The UN, Homeostasis and China


Vacuums do not last long in nature. In biology, homeostasis represents the body’s attempt to reach equilibrium. In a void, elements will flow towards spaces of less density until an equilibrium is reached. In political systems, the same phenomenon may hold true.

The United States was a moving force behind the creation of the United Nations. Although the organization was established during World War II, with five permanent members of the Security Council each with veto power, the U.S. was a leader of the multilateral system.
Donald Trump’s campaign of “America First” has turned out to be a frontal assault on the United Nations and multilateralism. Whether withholding its contribution to the organization (resulting in drastic cuts to its day to day business), withdrawing from the Human Rights Council or appointing representatives in New York and Geneva who are opposed to any consensual leadership, the United States has gone beyond “benign neglect.” Trump and his followers see the UN as an affront to their sovereignty, just as they see international law (or any law) as unjustly limiting their power.
The United Nations system has been in limbo since Trump’s inauguration in 2016. There has been no American leadership. In New York, Ambassador Nikki Haley and her successor Kelly Craft have continually undercut consensual leadership with the refrain of “What’s in this for us (US)?”
In Geneva, where the Carnegie, Ford and Rockefeller Foundations were instrumental in creating International Geneva, there was no American ambassador for two and a half years. The empty broken chair at the Place des Nations figuratively represents the obvious dismissal by President Trump of International Geneva and its pivotal role in human rights and humanitarian law. The Conference on Disarmament is blocked; the World Trade Organization has become second fiddle to bilateral negotiations with ad hoc arrangements trying to salvage the non-functioning Appellate Body.
And the recent appointment of Andrew Bremberg as U.S. Ambassador in Geneva does not bode well for the future of United States leadership. The 41-year-old has a career in domestic politics, having worked with Republican Senator Mitch McConnell in the White House on internal affairs.  Ambassador Adlai Stevenson he is not. 
Can a system as large as the United Nations function without leadership? Can multilateralism exist without top down leadership from a major power? To return to homeostasis: Can the political vacuum left by America’s withdrawal from the system remain void? Or will some other power begin to fill the vacuum?
The visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Switzerland in 2017 showed a determination by the highest Chinese authority to fill that void. A simple example would be the preparation of thousands of Chinese officials to understand the ins and outs of the World Trade Organization at specialized institutes in Beijing and Shanghai.
There is a vision in Beijing of playing a greater leadership role in the system. Not only did Xi Jinping in 2017 announce China’s interest in multilateral leadership, the Chinese have shown results: They have influenced the WHO’s hesitant decision to declare coronavirus an international emergency; placed Fang Liu as head of IATA; placed Houlin Zhao as the head of ITU and Qu Gongyu as head of FAO. And in the upcoming election for head of the World Intellectual Property Organization, the Chinese Wang Binying is a serious contender.
My colleague Stephane Bussard asks in Le Temps: Does the rivalry between China and the United States risk paralyzing the United Nations? Perhaps the question could be rephrased as: Does China wish to take over the multilateral system? Is the growing multilateral influence of China in the UN system a political complement to the physical infrastructure Belt and Road Initiative?
No one outside China knows the aim of China’s sudden interest in multilateralism. And it would be inappropriate to China bash with the unfolding of the coronavirus epidemic doing so much damage within the country. There is enough of that going on in the Western press. However, there is no question that China is filling a void left by the United States in the multilateral system. Whether one sees China as a rising empire, as it once was in history, or one sees the United States in decline, there is no question that we are witnessing a profound change.
It does not matter if the change is precipitated by President Trump’s America First or China’s desire to re-establish its imperial rule. A void is being filled. Vacuums do not last long in nature. And neither do they in political systems. 

Lien permanent 4 commentaires


  • The answer to whether China should play a bigger role in world affairs lies merely in the field of arithmethics. It's a fifth of the world's population.

  • Trump n`est qu`une parenthese dans l`histoire des USA. Quel que soit le prochain locataire de la Maison Blanche, on peut parier qu`il tirera un trait sur l`autisme trumpienne. Ce sera tres facile et tres rapide. Il sera par contre beaucoup moins facile de sortir le pays de cet état de déséquilibre grave que le trumpisme aura encore aggravé: l`inégalité pathologique des revenus et des chances pour une partie de plus en plus grande de la population de sortir de la pauvreté.

  • In Chinese culture, emptiness is the source of everything. From an original state of dispersion, the vital energy (qi) creates the binary split of yin and yang, which is itself at the origin of the ten thousand beings (humanity) and all the things that make up the world.
    And that hasn't changed for centuries, which is why China never intended to occupy an occasional vacuum, but to restore the balance that prevailed there before, so that the world could continue on its momentum.

  • Quand on lit ce qu il a dit Trump sur les USA avant et après son élection, ça fait peur car lui, nous dit-on, parle vrai et il est franc et un homme fort, soit!

    --Tout d abord quand il a lancé son slogan :"Make America great again", cela ne veut il pas dire que les USA selon lui sont en bas de l échelle et que lui, il va la réhabiliter de nouveau? Il avoue donc que l Amérique s est abaissée et qu elle est sur la pente descendante rapide ce que je crois et lui il le confirme, non?

    --Secundo, n a t il pas récusé la raison de son élection qui est du au populisme là bas (bien que ce terme n est pas forcément péjoratif) puisqu il se base sur la volonté du peuple que ce soit de bonne ou de mauvaise augure? M. Trump l a remplaçé par un autre terme qui est "Regain de Démocratie". Regagner ne veut il pas dire que la Démocratie aux USA est devenue désuète et bafouée et que c est lui qui va la réhabiliter de nuovo?

    --Au fond, espérons qu il va pouvoir réhabiliter autant la Démocratie que la Grandeur des USA, choses auxquelles un tel président en est incapable puis qu il est
    "Idiot, incompétent, dirigeant et menteur " et qui sont les quatre premiers adjectifs qui qualifieraient le président américain, selon un sondage publié le mercredi 10 mai 2017 avant son élection selon la Quinnipiac University, à Hamden dans le Connecticut qui a interrogé 1 078 électeurs à travers les États-Unis. Des résultats qui n’ont pas surpris, étant donné l’impopularité grandissante du président républicain, selon les derniers sondages d’opinion en pré-élection.

    In fine, va t il restituer la Démocratie et le Make America great again ou plutôt le Make America more vulgaire and worse than before? Je penche pour la dernière...

    Bien à vous M. Daniel Warner.
    Charles 05

Les commentaires sont fermés.