Tag: GGI

The Global Governance Initiative (GGI): An Oasis in the Global Political Desert

Posted on By Moshi Isreal

As wars rage in Europe and the Middle East, and as global institutions crack under increased pressure and scrutiny, the global political order is withering into a desert, barren of trust, fairness and new ideas. In this dry landscape, China’s GGI has emerged, an oasis of reform and rejuvenation that may yet save the global order.

Announced by President Xi Jinping last month, during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit (SCO) in Tianjin, the GGI stands as the fourth pillar in China’s reconstruction of an international system in disarray following the Development, Security and Civilization initiatives. The timing is very symbolic; GGI debuted alongside the 80th UN anniversary, when concerns about fairness, reform and global governance are at the forefront of global discourse.

At its core, GGI advocates for a world that is just, fair, inclusive and serious about delivering results. For decades, the Global South has begged for inclusion at the so called ‘big boys table’ that is largely dominated by Western countries. Reforming the Bretton Woods institutions, the United Nations and its Security Council is a key goal for the Global South. This push for reform is a valid and logical initiative especially when it comes to institutions and systems that preach democracy whilst being undemocratic themselves. Strong countries with veto power heavily influence the UN’s decision-making. China’s proposals suggest a paradigm shift and are not radical reforms such as those the IMF imposes on developing countries. It is only fair that the majority are key stakeholders in the decisions of the largest multilateral body. The GGI says no to the tyranny of the minority and powerful.

The GGI stands firmly on the principles of rule of law and a people-centered approach to global governance. An increasing number of experts criticise the hypocrisy that has eaten at the heart of the so-called ‘international rules based order.’  The Global South has rejected the ‘rules for thee and not for me’ approach to international relations. GGI calls for the equal and uniform application of these rules, no country is above the law. As long as favoritism and gangsterism remain features of the rules based order, the rest of the world will inevitably lose faith in the system and seek alternatives. Furthermore, through GGI, China emphasises the importance of addressing people’s needs and solving their challenges as a cornerstone of a reformed system. The people are the foundation of all institutions and making their lives more prosperous, simpler should be a key focus. Human rights, justice, poverty alleviation and climate relief are key components of a happy global citizenry.

GGI proposes a system committed to real results and rejects unilateralism. In the spirit of mutual benefit and a shared future for all, China envisions a world that collectively addresses global challenges such as climate change, war, famine and pandemics. Isolationism encourages unilateralism and is largely pushed by those seeking to build walls instead of bridges. It becomes detrimental when countries treat the world’s problems as if they were not their own, often pushed by the false belief that the world cannot be saved. While it is important, and even admirable for countries to put the needs of their domestic populations first, this should not in anyway mean that global challenges take the backseat. The Covid-19 pandemic demonstrated that some disasters recognise neither borders nor races.

Critics argue that GGI just like GSI, GDI and GCI is a mere tool for China to expand its influence over the Global South and challenge the West, that its largely aspirational with no concrete implementation plan, or that it seeks to fragment global systems. However, the facts tell a different story; China is already influential, the largest economy by purchasing power parity (PPP), second largest by GDP with a huge population and a modern military. It maintains consistent and predictable diplomatic and trade relations with most of the world.

Additionally, China’s initiatives are founded on the principle of reaching across the aisle. They seek to involve the West in the reform process and recognise the importance of collective efforts. It is intellectual dishonesty to argue that competition implies adversary. China competes with the West; it does not challenge the West. Those that feel challenged simply refuse to compete and demand subservience.

Moreover, the Global South has materially benefited from initiatives pushed by China such as BRI, and FOCAC. China seeks a fairer system that listens to the voices of the developing world, something long overdue. Even though the GGI may be largely aspirational, it will evolve. These initiatives often seek consultation over prescription.

China does not claim to have all the answers but has put forward a conceptual framework where the rest of the world can debate and forge a way forward. Above all, China is not seeking to fragment the global system; instead, it calls for reform within the system, not outside of it. If an alternative system ever emerges, it will stem from a firmly rooted, collective recognition that the current global governance system is incorrigible.

The Writer is a Senior Research Fellow at the DWC. 

 

 

Global Governance Initiative: Addressing longstanding governance gaps in the Global South

Posted on By Alan Collins Mpewo

On 01st September, 2025, His Excellency Xi Jinping, the President of the People’s Republic of China, during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Plus meeting held in Tianjin, China proposed the Global Governance Initiative that took in mind a foundational basis of the 80th anniversary of the victory of the world anti-fascist war and the resultant birthing of the United Nations Organization. Eighty years seem to be little time, but its consequences, if being weighed, would give a balanced view and proper judgment that this is not a past that anyone today and the years to come, should look to. This historical perspective is important because if lost in time, errors are often bound to be made as we see the state affairs of the world today. The very first one being the hegemonism that has often been flaunted by certain superpowers in times when impartiality is most needed, and the protectionism that comes with it in protecting their allies.

The five propositions from the Global Governance Initiative laid forth include; first, being adherence to sovereign equality. The second was abiding by international rule of law. The third, practicing multilateralism. Fourth, advocating for a people-centered approach. And finally, was a focus on taking real action. At the center of the Global Governance Initiative is the abiding to International Law. And this has its foundational basis in the United Nations Charter that gives genesis of the operations framework by the countries that ascribe and assent to being members of the United Nations (UN). On protectionism, a look at Resolutions 242 and Resolution 338 by the UN, a sample of which called on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories that belong to Palestine, to this day, remains a disturbing position for many UN members because severely, despite coming up to take a stand of the inadequacies that have seen loss of countless lives and property in the Gaza Strip, there is still not so much that can be done as implementation because of the right hand who at the end, has veto powers – Protectionism. The United States always folds and tilts towards Israel, rather than taking a stand of the majority – both permanent and non-permanent members to the UN Human Rights Council.

Today the world is facing global disruptions some of which are stimulated by geopolitical fragmentation. An increase in conflicts and alliances can be seen in the Middle East and the Southern China sea. Increasing economic decoupling and this is also seen in the United States and China trade wars that have led to serious effects to global economic stability. Sanctions have become a common practice. Climate crisis that has led to conversations about climate change and importantly a decline in the climate commitments such as was agreed by member states to the Paris Agreement, 2016. Technology – the world of science is taking a leap as is being seen by the Artificial Intelligence (AI) growth and adaptations which have a count on information access, misinformation and disinformation, cyber security threats and, the freedom of privacy and protection of personal data and security systems. Global health challenges that have led to modification in warfare and sovereign interruptions such as the COVID-19 outbreak that caused alarm, the current conversation on mental health that has become a raging topic globally, and the straining healthcare systems.

The economic inequality that has contributed to labor mobility and displacement of persons at all facets such as conflict, economic disability, and the broader questions of climate change that have an effect on the constantly changing border control dynamics while creating an imbalance on international humanitarian systems. There is also being seen to-date the birthing of empires that have been named ‘regional blocks’ but at the same time, an indictment to international institutions that are registering drastic decline in the majority of the world. Space remains a conflicting ground and as such militarization has spurred ever more conflict and a scramble for biotech in today’s growing age of genetic engineering.

The dynamism of the foregoing is not without question. The place of the Global South. Often neglected, but remembered at times of sourcing for alliance when global superpowers seek control over adversaries. The  Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is rallying its members to take on Global Governance as a critical point of concern.The responses that were recommended in the Global Governance Framework have potential of attaining in the Global South because of the existent framework – The Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC). China’s inclusive mutual benefit principle of diplomacy will enable guarantee closure of gaps observed in the UN Framework towards the Global South. The consensus of the SCO members to open cooperation across the globe is a welcome response to cover for the rigidity of Western commercial trading that has for decades closed export of a chunk of produce (raw and industrialised output) and hegemony. Access to credit has often been marred with harsh terms – a tale of IMF – and yet the Global South remains with minimal influence in the institution despite being the most recipients to the credit. And so goes for peace and security as dictated by the West. Shocking that the Global South has no permanent member on the UN Security Council? Such are some of the broader governance gaps that are in sight. The initiative will gain reception, in time.

 

The writer is a Senior Research Fellow, Development Watch Centre.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Place of the Global Governance Initiative in a Rapidly Changing International Political Space

Posted on By Joshua Kingdom

Moments following his inauguration eight months ago, President Trump announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, the World Health Organization, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. If that was not shocking enough, the assault on other international bodies in the intervening time not least, the International Criminal Court, the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, and the UN Human Rights Council has certainly been.

This tendency is representative of several different waves that the United Nations system has had to go against in the last couple of years. Eighty years after the two catastrophic wars that were the immediate motivation for the inception of global cooperation, it is incumbent on the international community to seriously reflect on the course of things moving forward.

Presiding over the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) plus meeting late last month hence, President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) proposed the Global Governance Initiative (GGI) as one way to mitigate this crisis.

GGI is driven by five core principles each speaking to a specific fracture in the present state of relations between countries. For the issue diagnosed in the first paragraph of this OP-ED for instance, it is principle two (a commitment to uphold international law) that carries the antidote.

According to the PRC leader, this should be arrived at by adhering to the said norms unwaveringly through among other things applying them fairly across the board. And when forging out new tenets, participation of all nations should be ensured. The latter attribute especially answers to the disillusionment that has increasingly arose in the Global South and Prof. Wang Dong the Executive Director of the Institute for Global Cooperation and Understanding at Peking University agrees.

Another of the current US administration bulwarks i.e. trade tariffs is addressed by the GGI in calling for multilateralism. Rather than discriminate their counterparts in some cases while isolating themselves in others, the Global Governance Initiative suggests that nations aim to harness resources for the common benefit of all humanity. This it argues, best allows for the realization of the intentions of the UN Charter.

State sovereignty is also at the heart of GGI. The details here are that regardless of a state’s size or economic capacity, her counterparts should do not intervene in its internal governance– political, social, and economic. This notion certainly goes far back in the history of diplomacy but given that it has faced real threats in recent times, China’s call serves to remind the world of how significant it is for political stability.

The other two GGI themes (people-centeredness and effectiveness) go hand in hand. If the global order is not effective, then the individuals to whom its policies are aimed will see no benefits. The concept paper which explains the full GGI picture rightly points out that as it stands, an example of where the status quo can be improved is fast tracking the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

But it is not enough that the proposal sounds nice, it must be attainable too. For China, this question is answered by the fact that it has already been extensively involved with different players for years in efforts that will no doubt augment GGI. The signing of the Tianjin Declaration at the recently concluded SCO summit for instance, showed that the super power already has several strategic allies behind its back.

Further, the different but related global programs coming before GGI tell us a lot about how effective the Communist Part of China (CPC) has been when it comes to steering the waves of geopolitics. The greatest testimonies here lie in the Global Development Initiative (introduced by President Xi at the 76th UN General Assembly session), the Global Security Initiative (introduced by President Xi at the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference in 2022), and the Global Civilization Initiative (introduced by President Xi at the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-level Meeting in 2023). Taking the second of the trio, a 2024 assessment of the project found that it had already received support from over one hundred countries and that its principles had been adopted in no less than ninety bilateral/multilateral agreements.

GGI is therefore an answer to several issues that have been plaguing international relations for a while now. And from the vision as articulated and the evidence of what China has accomplished previously, there is no doubt that its promise will come to fruition as the years unfold.

The writer is a research fellow at the Development Watch Centre