Fearing their loss of control over global affairs, Western countries falsely accuse China of challenging the rules-based international order

Officials of the United States keep hyping up the so-called rules-based international order and calling China out for allegedly not adhering to it. Some other Western politicians and media are following suit.

The manipulation of this narrative can cause misunderstandings and confusion of the international order, which serves the purpose of the West, especially the US. Up to now, neither officials nor scholars in the West have given a clear definition of what they mean by the "rules-based international order "and both have deliberately maintained its ambiguity. On international occasions, US officials and scholars often use international law and "rules-based international order" interchangeably, suggesting that the latter is synonymous with an international order based on international law, which is highly misleading and deceptive.

The current international order was established after World War II, with the adoption of the United Nations Charter and the establishment of the UN. Setting out the basic norms governing international relations, the UN Charter serves as the basic code of conduct and the "constitution" for international relations.

Although the US is vague about the "rules-based international order", what it implies is an international order led by the US, defined by Western values, and selected and specified by the West.

In essence, the so-called rules-based international order can be translated into the structure of power and interests that the West has imposed on the rest of the world: politically the West leading and the non-West subordinate, economically the West dominant and non-West dependent, culturally the West exporting and non-West receiving. In summary, it is an "international order" that is built on the US hegemony and aimed at maintaining the dominance of Western countries.

The US aims to achieve two objectives by hyping up a "rules-based international order" in this way. On the one hand, it seeks to paint a false impression internationally that China is "challenging "and "not adhering to" the international order, so as to jeopardize the recognition of China as a responsible major power and contain China's development. On the other hand, the US aims to resist China and other developing countries as they promote adjustments and reforms in the international order and rules, in order to maintain its control over the development of the international order, as well as to safeguard and consolidate its alliance, including its cliques with a "small yard with high fences".

The drastic changes in the international landscape have triggered adjustments in the international order, which worries the US-led West. However, with diminishing power, they are unable to use traditional hard measures, such as military force, to maintain dominance. Instead, they are promoting the so-called rules-based international order, a political opinion-shaping strategy.

China firmly upholds the UN-centered international system and the international order underpinned by international law. The rules of this order are the international legal documents, including treaties, conventions and declarations, which are established across various fields in accordance with the principles and purposes of the UN Charter. All countries should abide by this international order based on these rules.

The existing international order upholds peace and the development of the world. Having developed within this order, China is both its beneficiary and a defender. Of course, the current order is not perfect. Constant improvements and reforms are required in response to the changing international landscape. It needs to be made more just and reasonable, especially in terms of safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of developing countries. What China advocates is an evolution, not a revolution, of the international order. China does not seek to change or challenge the existing order.

In recent years, China has joined international conventions in various fields, including arms control, climate change, navigation and environment protection. In contrast, the US has withdrawn from organizations and mechanisms such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Global Compact for Migration and the Global Compact for Migration. It also withdrew and rejoined the UN Human Rights Council and UNESCO.

The US has been building exclusive and confrontational groups, including the AUKUS partnership (comprising the US, the United Kingdom and Australia), the Quad (comprising the US, Japan, India and Australia), the CHIPS alliance and a technology alliance. In contrast, China is advancing open, inclusive and cooperative multilateral organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The international community should engage in extensive and in-depth discussions and exchanges, so as to truly understand what the "rules-based international order" is.

The author is deputy director of the Institute of World Economics and Politics at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and a committee member of the National Institute for Global Strategy at the CASS. The author contributed this article to China Watch, a think tank powered by China Daily.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

Contact the editor at editor@chinawatch.cn