The Ukraine Crisis and the Building of a New International System
‘The Ukraine Crisis and the Building of a New International System’ was originally published as the lead article of the June 2022 issue of?Wenhua Zongheng?(文化縱橫). The article urges China, amid the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, to consider the dangers of the current international system that it has been striving to integrate into and the possibilities of building a new international system.
The outbreak of the Ukraine crisis has not merely altered the geopolitical landscape, it has severely disrupted the current international order. Particularly, the imposition of extensive sanctions on Russia by the United States and other Western countries has compromised the rules of the existing international system and revealed its true, coercive nature. This crisis should provide a strong reminder to China that it must deepen its ‘worst-case scenario thinking’ (底線思維, dǐxiàn sīwéi) and seriously contemplate, as a major strategic aim, building a new international system parallel to the current Western-dominated order.
▍Preparing for Looming Crises
The current international system is one that is dominated by the Western countries, led by the United States, and liberal capitalist in nature. During periods when liberal capitalism functions smoothly, this system expands globally and appears to be rules-based and fair, able to include most countries and regions of the world. However, during periods of crisis, liberal capitalism will contort itself, abandoning established international rules or seeking to create new ones, exemplified by increasing nativism or deglobalisation where the hegemonic nation relinquishes its purported duties of leadership and returns to power politics.
Amidst the Ukraine crisis, the US and the Western countries have disregarded international norms by forcibly casting Russia out of the global financial architecture, namely the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), confiscating Russian state and personal assets, and freezing the country’s foreign exchange reserves. Such measures go far beyond the typical nonviolent means of confrontation employed by nation states such as trade wars, technology blockades, and oil embargoes, and blatantly contradicts the timeless liberal principles that ‘debts must be paid’ and ‘private property is sacrosanct’, among others. These flagrant violations of the so-called ‘rules-based order’ have laid bare the arbitrary, unlawful, and biased character of the international system and the manner in which it can be manipulated by the US and its allies to violently discipline other countries.
From the Chinese perspective, the Ukraine crisis is a warning to China that it must prepare for scenarios in which it is subject to such hostile measures. It is necessary to re-examine the present international order to grasp an accurate understanding of both its benefits and drawbacks, giving up any illusions in its fairness and long-term viability, and, whilst participating in and maximising the utility of the current system, simultaneously making preparations for the construction of a new international order.
Given the size of China, the task of national rejuvenation requires much more than an economic strategy of mere ‘domestic circulation’ (內循環, nèi xúnhuán). To achieve industrialisation and modernisation, China must engage with the world and develop a broader ‘international circulation’ (外循環, wài xúnhuán) by accessing external resources, technologies, and markets. The central task of China’s reform and opening-up policy over the past four decades has been to open the country to the outside world and participate in the global system in order to promote an international environment more favourable to the pursuit of modernisation.?At the same time, China has had to take necessary actions when hostile aspects of the current system have threatened the country’s fundamental interests. In the current situation, it is necessary that China, on the one hand, fights steadfastly against the manipulation of the existing system by the US and the Western countries, and, on the other hand, begins to build a new, more democratic and just global system, in partnership with developing countries.
▍China’s Historical Destiny Is to Stand With the Third World
The present world order has not only been shaped by China, Russia, the United States, and Europe, the countries and regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America have also created a multitude of new regional networks amid the decline of US power. Working with other developing countries is necessary for China to strengthen efforts to build a new international system. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), since it was proposed by President Xi Jinping in 2013, has in fact laid the foundation for such cooperation and for the realisation of a new system.
Since the People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949, the Third World has consistently provided China with new spaces to survive and grow and new sources of strength whenever it has faced pressure from superpowers, including the national liberation movements of Asia, Africa, and Latin America in the 1950s and 1960s, the Bandung Conference of 1955 and the Non-Aligned Movement, Mao Zedong’s Three Worlds theory developed in the 1970s, the emphasis on South-South cooperation during the early stages of reform and opening up in the 1980s, the establishment of the BRICS mechanism at the turn of the century, and, most recently, the development of the BRI in the last decade. Over the past 70 years, China has had adopted a wide range of foreign policies, from the ‘lean to one side’ (一邊倒, yībiāndǎo) policy with the Soviet Union in the 1950s to the ‘integrating with the world’ (與國際接軌, yǔ guójì jiēguǐ) (or with the US, to be exact) policy at the turn of the century; however, China has, consciously or unconsciously, consistently turned to the Third World whenever it has felt that its independence and sovereignty were threatened.
This relationship with the Third World is China’s historic destiny. Today, as China becomes an important pole in the world and is faced with the hostile containment strategy of the hegemonic United States, it cannot follow the alliance politics pursued by the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Dividing the world into antagonistic blocs would drive humanity to the brink of war and global catastrophe; instead, China should continue to pursue an independent and nonaligned foreign policy, focused on bringing together the many countries of the Third World – which constitute the global majority – to foster new forms of partnership, establish new multilateral networks, and create a new international system.
Reflecting upon the practices and experiences of the BRI until now and accounting for the challenges posed by the Ukraine crisis, China’s approach towards building a new international system should be guided by the following considerations:
First, China’s orientation should be based on strategic rather than commercial interests. China cannot merely be concerned with exporting its production capacity and capital or securing access to external resources and markets for Chinese enterprises; but rather it must prioritise what is necessary to ensure strategic survival and national development. By adopting such a strategic perspective, it becomes clear that the approach taken by many Chinese firms and local governments towards other nations and regions, as part of the BRI, is not sustainable as it has prioritised commercial interests and tended to ignore political-strategic interests.
Second, the creation of the new international system requires the development of a new vision, philosophy, and ideology to guide and inspire efforts to build it. In this regard, the BRI’s principles of ‘consultation, contribution, and shared benefits’ (共商共建共享, gòngshāng gòngjiàn gòngxiǎng) are insufficient. While the United States today rallies the Western camp under the banner of ‘democracy versus authoritarianism’, China must clearly uphold the flag of peace and development, uniting and leading the vast developing world whilst appealing to and persuading more European states to join this cause. President Xi Jinping’s global call for the ‘building of a community with a shared future for humanity’ (人類命運共同體, rénlèi mìngyùn gòngtóngtǐ) should be adapted to the new international situation. The Chinese concept of ‘common prosperity and common development’ should be shared with the world and promoted as a core value in building a new international system.
Third, a ‘Development International’ (發展國際, fāzhǎn guójì) should be set up as an institutional entity to create a new global system. Unlike the Western alliance mechanisms, such as the Group of Seven (G7) and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) which are dominated by a minority of wealthy countries, a new global system must address the fundamental issue that the overwhelming majority of the world faces: how developing countries can be more effectively organised under the principle of nonalignment. Loosely organised and nonbinding initiatives such as conferences and declarations are wholly inadequate for this task; an institutional mechanism such as a ‘Development International’ should be promoted and constructed to drive more powerful organisational action and to develop networks of knowledge and culture, of media and communication, of economic cooperation, as well as other projects. In a nutshell, forms of organisational action under the mandate of peace and development should be established and experimented with.
▍The Relationship Between the Two Systems
Building a new system does not mean abandoning the present one.
In the forty years of reform and opening up, China’s direction and goal have been to integrate into the existing international order. As a latecomer to industrialisation and modernisation, China has had no choice but to learn from the Western countries and take in their advanced knowledge and experience. Breaking away from this system would inevitably drive China back to the old road of the ‘closed-door’ (閉關鎖國, bìguānsuǒguó) policy of the 1960s and 1970s, cutting the country off from the advanced economies of the present world.
Nowadays, China has travelled a long way down the road of globalisation and has benefited from it; reform and opening up has become bound up with the Chinese people’s basic interests. For this reason, it is neither desirable nor feasible to give up the benefits derived from participating in the current system.
But this by no means negates the urgent necessity of preparing for the threat of the US-led Western alliance sabotaging the present global system. The development of a new international system and the active participation in the present system are two processes that can be implemented simultaneously without conflict, in which the two systems are bound to overlap and interpenetrate each other. When the quantitative changes accumulated by the new system begin to transform into qualitative changes, a brand-new world order will naturally emerge.
烏克蘭危機與新型國際體系構建
烏克蘭危機的爆發，在改變地緣政治格局的同時，也動搖了現行國際秩序。尤其當美國等西方國家對俄羅斯施加了大量違背現行國際體系規則的制裁時，這一體系的暴力本質便暴露無遺。它強烈地提醒中國人，必須加大底線思維力度，認真思考構建與現行以西方為主導的國際體系相平行的新型國際體系這一重大戰略問題。
▍應為可能的危機預作準備
現行國際體系，是以美國為首的西方主導控制的國際體系，其實質是自由主義資本主義國際體系。當自由資本主義運轉順暢時，這一體系向著全球覆蓋，并顯現出規則性和中立性，能夠將大多數國家和地區容納進來。而當自由資本主義運轉不暢，這一體系便會扭曲，逆全球化上升，霸主國家放棄領導責任，實力政治回歸，或拋棄國際規則，或另起爐灶重建規則。
此次烏克蘭危機，美國等西方國家違背國際規則，強行將俄羅斯踢出國際金融結算系統（SWIFT），沒收俄羅斯國家或個人資產，凍結俄羅斯外匯儲備，其手段遠超貿易戰、技術封鎖、石油禁運等原有的民族國家間非暴力對抗手段，而是公然違背“欠債還錢”“私有財產神圣不可侵犯”等古老又現代的原則，充分暴露出現行國際體系非規則性、非中立性的一面，以及美國西方操控的國際體系的暴力政治的本質。
烏克蘭危機提示中國人，必須為類似的危機預作準備。其中的核心要義，在于重新審視當今國際秩序，準確把握其中的利與弊，放棄幻想，在參與并用好現有的國際體系的同時，盡快準備新型國際體系的構建。
以中國的體量，欲完成民族復興偉業，僅僅局限于“內循環”是不夠的。中國的工業化和現代化，必然要走出去，通過利用外部資源、技術和市場，形成廣泛的外循環。中國近40年改革開放的核心任務之一，就是對外開放，加入現有國際體系，搭建有利于中國現代化的國際關系網絡。然而，當現行國際體系發生扭曲變形，并可能傷害到中國的根本利益時，中國當然要有所行動。一方面，要通過堅定的斗爭，抗衡美國等西方國家對現行國際體系的操控；另一方面，則應逐漸搭建以中國為主導的新型國際體系。
▍選擇第三世界國家是中國的歷史宿命
當今世界，中、俄、美、歐之外，是廣大的亞、非、拉國家和地區，是美國力量收縮之后的大量新中間地帶。向這些國家和地區尋找新的力量源泉，是中國建構新型國際體系的當然選擇。起自2013年，由習近平主席倡導的“一帶一路”倡議，事實上已經構成了新型國際體系的實現基礎。
新中國成立以來，每當中國在超級大國壓迫之下欲尋找新的生存發展空間和新的力量來源時，第三世界國家便會自動成為不二選擇。從上世紀50~60年代的亞非拉民族解放運動，到70年代毛澤東的“三個世界理論”，從80年代改革開放時代對于“南南合作”的熱情推動，到世紀之交“金磚五國”機制的探索，乃至最近10年的“一帶一路”倡議。這70多年間，雖然經歷了50年代對蘇聯的“一邊倒”，經歷了世紀之交的“與國際接軌”（實質是與美國接軌），但只要中國感受到獨立自主地位面臨威脅時，便會自覺不自覺地轉向廣大的第三世界。
這恐怕就是中國的歷史宿命。當今日中國已經崛起為世界一極，并面臨霸主美國的全面遏制之時，它的選擇并不會重復蘇聯和美國的結盟政治道路，以集團對抗助推世界走向危險的戰爭邊緣，而是始終保持不結盟的獨立自主姿態，同時將更廣大的第三世界國家團結起來，構建新型伙伴型關系，由此形成獨特的新型國際關系網絡和新型國際體系。
總結“一帶一路”迄今為止的實踐，面對烏克蘭危機之際的挑戰，這一新型國際體系應該具備如下特質：
第一，這一體系應該是戰略性的，而非商業性的。它不僅是中國的產能輸出與資本輸出需求，也不僅是中國企業走出去尋找外部資源與外部市場的需求，而且是服從于中國的戰略發展與戰略生存的根本需求。在這樣的戰略目標下，目前中國許多企業和地區對“一帶一路”沿線國家只講商業利益、不講政治戰略利益的行為便是不可持續的。
第二，新型國際體系的構建必須有新的理念和愿景，必須有新型意識形態的指引，工具方法層面的“共商、共建、共享”是遠遠不夠的。今日美國，以“民主vs威權”為旗幟團結西方陣營，中國應鮮明地舉起“和平與發展”的旗幟，團結帶領廣大的發展中世界，并說服影響更多的歐洲國家?！叭祟惷\共同體”在新的形勢下應得到新的解釋，中國的“共同富裕與共同發展”模式應該在構建新型國際體系時作為核心價值輸出到全世界。
第三，新型國際體系應以“發展國際”作為組織載體。相比于G7、北約等西方國家結盟機制，廣大發展中國家在不結盟機制下如何進行高效的組織動員，是擺在新型國際體系構建面前的一個關鍵課題。在這方面，僅有松散的論壇、項目等組織形式是遠遠不夠的，應推動形成類似“發展國際”的組織機制，推動更加強有力的組織行動，并在此基礎上，形成發展國際知識與文化網絡、發展國際媒體與傳播網絡、發展國際工商企業合作網絡等組織機制?？傊?，要探索和形成以“和平與發展”為主題的國際性的組織行動。
▍如何處理兩種國際體系的關系
構建新型國際體系，并不意味著拋棄現有的國際體系。
改革開放40年，中國就是以融入現有國際體系為方向和目標的。由于中國在工業化和現代化道路上后來者的身份，向西方世界學習，吸收其先進的知識和經驗，就成為不二選擇。一旦脫離這一體系，中國勢必會回到上世紀60~70年代“閉關鎖國”的道路，與現有世界的先進部分喪失聯系。
今天，中國已經在全球化的道路上愈走愈遠，成為全球化的受益者，改革開放已經成為中國人民的根本利益。因此，放棄這一參與現行國際體系而來的根本利益，既不可取，也不可行。
但這絕不意味著我們對于以美國為首的西方世界破壞現行國際秩序的危險不做準備。應該認識到，發展建設新型國際體系是可以與積極參與建設現行國際體系并行不悖、互不沖突的。新的體系是增量，舊的體系是存量，它們一定會你中有我，我中有你。當新體系的發展由量變達到質變的時刻，一個嶄新的世界秩序就會自然形成。
本文發表于《文化縱橫》2022年6月刊，該期目錄如下，歡迎訂閱紙刊查看更多內容：
— ?2022年6月新刊目錄??—
▍編輯手記
烏克蘭危機與新型國際體系構建
《文化縱橫》編輯部
▍域外
擺脫“資源詛咒”？——海灣六國的工業化與經濟多元化
張若楓
白宮新一代對華戰略操盤手的思想素描
楊博文
▍封面選題：巨變來臨——俄烏沖突改變世界
俄烏沖突在2022 年爆發，以出人意料的方式改變著整個世界格局。沖突爆發以來，以美國為首的西方把國際規則作為武器對俄進行輪番制裁，深刻且全面地動搖“二戰”后幾十年來的國際治理體系，和平與發展的時代主題面臨前所未有的挑戰。俄烏沖突后的世界將向何處去？
跨越俄烏沖突陷阱：重新思考以規則為核心的國際秩序
曹遠征
構建“新三環”：面對全面脫鉤可能的中國選擇
程亞文
作為帝國間沖突的俄烏戰爭
張昕
歐洲為什么不能掌控自己的命運？
魏南枝
重振領導力：俄烏沖突中的英國戰略
孔元
▍專題：人類文明新形態
強世功
正是在這短短十幾年中，中國看待世界的眼光和心態也悄然發生了變化：從凸顯中國特色的特殊主義敘事，轉向更為包容世界的普遍主義敘事；從追求被西方承認的刻意努力，轉向平和心態的自我認同。這種變化最直觀地體現在兩次奧運會的開幕式上。
王立勝、晏擴明
▍觀念
史觀重建：從“主旋律”到“新主流”
陶慶梅
2021年《覺醒年代》《山海情》等作品的出現，不但打破了“主旋律”與大眾文化之間的界限，在市場上創造出良好的口碑；更重要的是，它們通過開辟一種新的歷史敘事方式，呼應了這個時代被掩藏著的某種社會情緒，帶動了更多年輕觀眾的情感，造就了屬于這個時代的主流價值。
周安安、吳靖
從“未來人”到“頑童”——日本動漫與社會秩序的張力
潘妮妮
從不同時期的代表性作者與作品中，我們看到了日本動漫文化中未成年人位置的變遷：從改造世界的“未來人”，到被教養的未成年人，再到輕視成人世界并主動疏離的“頑童”。這反映了并不存在一個價值統一的日本動漫文化，正如戰后日本成人社會的思潮也并非始終如一。
▍社會結構變遷
“波蘭尼時刻”在當代中國
酈菁
中國無法避免全球“波蘭尼時刻”重現帶來的社會壓力和不確定性；并且，由于自身龐大的經濟體量和重要的政治地位，中國必將在其中扮演重要的角色。
▍公益理論與公益實踐
社會組織專業化的中國實踐：慈弘基金會的探索
張婧
▍反思美國模式
重新審視“地緣政治學”——一個世界史的視角
方旭
韓國“單一民族”的神話與現實
鄭立菲
《文化縱橫》國際傳播系列由三大洲社會研究所（Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, 網站：www.thetricontinental.org）和東聲（Dongsheng News，網站：www.dongshengnews.org)協作翻譯并制作，有英語、西語、葡語三個版本。每期根據不同主題，從《文化縱橫》雜志過往發表文章中，選擇3-5篇文章進行編譯，預計每季度發布一期。2023年第1期主題為“重構現代世界體系”，主要分析全球緊張局勢加劇背景下的俄烏戰爭的全球影響，追溯中西關系的歷史軌跡，并探討團結廣大第三世界國家、推動構建新型國際體系的可能性。
