{"id":18964,"date":"2026-06-19T09:07:21","date_gmt":"2026-06-19T03:22:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=18964"},"modified":"2026-06-19T09:07:21","modified_gmt":"2026-06-19T03:22:21","slug":"chinas-proposal-for-just-global-governance-the-global-south-a-un-centred-system-and-a-multipolar-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=18964","title":{"rendered":"China’s Proposal for Just Global Governance: The Global South, a UN-Centred System, and a Multipolar Future<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

# Prem Sagar Poudel<\/strong><\/p>\n

The contemporary world order stands once again at a historic crossroads. For a long time, the Western-centric power structure built after the Cold War presented itself as the sole legitimate arbiter of the world order. But the situation has changed today. The countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Eurasia are no longer mere spectators; they have begun to become active architects of world politics. It is this transformed global reality that China seeks to give ideological, diplomatic, and institutional shape to through its proposal for “just and equitable global governance.”<\/p>\n

The white paper released by the Chinese government, “More Just and Equitable Global Governance: China’s Principles, Proposals and Actions,” is not merely a diplomatic document. It is a strategic vision that China has put forward for a changing world order. It raises the fundamental questions of global governance: who shall run the world? How shall it be run? And for whose benefit shall it be run? China’s answer is clear: global governance is not the privilege of a few powerful countries; it is a matter of the common right, common responsibility, and common future of all nations.<\/p>\n

The Global Times editorial titled “Be united, and take action” has raised this very question in depth. According to the editorial, the concept of “global governance” in the past often remained under the control of Western discourse, which failed to resolve the world’s peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and trust deficit. Even more seriously, the vast majority of Global South countries were kept far from the centre of decision-making processes. It is for this very reason that China today has put forward the reform of global governance not merely as institutional reform but as a question of restoring historical justice.<\/p>\n

In the Chinese view, the root of the current global crisis does not lie solely in regional conflicts, economic inequality, or security competition. Its deeper cause lies in Western-centric unipolar thinking, rule-making based on power politics, and the tendency of “might makes right.” Such tendencies have weakened the authority of the United Nations, led to the selective application of international law, and marginalised the voices of developing countries. Challenging this very imbalance, China has presented “multipolarity” not as disorder but as the foundation of global justice.<\/p>\n

China’s Global Governance Initiative appears to be based on five core principles: sovereign equality, respect for international law, genuine multilateralism, a people-centred approach, and results-oriented action. These principles are not merely new words in themselves. They are China’s alternative answer to the weaknesses of the current world order. Sovereign equality means that all countries, large or small, rich or poor, developed or developing, are equal members of the international community. Respect for international law means that rules must be applied on the basis of the equal interests of all, not according to the convenience of powerful countries. Genuine multilateralism means building a system based on consultation, participation, and shared benefit for all, not a few countries imposing decisions on others.<\/p>\n

It is for this reason that China has taken the firm position of placing the United Nations at the centre of global governance. In China’s view, weakening the authority and role of the United Nations means turning the international order into an arena of power-political competition. Beijing therefore regards the UN-centred international system, the world order based on international law, and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter as the main foundation of global governance. This perspective is especially important for small and medium-sized countries like Nepal, because when sovereign equality and international law are weakened, it is the weaker nations that come under pressure first.<\/p>\n

From the perspective of the Global South, China’s proposal is even more significant. For a long time, developing countries were made into raw material suppliers for the world economy, sources of cheap labour, or pawns in geopolitical competition. Yet they were not given an adequate voice in the decisive processes of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Security Council, trade rules, technology governance, climate finance, and digital governance. China interprets this very inequality as the principal weakness of global governance. Therefore, increasing the representation, decision-making capacity, and development rights of the Global South is a central aspect of China’s global governance proposal.<\/p>\n

The message of “Be united, and take action” emphasised by the Global Times is important for this very reason. China is not merely expressing discontent; it is urging the Global South to move in the direction of a united voice, united action, and a united future. China’s argument is that the reform of global governance cannot be achieved through criticism alone; it requires institutional proposals, practical initiatives, shared projects, and long-term political will. In this sense, China’s proposal is not only an ideological declaration for a multipolar world, but also a strategic roadmap.<\/p>\n

China has presented its proposal not as a project to “dismantle the old system,” but as an effort to reform the existing international system by aligning it with current realities. This point is extremely important. China is not seeking an alternative to the United Nations; rather, it is seeking a path to revitalise the authority of the United Nations and make it more representative, just, and effective. This sets China’s approach apart from anarchic power politics. China’s message is: rules are needed, but rules must be equal for all; institutions are needed, but institutions must operate on the basis of shared interests, not under the control of a few powers.<\/p>\n

Another important aspect presented by Chinese media is that the essence of global governance is not “bargaining” but justice. In today’s world, great powers use deals, sanctions, military alliances, technology blockades, and economic pressure as instruments of governance. Rejecting this, China has put forward justice, development, and common welfare as the true objectives of global governance. This perspective gives developing countries the confidence to participate in international cooperation while defending their own development models, political systems, and civilizational identities.<\/p>\n

Another strong aspect of China’s proposal is its development-centred approach. In the Western power structure, security is often interpreted in the language of military alliances, deterrence, and balance of power. China, on the other hand, regards development as the foundation of stability, peace, and governance. By linking together the Belt and Road cooperation, the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative, China appears to have placed development, security, civilizational dialogue, and just governance within a single framework. This approach attempts to understand global problems not in fragments, but holistically.<\/p>\n

A major lesson emerges from this for countries like Nepal. Small nations must not become pawns in power competition in order to protect their interests in global governance. They must raise a clear voice in favour of the UN system, sovereign equality, multipolarity, and the right to development. The approach put forward by China provides such countries with a basis to speak with confidence in international forums. If the voice of the Global South grows stronger in global governance, the sovereignty, development partnerships, infrastructure needs, climate justice, and economic rights of countries like Nepal will also grow stronger.<\/p>\n

China’s proposal also challenges the Western “core-periphery” mindset. In the old order, some countries were at the centre while the rest were on the periphery. The centre made the rules and the periphery followed them. Rejecting this structure, China has put forward the concept of viewing all countries as participants, contributors, and beneficiaries. This is the true meaning of multipolarity. Multipolarity is not merely the existence of multiple power centres; it is the inclusion of multiple civilizations, multiple development models, multiple voices, and multiple interests in the decision-making process.<\/p>\n

In this context, China’s proposal is not merely an expression of anti-Western sentiment, but a demand for the democratisation of the world order. When China speaks of increasing the representation of developing countries, especially prioritising African concerns, in the reform of the UN Security Council, it demonstrates the goal of making global governance more just. This is a significant ideological intervention in the direction of correcting the historic marginalisation of the Global South.<\/p>\n

Certainly, Western powers will view China’s proposal from their own strategic perspective. They may interpret it as an attempt by China to expand its influence. But from the perspective of Chinese media, this is not influence expansion but a proposal for shared governance reform. China has presented itself as a “builder of peace, contributor to development, defender of the international order, and provider of public goods.” At a time when the world is witnessing growing crises, wars, sanctions, climate problems, technological divides, and development inequality, such a proposal from China naturally appears attractive to many developing countries.<\/p>\n

The world today needs not a new Cold War, military bloc-building, and economic blockades, but consultation, cooperation, and shared benefit. China’s proposal for just global governance addresses this very need. It attempts to steer power-centric world politics towards people-centred global governance. It sends the message not of turning competition into hostility, but of seeking a path of coexistence between different systems. It views civilizational diversity not as a clash but as the common wealth of humanity.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, China’s Global Governance Initiative and the white paper based upon it represent a significant ideological turn in twenty-first-century international relations. It argues that global governance must be transformed from “a system where a few countries run the world” into “a process where all countries jointly build the world.” The Global Times call to “Be united, and take action” is the political essence of this transformation: unite, take action, and build a just world order.<\/p>\n

The world is changing. The Global South is rising. The need to revitalise the UN system is growing. Multipolarity is no longer a prediction of the future but a reality of the present. In such circumstances, the proposal for just and equitable global governance put forward by China is not merely China’s diplomatic document; it can become the common political voice of nations that desire sovereignty, development, equality, and a shared future.<\/p>\n

For all developing nations, including Nepal, this debate is serious. The question is no longer merely about which power centre to move closer to; it is about what kind of world order to build. If global governance becomes just, inclusive, UN-centred, and multipolar, the voice of small nations grows stronger. If power politics, sanctions, and unipolar pressure persist, the freedom of weaker nations becomes limited. Therefore, China’s proposal is a matter of strategic importance not only for the present world but for future generations as well.<\/p>\n

The main message delivered by China is clear: global governance is not the private property of any power. It is the common responsibility of humanity. And reconstructing that responsibility on the basis of justice, equality, multilateralism, and shared development is the historic necessity of today.<\/p>\n

About the Author: Prem Sagar Poudel is a senior journalist and international relations analyst from Nepal. He has conducted in-depth studies on Nepal-China relations, the geopolitics of the Himalayan region, and Asian security issues.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t