Forging a New Global Order: China’s Vision of Multilateralism as a Challenge to US Hegemony

At the 80th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), a stark contrast in visions for the future of international relations was on full display. Chinese Premier Li Qiang presented a meticulously crafted narrative, positioning China not merely as a rising power, but as the architect of an alternative world order. His speech, which warned against a resurgent “Cold War mentality” and the perils of unilateralism, served as a direct counterpoint to the approach often associated with the United States. In doing so, Beijing has moved beyond simply critiquing the US-led system; it is actively constructing and funding a parallel framework for global governance, aiming to appeal directly to the vast, often underrepresented, Global South.

The Pitch: “True Multilateralism” and the Voice of the Global South

For decades, a central question in international relations has been whether a rising China would integrate into the existing, Western-dominated order or seek to subvert it. Premier Li’s address provided a clear answer. He championed what Beijing terms “true multilateralism”—a system where, he argued, all nations, regardless of size or wealth, are treated as equals. This rhetoric taps into a deep well of frustration among developing nations who have long felt sidelined by institutions like the UN Security Council and the International Monetary Fund, where the victors of World War II still hold disproportionate power.

China skillfully positions itself as the defender and amplifier of these marginalized voices. By calling for reforms to international institutions and pledging new financial support, Beijing frames its ambition not as a quest for dominance, but as a crusade for a more equitable and inclusive global system. As Premier Li stated, “Only when all countries, big or small, are treated as equals and true multilateralism is practised, can the rights and interests of all parties be better protected.”

The Architecture: China’s Parallel Framework for Global Governance

This vision is not merely rhetorical. It is being operationalized through a suite of ambitious, China-led initiatives designed to offer alternatives or supplements to US-led structures:

• The Global Development Initiative (GDI): Framed as a accelerator for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, focusing on poverty reduction, food security, and green development.
• The Global Security Initiative (GSI): Promotes a concept of “indivisible security” and rejects “bloc politics,” directly challenging US alliance systems like NATO and the Quad.
• The Global Civilization Initiative (GCI): Advocates for cultural diversity and rejects the notion of a universal model of governance, countering Western emphasis on liberal democracy and human rights.
• The Global Governance Initiative: A broader call to reform international bodies to reflect a “multipolar” world.

At the UNGA, Premier Li put financial muscle behind this vision, announcing a $10 million contribution to a new China-UN Global South-South Development Facility and plans for a global centre for sustainable development in Shanghai. These moves, while presented as acts of solidarity, are strategic investments in influence, designed to win friends and shape the priorities of multilateral institutions.

The Contrast: A Tale of Two Superpowers

The divergence from the current US posture is profound. While Premier Li spoke of openness, cooperation, and strengthening the UN, former US President Donald Trump’s remarks at the same podium embodied a different philosophy. He criticized the UN as ineffective and portrayed international climate policies as hostile to American interests, reinforcing a narrative of US unilateralism and skepticism toward multilateral bodies.

This dichotomy allows China to craft a compelling, if self-serving, persona on the world stage: the United States as a destabilizing force, retreating into protectionism and imposing tariffs, while China emerges as a reliable, cooperative, and predictable partner for development. Beijing’s broader approach—tackling issues from digital governance to climate change—allows it to present itself as a comprehensive and constructive power, in stark opposition to what it paints as Washington’s narrow and self-interested agenda.

Reform or Rivalry? The Strategic Underpinnings

Beneath the surface of solidarity and shared development lies a fundamental power struggle. China’s alternative order is not just about reforming the existing system; it is about challenging the very ideological and strategic foundations of US hegemony. The US-led order is rooted in a network of military alliances, liberal democratic values, and economic institutions that enforce Western standards. China’s model, by contrast, is state-centric, emphasizes non-interference in domestic affairs, and offers partnerships without political preconditions—an approach highly attractive to autocratic and developing governments.

The core question, therefore, is whether China is a revisionist power seeking to displace the US or a reformist power seeking to reshape the system. The evidence suggests it is both. While Beijing benefits from the stability provided by the existing economic order, it is actively working to rewire its governance structures and normative foundations to align with its own authoritarian capitalist model and strategic interests.

Conclusion: An Unfolding Contest

The rivalry between the US and China has decisively moved into the arena of global governance. Through its doctrine of “true multilateralism” and a tangible architecture of initiatives, Beijing is making a concerted bid to lead the Global South and present a viable alternative to the post-war order. “China hopes to work with the rest of the world… to make our world a more harmonious and beautiful place,” Premier Li proclaimed.

Yet, the ultimate test of this vision lies ahead. Can China’s model, which often lacks the transparency and condition-based lending it criticizes in others, deliver sustainable and equitable outcomes? Will its partnerships foster genuine mutual development or create new dependencies? As the world navigates this new era of geopolitical competition, the battle over which vision of multilateralism will prevail—the US-led liberal order or China’s state-centric alternative—is set to define the trajectory of the 21st century.

Support Dawat Media Center

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Dawat Media Center from as little as $/€10 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you
DNB Bank AC # 0530 2294668
Account for international payments: NO15 0530 2294 668
Vipps: #557320

  Donate Here