh per capita; when we offset it in accordance with the population, it surges four times itself, three times over China. The per capita energy consumption is one of the indicators that helps measure a country’s development as the theory states that the great the supply is, the lower the price will be; in terms of energy, as it will become affordable, it will attract the major investments allowing corporates to build factories, which eventually produce employment opportunities in that region. This will act like a double engine growth paradigm where the key to prosperity lies in energy production and reasonable distribution.
Energy consumption plays a critical role in the development of any nation to sustain its growth through industrialization. Energy consumption plays a critical role in the development of any nation to boost the industries, produce jobs, and increase connectivity through modernization; even for the basic needs, it requires energy. For the production of energy, the common instruments that are accommodated are the fossil fuel that contributed to the growth of China. China, since 1990 quadrupled from 1.06 billion million metric tons of coal to 4.02 billion metric tons to boost the second revolution, “Open Market,” launched under Deng Xiaoping. According to the CSIS, China’s energy production made up 56.8 percent of coal alone.
The emissions transfers are where one Nation is outsourcing its carbon emission by shifting other nations’ industries for their goods. The colonies’ human resources were exploited during imperialism to produce the imperial state’s goods. The emission transfer accommodates two facets, Emission production elucidates how much one Nation contributes to the emissions of carbon and the consumption emission emitted when we consume the goods and services, we purchase every day within that country.
Through Globalization, outsourcing critical components and industries became a norm as it not only saved billions of dollars simultaneously for the underdeveloped nations it was providing an opportunity for jobs.
The Nation of 1.4 billion people, China, pledged in 2020 that it would peak its carbon emissions by 2030 and pave the way for carbon neutrality by 2060. This is a 40 years master plan if China leaves us a grandiose vision for the future, as China already has a monopoly over solar panels and access to fresh waters and high streams, enabling China to diversify the energy production with elegance without much hindrance.
In 2019, renewables accounted for nearly 15 percent of China’s energy mix, compared to 7 percent a decade earlier; by 2030, China’s total renewable energy will reach 25% of the total energy production; this will be done through the installation of solar power grids and wind power generation constituting 1.2 billion kilowatts of energy by 2030. This will assist China in entering the new phase transition in the post-carbon emissions peak.
What are the limitations of the Green economy?
The present crisis that erupted in Europe due to the Russian-Ukraine war exposed the vulnerability of the green transition as in the sudden absence of fossil fuels; the Western Economy will take the harder hit. This unprecedented situation made the EU revert to using fossil fuels to offset the impact of the natural gas blockade imposed by the EU. According to the data in 2019, 71 percent of the European continent’s energy requirements are filled through fossil fuels, 82 percent in the 1990s. This slow transition towards the green economy makes it Non sustainable in the moments of the sudden shift towards one to another as a mammoth percentage of energy production still relies on burning fossil fuels.
Despite the enormous growth in technology and green energy, one key hindrance lies in front of the world, and that is the storage of energy. Several other energies are dependent on geological realities, such as wind energy, hydro energy and nuclear energy, which are the prominent choices for replacing fossil fuels. It also accommodates the fact that some energies produce externalities, including environmental degradation, and radiation, along with high maintenance costs. These factors are critical for the evaluation of a more resilient and effective policy for the transition toward a green economy.
The economy word correlated Industries in the modern era, where Globalization reduced the state status quo, and a surge of MNCs has taken place. The green transition needs a skilled and educated labor market in order to cope with the transitional change that is going on. For this, a public-private partnership is critical that could effectively incentives the learning of the required skills. The green transition will eliminate millions of jobs in the fossil fuel arena, which could lead to catastrophic if not equivalent or multifold jobs produced by the green economy transition. However, despite the positive claims by the analyst on the green economy job growth, we must use a multidisciplinary approach to review the actuality of the issue; as technology and AI is on the rise, 800 million jobs will disappear, reported to the World Economic Forum, in that case, scenario if the national policy on green transition does not cope with the realities, it will bring devastation. In Sri Lanka in 2021 radically shifted towards organic farming, which caused a severe food shortage that accelerated the crisis in Sri Lanka.
The exclusive policy aimed at slowing down the progress of developing nations
As we have discussed the outsourcing bias in the Western Hemisphere when we deliberate on climate change, we fail to accommodate this facet where the advanced industrialized countries, to a major extent, exploited the fossil fuels that secured modern-day prosperity. Harsh restriction on using fossil fuels as an energy source will be detrimental for the developing nations, which is recording uneven growth within and outside their boundaries. This includes at the domestic level, the tussle between Rural and Urban areas development that report an uneven growth in rural and urban areas could not cope with the same parameters under green taxation.
The three facets we need to discuss first are the rate of industrialization in the region, Power consumption and source of power generation; third is the job growth percentage. These three pillars will give a real picture of the uneven growth. The rate of industrialization directly correlated with the general trend reporting the incoming or departure of the companies from that particular region. Suppose the growth of industrialization is not paced at high speed. In that case, it will create a gap between the urban and rural economies that further the job shrinks and loss in the rural areas as the opportunities will not hold that many incentives for the private firms to establish their companies.
The second aspect is the region’s dependence on fuel consumption; this is a major player in the policy development, especially concerning the green taxation legislation. Suppose the government imposes any arbitrary taxation based on the urbanized region data. In that case, it will further hamper the existing industries in the rural areas that are already struggling to make the required profit to sustain.
The impact of environmental taxes is to increase the cost of polluting. and as a result, discourage their production and consumption – this can hurt jobs if the tax leads to a firm decreasing production green legislation in any nation will eventually lead toward w global industries shift to more climate lenient nations outsourcing the jobs or leading to permanent job loss in the Nation as, during the NAFTA, 72 percent of the total manufacturing jobs in the United States shifted to Mexico as the incentives were too lucrative for the private firms. If these phenomena replicate themselves in the developed nations, it will accelerate the outsourcing and permanent shift of operational bases to more climate-neutral countries.
The Great Game of China and the United States of America in Asia
Harjeet Singh is a student of the University of Delhi pursuing a bachelor's in political science honors, his heterodox approaches to international studies and research that has received considerable international acknowledgement.
Why the EU Could End Within a Year
Asian and Pacific Countries Preparing for the Far East Forum
The Great Game of China and the United States of America in Asia
Sujit S Nair – Creating diplomatic ties between Europe and India
Global economy: Outlook worsens as global recession looms
The so-called US vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region is essentially a strategy to divide the countries in the area, and incite in-out confrontation. It goes against the trend of times in the Asia-Pacific region, namely peaceful development and win-win cooperation.
The Biden Administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy is contradictory: the USA claims to promote freedom and openness in the region as a goal, while in reality co-opting with allies to forge the 5-4-3-2-1 countdown system.
The Five Eyes (FVEY): the intelligence and surveillance alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America.
The Quad Mechanism (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue): the informal strategic alliance between Australia, Japan, India and the United States of America with the aim of containing China in the Indo-Pacific region.
AUKUS, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, announced on September 15, 2021.
The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF): a plan for investment and strengthening trade relations that aims to increase the US presence in the region and counter Chinese influence. For some observers, however, IPEF actually serves to dampen allies’ criticism of the nature of US strategy in the region, focused only on military presence and lacking concrete economic implications, unlike the Chinese policy in the macro-region.
AUKUS supports Australia in building nuclear-powered submarines and developing hypersonic weapons, increasing the risk of a regional arms race and world war.
Under the pretext of combating illegal fishing and making supply chains resilient, Quad has vigorously pursued military cooperation and intelligence sharing. The USA has also encouraged NATO’s involvement in the Asia-Pacific region. These are all attempts to make an Asia-Pacific version of NATO materialise and promote integrated deterrence against the People’s Republic of China.
The Indo-Pacific strategy is causing growing alarm and concern in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region. As reported by the BBC, in April 2021, New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, expressed her country’s discomfort with the expansion of the Five Eyes’ mandate, thus putting pressure on the People’s Republic of China, while New Zealand prefers to pursue peaceful bilateral relations with the People’s Republic of China.
The Indo-Pacific strategy is causing growing alarm and concern in many Asia-Pacific countries. As reported by the BBC, in April 2021, New Zealand’s Foreign Minister, Nanaia Mahuta expressed New Zealand’s discomfort with the expansion of the Five Eyes mandate, thus putting pressures on China, while New Zealand prefers to pursue peaceful bilateral relations with the People’s Republic of China.
Last May, at the special US-ASEAN Summit, the countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) – namely Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar (Burma), Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam (Papua New Guinea and East Timor as observers) – emphasised their aspiration for peace and cooperation, not for posturing, division or confrontation.
The United States of America has made it clear that IPEF will enable it to win the race of the 21st century. This means that IPEF is designed to serve only the US economy. Long ago the White House shelved the idea of developing the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific. The USA walked out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and refused to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership. This exposes the US one-sided nature and its selective approach to international institutions. It is about US self-interest, and nothing mutually beneficial.
IPEF is a US political instrument to sustain its hegemony in the regional economy. The essence is to dominate supply and value chains, as well as the new economic sectors, and marginalise specific countries. The United States has chosen to make economic issues sound as political and ideological ones, using the economy to force regional countries to side in-out with China or the USA.
US Trade Representative Katherine Tai has publicly stated that IPEF is a stand-alone agreement independent of China. US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo said that IPEF marked the restoration of US economic leadership in the region and provided Indo-Pacific countries with an alternative to the Chinese approach. Earlier, she had also stated that IPEF could harmonise export controls and other “poison pills”, such as restricting the export of sensitive products to China.
IPEF seeks to establish US-led trade rules, as well as restructure the industrial chain system and economically and scientifically “decouple” the neighbouring countries from China. Many countries in the region are worried and believe that the cost of such “decoupling” will be huge. Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad noted that any trade alliance excluding the world’s second largest economy could not be conducive to closer multilateral trade cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region. The exclusion of China by the United States is not an economic but a political issue.
Hailed as “menu approach” cooperation, IPEF actually takes little account of the level of development and the real needs of the countries in the region. It barely makes concessions to developing countries on tariff reductions and market access, but forces participants to accept the so-called high standards of the United States of America and its unilateral agenda. IPEF focuses exclusively on the US direct interests and cares little for the other parties’ needs. There is no mutual benefit in IPEF.
In its report Regional Perspectives on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, the US Center for Strategic and International Studies has emphasised that IPEF has little more to offer than expanding the US economic presence in the region. It does not tackle the issues of the larger interests of the countries in the region. There is widespread concern that IPEF will only benefit the United States of America, while heavily burdening the participating regional countries.
The People’s Republic of China is committed to the path of peaceful development and of the five principles of peaceful coexistence, while opposing the practice of the bigger and stronger party prevailing over the smaller and weaker ones. By depicting China as a threat and using “freedom of navigation” as a pretext to undermine Chinese sovereignty, security and maritime rights and interests, the United States poses serious concerns to regional peace and security. In a way the interference in Ukraine, which has led to the war between the parties, is already a stern warning.
In Asia and around the world China upholds equality among all countries regardless of their size. It respects each State’s choice of the development path suited to its national conditions, and does not seek any sphere of influence. China pursues a defence policy of a defensive nature and an active defence military strategy. In developing its defence capabilities, China aims to safeguard its sovereignty, security and development interests and does not target any other country. The growth of China’s defence capabilities enhances the force for world peace, so that no country dictates its conditions to the international community. It is therefore utterly ridiculous and provocative – as unfortunately happens to read in some embedded press – to claim that China has the ambition to create a sphere of influence in the Pacific region, especially in the area of the South China Sea and East China Sea. The same holds true for the claim that some usual Western countries will continue to oppose China’s “illegal” activities in these two seas, and that these countries will support other States in the region in defending their maritime rights (i.e. Western foreign war fleets’ ones), and seek allies and friends to defend freedom of navigation and overflight of foreign fleets and air forces that they would like to continue to fly and sail at will, even against international law. Let us take a closer look.
The People’s Republic of China is the first country to have discovered, named, explored and exploited the Nanhai Islands and its waters, as well as the first one to have exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over them continuously, peacefully and effectively. The Chinese sovereignty over the Nanhai Islands and its rights and interests in the South China Sea have been established throughout the long course of history. They are firmly rooted in history and law and have been upheld by successive Chinese governments and recognised by the international community. In accordance with the Cairo Declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam Declaration of 1945, China reclaimed territories illegally occupied by Japan, including the Paracel Islands (Xisha Qundao) and the Spratly Islands (Nansha Qundao) after World War II, and has since asserted sovereignty and strengthened jurisdiction by establishing official names, publishing maps, creating administrative units, deploying and stationing troops.
The resumption of China’s exercise of sovereignty over the Nanhai Islands is a legitimate and lawful act to inherit China’s rights established throughout history. It is also part of the post-World War II international order and has been recognised by countries around the world, including the United States of America.
Moreover, thanks to the joint efforts of China and the ASEAN countries, the overall situation in the South China Sea remains stable. With the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), signed by China and ASEAN members at the 8th Phnom Penh Summit on November 4, 2002, freedom of navigation and overflight, peaceful settlement of disputes and self-control in the conduct of activities are reaffirmed.
In this regard, the parties have stepped up dialogue, appropriately managed divergences, deepened cooperation and enhanced mutual trust, as well as made active progress in advancing the consultations on the Code of Conduct (COC) in the South China Sea, in an effort to jointly safeguard peace and stability in that sea and positively shape regional and global security, stability and prosperity. Despite COVID-19, the parties held video-conference meetings of senior officials on the implementation of DOC and ten joint working group meetings via video link to advance consultations on the COC text. On June 22, 2022 the first face-to-face consultations on the COC since COVID-19 were held in Cambodia. This positive progress says a lot about the determination and commitment of the countries in the region to pursue the COC consultations steadfastly.
China respects and supports the freedom of navigation and overflight of all countries in the South China Sea, in accordance with international law, and actively protects security and free passage through international sea routes. The South China Sea is indeed one of the safest and freest shipping lanes in the world. Fifty per cent of the world’s merchant ships and a third of international maritime trade, as well as over 100,000 merchant ships, pass through it every year. Freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea has never been an issue.
The Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands and the surrounding ones are China’s territory. Chinese patrol and law enforcement missions in the waters off the Diaoyu Islands are legitimate measures taken by China to exercise its sovereignty, in accordance with law, and are necessary responses to Japanese provocations in violation of Chinese sovereignty. No country should misjudge the strong determination of the Chinese government to safeguard sovereignty and territorial integrity. At the same time, the People’s Republic of China remains committed to managing and resolving problems properly through dialogue and consultation and has made great efforts to maintain maritime stability. In 2014 a four-point consensus in principle was reached between China and Japan to manage and improve bilateral relations. It includes a clear understanding for managing the situation regarding the Diaoyu Islands and the East China Sea.
While acting according to the logic of the Monroe Doctrine, the United States of America often uses power politics, as well as hegemonic and imposing actions, to flagrantly undermine the international maritime order so as to sustain its maritime dominance. In the 246-year history of the United States, there were only 16 years in which the country was not at war with others. The United States of America operates over 800 military bases in 80 countries and regions. Its military spending, which has grown consecutively for years, accounts for a quarter of the world total and is equivalent to the military spending of the world’s top nine countries combined. The United States has recently proposed a national defence budget request of around 813 billion dollars for the fiscal year 2023. Such massive military spending makes the United States the first and only challenger. Of whom?
The United States of America ignores the history and facts regarding the South China Sea issue, deliberately fuels disputes over territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, and sows discord among regional countries. It undermines stability and fuels militarisation in the South China Sea. Data from relevant organisations show that the number of US close reconnaissance activities targeting China has more than doubled in the past decade or more. An average of five US military ships currently navigate near the Chinese coast every day. In 2022, US military ships have navigated through the Taiwan Strait about once a month and large US reconnaissance aircrafts have flown over 800 times near China and have repeatedly violated China’s airspace. Under the assumption of creating trouble in the South China Sea, the United States has also encouraged its allies and collaborators to make their military ships sail the South China Sea.
On the afternoon of October 2, 2021, the Seawolf-class fast attack submarine USS Connecticut (SSN-22) struck an object while submerged and operating in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region. Only a week later, the United States released a vague statement, claiming that the submarine had hit an unknown object. A month later, it was reported that the submarine “had run aground on an unexplored seamount”. A final report on the accident was finally released by the US Navy on May 23, 2022, but no clear explanation was provided in response to the serious concerns and questions raised by many people, including: 1. the aim of the submarine; 2, the specific location of the accident; 3. whether the submarine had entered the exclusive economic zones (EEZs); or 4. even the territorial sea of other countries; and 5. whether the accident had caused a nuclear leak or damaged the marine environment.
The United States started its Freedom of Navigation (FON) programme in 1979 before signing the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in Montego Bay on December 10, 1982. In defiance of the new maritime order, it signed but did not ratify the Convention. The signature entails no obligation for the State, but merely serves to authenticate the text: it is only with ratification that the treaty takes legal effect for the country.
The “shrewd”’ move sought to maximise US military’s freedom to expand without rules into the oceans. The FON Programme is not consistent with universally recognised international law, disregards the sovereignty, security and maritime rights and interests of many coastal countries, and seriously jeopardises regional peace and stability. Its goal is to promote US maritime supremacy under the pretext of “freedom of navigation”. The FON Programme has been strongly opposed by many members of the international community, particularly the developing countries, and is in itself a threat to world peace.
The summit level dialogue comprising of India, US, Australia and Japan i.e. the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) is widely seen as noteworthy, given its resolve and potential to influence the geopolitical structure and geo-economics of the Indo-Pacific region. It first acted as a consultative and an informal group when it came into existence post the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, and later underwent a transformation in 2017, when the countries’ interests converged vis-à-vis a belligerent China’s assertive rise in the region and their shared commitment towards a rules-based order, a free and open Indo-Pacific (that is a veiled reference to China’s aggressive activities in the region), and co-operative action against terrorism. Thus, briefly, the Indo-Pacific strategy comprises of five elements: advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific, building connections within and beyond the region, bolstering Indo-Pacific security, driving regional prosperity, and building regional resilience to transnational threats.
The Indo-Pacific, which is technically a mental map, is a focal region of international attention and the intensification of China’s growth as a prospective hegemon has had the most profound impact on the security structure and the geopolitical backdrop of the twenty-first century. Beijing’s rise as a political, economic, scientific, and military powerhouse has given rise to a tectonic shift in the power equilibrium in the region. Consequently, it is understood that handling the rise of a discreetly pugnacious China is profoundly significant for the safety, security, and stability of the Indo-Pacific region. Quad needs to tread these waters successfully in order to curtail China’s long standing ambition of being the world hegemon.
In this context, especially in the post-Covid world, the United States perceives the relative influence of China to be burgeoning and it views Beijing as positioning itself as a major strategic competitor on the world stage. Furthermore, as the Sino-Indian relations plummet further, given the Chinese stealth encroachments in the Indian Territory and the economic hostilities between both, Beijing’s growing power projection proficiencies are greatly impacting the Indian strategic and security circles. Additionally, the Sino-Japan relations are also being worrisome due to China’s muscle flexing in the region, as Beijing has been an aggressive bully that is trying to establish rules and laws that favour its grandiose plans in the East China Sea where it attempts to challenge the status quo by coercion. The relations between Australia and China also have hit the lowest level in decades as there was a diplomatic and economic freeze between the countries for over two years. Therefore, in such a scenario, the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific is centred on cobbling together these strong states and curtailing the escalation of the Dragon’s aggressive actions in the region. Thus, the resurrection of Quad is a major balancing act to frustrate the growing threat of Chinese footprint and significantly, the robust strategic partnership is an attempt to thwart the Dragon that has become extremely authoritarian at home and aggressive abroad. The Quad members are working together in order to counter the rogue state and its exploitation and corruption in the Indo-Pacific, the South Asian region and the South China Sea.
The Quad as an informal IGO met in 2007 to discuss shared apprehensions about China and related maritime security issues across the Indo-Pacific, however, it disbanded soon after. As pressure from China mounted, in order to not put their lucrative and healthy relations with Beijing at stake, Australia quickly left the Quad, post which the period of dormancy of the Quad began for nearly a decade. During the Quad’s obscuration, the Australia-Japan-India (AJI) trilateral held its first dialogue in 2015 discussing issues such as freedom of navigation and maritime security. Nevertheless, as China’s antagonism kept increasing across the region, the trilateral developed more upgraded interaction and this was followed by the trilateral India- US, Japan- Malabar Naval Exercises. This further revitalized the Quad i.e. the Quad 2.0 with shared interests and converging ideologies per se, as there was a growing experience in security organization and this would prove to be pivotal in countering the hegemonic Beijing. As the world order undergoes a remarkable transformation, the world’s vibrant economies and like-minded states who uphold democratic values and principles, under the grouping of Quad have an extensively major role to play in grappling with the China challenge. As a constructive agenda of cooperation, Quad is seemingly an embryonic military alliance although it functions on the premise of informality, which is basically a geopolitical requirement; the grouping also delivers a practicable format for four diverse participants to synchronise security activities whilst upholding equivocal loci vis-à-vis China. However, despite Beijing’s aggressiveness and an increasingly hostile strategic environment, the members have so far avoided declaring obligations of joint defence and have displayed little interest, till date, for the Quad’s formalisation and deeper institutionalization.
Since its renewal, the Quad has received major attention and conjectures about is geopolitical eminence. The hub of mercantile traffic and most certainly, the battleground for influence in Asia, the Indo-Pacific has seen the reincarnation of Quad as a turning point in order to contain the exponential expansionist activities of the Dragon. Beijing’s debt trap diplomacy through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is definitely reaping benefits for it by securing its sphere of influence in the region under consideration. Each of the members of the Quad faces varying domains, degrees and levels of threats from China and thus, need to develop a stronger approach. The four nations have come together on an ambitious project traversing cooperation on vaccines, technology and infrastructure, and unanimously working towards the overtly tacit aim designed to blunt Beijing’s challenge. Quad is a geopolitical game changer which is evident from the meetings between Joe Biden, Narendra Modi, Fumio Kishida, and Anthony Albanese. India has a major incentive to develop this close-knit strategic friendship with the leading democratic players of the Indo-Pacific, given its border issues with the ever-hungry China. The Quad is thus, at a tricky juncture and must prioritise defence and security issues in its purview. As the Indo-Pacific security environment becomes more multifarious, the Quad countries have been augmenting the interoperability between their militaries, in the face of the challenge of Beijing-led regional order. While China continues its unabated attempts at gaining foothold, and given its callous attitude towards violating sovereign and jurisdictional rights of the neighbouring nations, this calls for a system of checks and balancing by the Quad that has an undeniable role. This comes at the backdrop of the frantic pace of China’s warship infrastructure construction and reports of a larger nuclear-powered carrier in the pipeline which is a major threat to the other states in the region and to the international order. China has, over the decades, developed into an influential entity that has an unconcealed ambition which is evident from its military and economic might and ever- expanding projects and initiatives including the BRI processes, debt traps, and self-serving trading arrangements. The Quad provides the steady push back that has been needed against the predatory activities of this regional bully that talks of principles that it does not itself adhere to. The Quad as major entity, through proper institutionalisation would, in such a scenario brew in the required fear and nervousness of containment of China’s growing ill-founded ambitions; this can be done through proper diplomatic and economic channels like denial of technologies and markets to the aggressor state.
While the role of Quad in curbing China’s bellicosity is undeniable, there remain certain caveats and lacunae that need to be tackled with regard to the former. There is a major need for all the member states of the grouping to not shy away from calling out the Dragon for its expansive illegitimate designs and thus, this points out to the need for calling a spade a spade, here, alluding to the military aspect of the grouping. Mere symbolic grouping focussing on softer issues is not sufficient, and China needs to be aware of the fact that Quad was founded on the premise to clip Beijing’s ever-spreading imperialist wings. The Quad, thus, is not narrow-purposed, nor is it a geopolitical clique or “Asian NATO” as believed and branded by the adversary. The time is now ripe for the Quad to provide fresh impetus to its role as a summit-level grouping by combining its military and non-military policies as one integrated strategy for the region, and the world at large, given that China’s aggressive posturing sees no bounds. It needs to provide a buffer against China’s threats to the international norms and its attempts at altering the status quo, by sticking to the task at hand in the most rigid manner i.e. respecting and upholding the rules-based international order. Moreover, if the Quad countries unleash an attack on China from all possible fronts, it can greatly dissuade the reprobate state from its exorbitant expansionist designs. This network-based security system that would rely on developing the offensive as well as defensive capabilities of the Quad would be highly beneficial towards countering China’s threats and frustrating it militarily as well as economically.
The Quad has energised in the recent years with virtual as well as face-to-face summits, with a commitment towards an emboldened Indo-Pacific. There is a great need for it to embrace an active defence and security role for counter-balancing the truculent China which an be done through areas like health, infrastructure, climate policy and maritime cooperation and technology collaboration, by controlling the supply chain to their benefit and most importantly, by forming an exhaustive network of information-sharing to prevent a security and power vacuum in the region that can be dominated by China. Thus, to conclude, while the agenda is packaged differently, there is no denying the fact that the Quad is driven by concerns of a potentially ravenous China that seeks to dominate the Indo-Pacific region and this sustained partnership needs to become broad-based as well robust inorder to achieve its goals.
China considered that improving people’s living standards, eliminating poverty, protecting the environment and improving the education system are an important part of promoting human rights issues both domestically and internationally. Therefore, China has tried to set an internal and international agenda at the level of the United Nations and its relevant agencies, in order to (support the developing countries of the South in development and the elimination of poverty, as one of the indicators of improving the human rights situation globally). Accordingly, we can evaluate the Chinese measures and policies related to the field of “global human rights governance as a common destiny of mankind”, according to the proposal of Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping”, as follows:
Today, the Chinese leadership seeks, within the framework of an ambitious plan, to achieve a “well-off society” for all the Chinese people, by developing a “comprehensive and institutional reform plan” in a way that includes the structure and frameworks of legislative institutions, the Communist Party, and state government institutions, and supervising private institutions of an economic nature, development and services, while retaining the characteristics that distinguish Chinese socialism. It is expected that these changes will positively affect China and its relations with the outside world, especially major countries, neighboring countries and third world countries.
In this context, after strengthening the environment for internal reform, China seeks to revive new Silk Roads. There is no doubt that the push towards a (coherent social construction), which is called the process of opening up to the outside smoothly, requires strict control over the implementation of laws, and a permanent development of political and administrative legislation at the same time.
It should be noted that China has signed (26 international conventions on human rights). China was one of the countries that proposed and supported the (Declaration on the Right to Development and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities). It was also elected as a member of the (United Nations Human Rights Council) four times.
In March 2017, the concept of “building a bond of a common future for mankind”, put forward by Chinese President “Xi Jinpin”, was included in two resolutions on the rights of economy, society, culture and the right to food of the Human Rights Council, and this concept was also adopted in (Security Council Resolution United Nations) in 2017, during the 37th meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council, in which China put forward the resolution “Strengthening Cooperation and Enjoying Win-win in the Protection of Human Rights”, and the resolution was adopted at the 39th session of the Human Rights Council in September 2018, and the representative of China, on behalf of some 140 countries, delivered the joint statement, entitled: “Eradicate poverty through cooperation and promote the development of human rights in the world”.
In November 2018, China pledged to donate $800,000 each year to the Office of the (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights) “OHCHR” for the next five years in order to support the work of the Office. In addition, China established the (South-South Cooperation Assistance Fund to help countries other developing countries to eradicate poverty).
The Chinese political leadership of President “Xi Jinping” began removing all political obstacles, which paved the way for China to enter a new era of economic reform and openness to the world, in line with strengthening and increasing the role of the market and planning “private cities”, while reducing government planning in the economy, to bring China more into the world economy.
The leaders and comrades of the ruling Communist Party in China were keen to emphasize that (in terms of ideology) this was portrayed not as abandoning socialism, but as a better way towards achieving it, as the Communist Party announced that China was in the basic stage of socialism, according to which the capitalist economy was Prosperity, as a prerequisite for the subsequent transition towards comprehensive reform.
The number of employees and volunteers of the (non-governmental organizations) in China is more than one million, working in the fields of (charity, environmental protection and human rights protection), and other matters of interest to the Chinese citizen. These organizations are considered a platform to highlight the creative creative abilities of the masses, and play a positive role in improving the lives of citizens and addressing many social problems. The Chinese government is currently exploring and experimenting with new approaches to managing NGOs.
The Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, and the ruling Communist Party comrades are keen to highlight (the relationship between the state and society as an important element in managing the political system and the Chinese state and working for the benefit of the people). During the era of President Comrade “Xi Jinping” China is carrying out continuous reforms at the party and governmental levels in order to (adjust the relationship between the state and society), which gives more opportunities for citizens to express their views.
With the great economic openness during the era of the Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, the freedom of the Chinese citizen has increased in the areas of movement, housing, treatment, study, entertainment and consumption, so the government no longer manages people’s lives directly. Chinese citizens’ criticism of government policies and the performance of government officials has become a regular occurrence.
The Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping” has given a lot of credit for the successful implementation of economic reforms, as he was on the right political line, in addition to taking political reforms even further, by working with a number of (new think tanks, founded in the universities and research institutes at Beijing and all other provinces and cities). We found out that some new research groups and think tanks have been formed to discuss and formally central discussion on all issues of political reform in the Chinese state, and the blessing was later given to studies of bold political changes, and the citizens of China continued to consider (liberation politics, criticizing policies, expressing their political opinions), and other matters, as valid topics for public discussion.
According to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s vision, if China is to continue to advance in a rapidly changing world, it must safely manage the major social and economic transformation, and most importantly to (improve state governance). In order to ensure the long-term survival of China’s one-party system, the reform of state and party institutions has been initiated. Indeed, for President “Xi Jinping”, political reform was a prerequisite for economic reform.
Chinese President “Xi Jinping” did not try to follow the pattern of modernity in the manner of the West, that is, to establish China as a superpower on an equal footing with the United States of America. On the contrary, President Comrade “Xi Jinping” believes that his current challenge is internal and his message is domestic in the first place. He knows that success in this will determine his place in history. This is his main concern.
ChineseLeader “Xi Jinping” has become the most powerful leader in China today since the era of Deng Xiaoping, and has been able to shape his legacy according to his own vision, relying on sufficient political capital to carry out the necessary political reforms. China has followed a positive path in improving education, judiciary on poverty, increasing development and prosperity, and taking measures to raise development rates in all provinces and cities, as well as adopting economically advanced strategies to deepen the necessary reforms alongside political reforms.
Education has helped in (developing innovative capacity and strengthening competitiveness), with attention to developing skilled manpower from the top to the bottom, as manpower skills have become the main competitive weapon for China at the present time.
The reforms and measures undertaken by the Chinese state have led to progress in all aspects of public servant management, which (reflected on economic performance, improvement of the investment climate, success in reducing the size of institutions and the number of employees, strengthening the separation between party leadership and government functions, and separating government tasks from administration companies), has reduced the number of government employees in the framework of the reform of the State Council by almost half, as well as transferring and transforming government jobs, separating government functions from project management, strengthening the power of companies in management and decision-making, reducing administrative procedures and approvals, and stimulating initiative in local governments through administrative decentralization through Giving these local governments more power in making decisions in the areas of finance, taxes and employees, and giving more autonomy to individuals and society.
China has formulated and implemented (three action plans on human rights) since 2009. During this period, the Chinese people’s living standards have improved, their rights are better protected, policies and legal procedures protecting the rights of certain groups have been improved, and legal guarantees for human rights have been strengthened, according to the action plan. China has also fully shared its experience in the global governance of human rights, and made a great contribution to the international human rights cause.
The (Recent Action Plan for Human Rights in China, through a set of goals for the period 2021-2025) was drawn up, and this latest plan for Chinese human rights affirmed that China will promote the free, comprehensive and common development of all its citizens as a general goal. According to the plan, China will strengthen equal protection of the rights and interests of certain groups, especially in minority autonomous regions, by providing them with additional assistance to ensure that everyone gets an equal share of the fruits of development, and providing political support for the comprehensive development of all the Chinese people.
The Chinese leadership was keen to conduct continuous research, as well as improve education and training levels and build awareness, to create a social environment that respects and protects human rights.
The adoption of the United Nations Human Rights Council in its (third periodic review) has received a report submitted by China in Geneva, Switzerland, on March 15, 2019, with the participation of representatives of more than 120 countries, who delivered speeches at the Council’s meeting to support human rights in China, praising China’s achievements in developing human rights. The representatives of the countries at the meeting also referred to China’s positive role in alleviating poverty and promoting economic, social and cultural rights, emphasizing the importance of China’s contributions to (promoting the common development of various countries).
The “Beijing Human Rights Forum” was also held in September 2018, entitled: “Eradication of Poverty: Building the Bond of a Common Future for Humanity Without Poverty and Seeking Common Development”, with the international praise from well-known officials and experts, regionally and internationally, representing more than fifty countries and international organizations, the human rights conditions in China.
The Chinese government’s emphasis, during its development of the last plan for human rights until 2025, came on (China’s participation in the global governance of human rights), as well as its participation in all work related to the human rights mechanisms of the United Nations, and pushing the international community towards establishing a more governance system Justice, equity, reasonableness and inclusiveness, and working together to build a (community with a shared future for humanity).
Here, we found out that “Michelle Bachelet”, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, opened the meeting of the Human Rights Council in its (forty-seventh session) in June 2021, which was attended by representatives of 47 UN member states around the world, with accusations against the Beijing government.
But the representative of the Chinese mission to the Human Rights Council in Geneva, “Liu Yuen”, rejected all accusations from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, assuring him that China would not allow any outside forces to interfere in what he described as the inalienable parts of China’s territory, and Liu Yuen issued a warning. Strongly worded to “Michelle Bachelet”, in order to work to “respect the facts and stop making false statements about China”.
In my personal analysis, what stopped me the most about the strict Chinese position to ensure her election to the (United Nations Human Rights Council), despite all the American and Western criticism directed at her in this context, is (the extent to which the Chinese government is officially keen to represent the largest number of people from the United Nations by its Chinese nationals in all major UN agencies). Which reflects Beijing’s smart diplomacy as a rising power, and its position as the second largest economy in the world.
Therefore, US President Joe Biden’s objection to all the leadership positions held by China in the United Nations and its relevant agencies, emphasizing that: “the time has come for Western allies to unite to confront China’s growing influence at the level of multilateral relations and policies”. Over the past few years, China has provided or supported candidates for some key positions in United Nations agencies and international organizations, such as:
The International Telecommunication Union and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the World “ITU & FAO”
Based on the previous analysis of the Egyptian researcher, we conclude that China relies on following the pattern of development internally and externally, in order to reach the best models and ways to achieve them globally away from this narrow concept of human rights. Therefore, China resorts to solving emerging issues through development, considering that this is the main experience of China that to the world, especially emerging and small countries. With this unprecedented state of great changes and adjustments in the whole world, China here faces opportunities and challenges unparalleled in history, and China still adheres to development as a major topic, and pushes peace and development forward with visions, ideas and solutions for development constantly, especially in the face of new topics and tests.
Germany, which has been high-and-mighty within the European Union and has imposed austerity against weaker European economies such as in...
Opposition in India in rajya sabha (council of states) had asked government“whether there has been a rise in attacks on...
China, India, Vietnam and a number of Asian and Pacific countries are already gearing up for the 7th Eastern Economic...
Optical gas imaging (OGI) is a technique that allows for the detection of leaks in sealed containers of pressurized gases....
By 2028, China will surpass The United States as the world’s leading economy in terms of GDP, according to major...
The so-called US vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region is essentially a strategy to divide the countries in...
In countries such as the U.S., there is an unwritten theory in police investigation that assumes whenever a neighborhood robbery...
India and the Five Eyes. Is the time ripe?
China’s Big Tech: From Free Development to Strict Regulation
The Messy Fate of Coal: War, Heat, and Instability Delay a Global Phaseout
Should Bangladesh Obtain Membership at the Colombo Security Conclave?
Russia’s Approach to Cross-Border Aid Delivery to Syria
Anarchy, Community of States and “Talibans”
China Factor and the Indo-Pacific: Possible Role of Quad
The Axis of Russia, Iran, and China: Birth of a New World Order?