Copenhagen changed the political climate
By Jian Junbo
SHANGHAI - The United Nations' climate change conference in Copenhagen at the
end of last year highlighted an emerging new international order that will be
dominated by international groupings rather than by individual state powers.
The conference's agenda was dominated by informal groupings, particularly
between the United States and China, but also between the world's largest
developing countries. Developed
powers such as Europe and Japan were largely sidelined and, significantly, it
was last-minute bilateral cooperation between the US and China that saved the
conference from collapse.
This highlights that bilateral interactions between the US and China, be they
confrontational or cooperative, are having a growing or perhaps even dominant
influence over international affairs, as part of an informal Group of Two
(G-2).
The US remains the sole superpower, despite the financial crisis, while China
leads developing countries as a model with its fast-growing economic and
military strength. Both are permanent members of the UN Security Council. Their
consensus is thus key to solving any major international issues.
However, given the different interests the two represent and due to some
complicated issues (such as Taiwan and human rights), US-China relations cannot
always be cooperative - they can even be confrontational. Because of this,
China squarely rejects the idea of a formal G-2.
Nevertheless, an informal G-2 concept can be applied to the bilateral efforts
of the US and China in dealing with international affairs. As more
international issues will require the cooperation of China and the US, the
informal G-2 will form an important pole in the emerging new world order.
Besides the informal G-2, groups of emerging nations that include China such as
the BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) also played a
significant role at the climate change conference. Although they are often
considered as key players and pioneers in preventing climate change, the
influence of Europe and developed countries like Japan was seen as diminished.
Another actor which lost influence in Copenhagen was the United Nations itself,
though the conference was chaired by the UN and convened in its name. The voice
and influence of smaller countries in Africa and Latin America also declined on
major issues.
Therefore, the fledging international order seen emerging from Copenhagen is
one dominated by groupings such as the informal G-2, and the BASIC, BRIC
(Brazil, Russia, India and China) and Group of 20 (G-20) countries.
However, for China, the informal G-2 that became a dominant force in Copenhagen
does not represent the best platform from which to engage the international
community. As a developing country, China wants to be involved in international
affairs without burdening itself with too many responsibilities. A formal G-2
framework would present China with too much accountability, while the rules
would be constructed by the US.
China agrees that cooperation with the US is important, but it entered the
informal G-2 at Copenhagen reluctantly through necessity. Fortunately, emerging
countries were also helpful as a counterbalance towards reaching an
international agreement at the conference. This highlights that besides the
informal G-2, China has other meaningful arenas, such as the BASIC, BRIC and
G-20 groupings in which to interact with the international community.
The new multi-polar order that is emerging will be dominated by international,
sometimes overlapping groups. The structures of the emerging groups are
inconsistent with the power politics of the old era, so it is unlikely they
will confront each another in the way that individual superpowers did during
the Cold War. They will more likely tend towards improving international
democracy and global governance.
As the largest international group, consisting of about 200 states, the UN
cannot be neglected in this new world order. Though the UN is currently seen as
too weak to solve most of the pressing issues and dominate the global agenda,
it is still the most influential international organization. In summary, the UN
is the main source of international legitimacy. With UN approval, any
individual country or international group's conduct can be seen as approved,
and the UN is still the best platform for international cooperation.
China should never neglect this organization if it wants its international
conduct to be seen as legitimate. China should also use its permanent
membership of the UN Security Council to promote international cooperation as
well as defend the spirit of the UN charter and the interests of Third World
countries. China should never allow any international grouping to try and
overrule the UN.
If China believes that a G-2 or a possible G-3, including the US, China and
another Western power, may be an attempt by the US and Western countries to
dominate an international agenda that is being reshaped by China and emerging
countries, it will decline entry.
Dr Jian Junbo is assistant professor of the Institute of International
Studies at Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
(Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
