Why weaponising democracy against China will backfire on the US
- Washington’s Summit for Democracy has made half the world a pariah by defining as ‘authoritarian’ any country that does not share its choice of political system
- But countries have grown sceptical of the West’s motives. It’s time the West accepted there is value in plurality
What’s more, the US defines “authoritarian” as any country that refuses to follow the prescriptions of the West with regard to the political system it adopts.
Yet the United Nations Charter, signed in 1945, did not mention the word democracy – because it is each nation’s sovereign right to pursue its own political system. And a nation’s choice is legitimised solely by its people.
America’s divisive exercise – the Summit for Democracy, to be held on December 9, 2021, in Washington – goes against the principles of the United Nations Charter.
This means that of the 193 countries in the world, the US believes 92 are undeserving of its definition of international recognition and are essentially pariah states. That is almost half the world. But the world possesses a diversity of political systems that we must all learn to accept and work with to make multilateral cooperation more effective. Dividing the world into two camps is limiting, regressive, and a reflection of a Cold War mentality that is counter-productive.
This approach is not new. It is the age-old “with us or against us” strategy, and delivers all the consequences that a hegemon can inflict upon non-compliant states, including sanctions on the weak and the poor. Yet the more the West attempts to convince the world that China is the threat, the more it isolates itself in its own echo-chamber of Cold War-esque narratives.
The strategy, which is guaranteed to fail, raises three questions:
1. Why does most of the world not see China as the over-arching global threat?
2. Why is acceptance of a plurality of political systems essential for a multi-polar and more equal world?
3. Is there a need for the resurrection of a spirit of non-alignment in the new post-Western world?
In answer to the first question, decades of Western hypocrisy have undermined trust in its assessments of China. Decades of double standards have eroded the credibility of the West, from repeated invasions of Asian and Middle Eastern nations to exploitative behaviour across the world.
So why doesn’t the world view China as the villain despite the best efforts of the West to vilify it?
In today’s ‘contra-polar’ world, all boats may leak together
Third, non-Western countries may have qualms about the Chinese governance model and aspects of its foreign policy, but they also respect China’s successes. They are not fooled by biased Western reporting: they look at the facts, see the results, and visit China to understand it.
They see a government that has worked for the people and produced results. These non-Western nations want to produce the same results for their people, rather than adhering to more of the misleading and condescending Western rhetoric about democracy as a utopian fast-track.
So, what has China achieved that these countries seek to emulate? For starters, its poverty alleviation rate. In 1994, the government set a goal of lifting 80 million people out of poverty within seven years – by 2021, it had uplifted 800 million.
Additionally, over the last two decades alone, China’s Gross National Income (GNI) per capita grew from US$940 in 2000 to US$10,410 in 2019. This is double the rate achieved by Russia, the second-fastest growing BRICS economy.
China has seen success abroad, too. Since 2000, China has spent US$843 billion on bilateral aid, spread across 13,427 projects in 165 countries. The People’s Liberation Army last fought a major conflict over 40 years ago, compared to the endless wars of the West. China made the decision to stop building new coal-fired power projects overseas in 2021, and it has already pledged 1.2 billion yuan (US$190 million) for climate cooperation with developing countries, and 1.2 trillion yuan being issued in green bonds.
China is not faultless; it has contentious issues of its own to tackle. The Uygurs are an example: China needs to do better at accounting for itself and communicating its version of events to the world.
Western criticism of the situation is an attempt to justify its moral authority and legitimise its rejection of other political systems. But it is a double standard.
The people have last word on democracy, not foreigners, China says
It is in China’s interest to come clean and work with bodies like the UN to reassure the world that these charges are either false or exaggerated.
But it is also only fair and in the interest of global peace that Western nations and their allies who are accused of war crimes – in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine - allow UN investigations to be carried out.
Flying the democracy banner should not be used as cover to run roughshod over international norms, nor should “non-interference in internal matters” be a pathway to carrying out abuses.
The US would do well to remember that there is value in embracing different political systems for a more equal world. Why? Because China has demonstrated that a nation does not need to meet the West’s definition of “democracy” to achieve success for its people.
This is because democracy is not defined by simplistic notions about free speech or Western electoral processes. Democracy is the right of all peoples, and cannot be arbitrarily judged by the US.
According to the United Nations Charter: “The UN does not advocate for a specific model of government but promotes democratic governance as a set of values and principles that should be followed for greater participation, equality, security and human development”.
This is to say that the political systems of a country and its method of governance are important because they must ultimately serve the people, enable them to have a sense of participation, satisfaction and improvements to their quality of life. Democracy is just one approach to this, so it is reasonable to conclude that China has developed a successful governance system suited to its culture, history, and the needs of its population.
Is Biden’s democracy summit the start of a new world order?
For many countries, the dated prescriptions of former imperial powers or settler communities (the US, UK, Australia, Canada) are unsuitable.
The West should recognise that diversity in political systems is the natural order of things in a complex and changing world, and can only enrich the global majority. Nations should learn from each other, encourage, even teach. This is what geopolitical equality looks like.
This brings us to the last of the three questions: given that other nations do not see China as the tyrant painted by the West, and that political plurality is a good thing, it is time to reverse the dangerous attempts of the West to confront China under the pretext of democracy.
This does not need to be done in a way that risks tension, or war. It can be achieved through the spirit of non-alignment.
Non-aligned nations must refuse to allow the West – driven by anxiety at losing its position – to divide and endanger the world. They must now address this and no longer remain subservient.
Non-Western countries have a right to be non-aligned: to determine the nature of their political and governance systems and be supported in the learning and building process. Where some go astray, diplomatic means should be used to persuade and encourage reforms built on mutual respect and understanding.
These nations should not be bullied by self-serving Western foreign policy into accepting a single political system that is clearly failing, even in the West – where some demand the right to not wear masks during a pandemic, or the right to carry guns.
The West must recognise that narrow interpretations of democracy can no longer be weaponised.
Fundamentally, the question is: what is the role of the state?
The answer is clear: to secure the right of its citizens to have safe and dignified lives devoid of drudgery and suffering.
When coupled with the existential threats of the 21st century, the irony is that the Chinese system of governance is in many ways the most suited to meeting this objective.
Chandran Nair is founder and CEO of the Global Institute for Tomorrow, an Executive Committee Member of the Club of Rome, and author of ‘Dismantling Global White Privilege: Equity for a Post-Western World’.