欧洲安全研究所-中俄合作的规范性维度：人权，不干预和网络治理（英文）-2020.8-8页_695kb

Sino-Russian Normative Partnership Summary

Core Content

The Sino-Russian normative partnership represents a growing alignment in their views on international norms and global governance. This partnership, often described as a "marriage of convenience," has evolved into a more strategic and coordinated form, particularly since the 2010s. Both countries share a critical stance toward the West, viewing the current international order as dominated by Western values and norms that they believe are not universally applicable. They aim to redefine international norms in line with their own principles, such as state sovereignty, non-interference, and a relativist approach to human rights.

Main Views

• Shared worldview: China and Russia see themselves as like-minded states, united by a belief in the need to challenge Western dominance and promote a more balanced global order.
• Human rights: Both countries advocate for a state-centric and relativist interpretation of human rights, prioritizing collective and socio-economic rights over individual freedoms. They reject Western narratives and have become more assertive in promoting their own human rights frameworks.
• Non-interference: They support the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, emphasizing the sovereignty of states. However, their actions sometimes contradict this principle, particularly in cases involving the post-Soviet space and the South China Sea.
• Cyber governance: Sino-Russian cooperation in the cyber domain is characterized by a focus on information security over the security of digital infrastructure. They have worked together to shape norms and standards in cyberspace, often opposing Western-led initiatives such as the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime.

Key Areas of Cooperation

Human Rights

• Joint strategies: China and Russia have coordinated efforts in the UN to undermine the effectiveness of the international human rights system.
• Reports and advocacy: They publish human rights reports on other countries and challenge the legitimacy of Western human rights norms.
• UNHRC engagement: Both have used the Human Rights Council to promote their relativist interpretations, with China advocating for "harmony" and "right to development."

Non-Interference

• UN Security Council (UNSC): Since 2007, Russia and China have been the main users of the veto power, often acting in unison to block resolutions.
• R2P (Responsibility to Protect): They emphasize states' responsibility to protect their populations and the international community's role in assisting, but are skeptical of political or military interventions.
• Contradictions: Russia's record on non-interference is inconsistent, with military actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, while China has shown restraint in similar contexts.

Cyber Governance

• Bilateral and multilateral efforts: They have collaborated on cyber norms, particularly through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the UN.
• Information security focus: Both prioritize information security over the security of digital infrastructure, reflecting their authoritarian governance models.
• Alternative norms: They have proposed an international code of conduct for information security, challenging Western-led frameworks such as the Budapest Convention.

Implications for the EU

• Challenge to multilateralism: The Sino-Russian normative partnership contests the liberal foundations of current multilateral institutions, undermining the EU's influence.
• Violation of norms: Both countries often breach international norms, including those they support, such as UN-approved sanctions and human rights protections.
• Propaganda and disinformation: They use propaganda and disinformation to challenge the EU's values and legitimacy, particularly through media and strategic communication.
• EU response: The EU needs to address the normative challenge proactively, strengthening ties with like-minded states and engaging those tempted to align with Sino-Russian norms. It must also protect the integrity of multilateral institutions, which are seen as vital for peaceful international cooperation.

Conclusion

The Sino-Russian normative partnership is a significant and evolving force in global governance. It is rooted in shared principles and threat perceptions, and has led to coordinated actions in key areas such as human rights, non-interference, and cyber governance. While the partnership is not without contradictions, its growing influence poses a challenge to the EU and its liberal values. The EU must respond with a coherent and strategic approach to counter this partnership and preserve the foundations of multilateralism.