 |
| Pix credit here (Zhang Qing, Past & Future,1998) |
The 2026 Davos speeches has appeared to energize even those propaganda organs that tends to ignore it if ony because there is often very little at Davos that is "masses consumable" ready. One rarely sees much reporting on Davos in the popular Western legacy or new information engagement organs, and usually even less in Marxist Leninist organs. Not that Davos is ignored entirely--it is usually best harvested for its celebrity and imagery--a pageant of power, a celebration of celebrity, that rivals the US Oscars or the their European equivalents. Davos is useful for the masses only as a function of its utility to more deeply embed the signalling of power and its vanguardist collectivity--with just a smidgen of analysis for near intellectuals who wish to feel "9in the loop" in a near celebrity kind of way. Delightful. . . and ancient performative semiotics.
But apparently not entirely true this year.
China's People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, may sometimes be a useful barometer of the public facing positions--and the discursive tropes of fundamental importance to--the Chinese political vanguard. In that way it also provides some insight into the way in which the core of leadership of the nation reflect on and understand critical elements of Leninism evolving into its mature form in this new era of Chinese historical development. And recently it focused on Davos. Not the celebrity; not the pageant; but rather the offal, the odors of which now appear to have stung th4e sensitive nostrils of people in the Chinese homeland. That, more than the content of the message suggests that the frolic in Davos this year appears to be important enough to be taken seriously in China; and more importantly, that this notice is spiced with a chagrin--a chagrin at the possibility that at the point of a Chinese Leninist insinuation into the interstices of international institutionalism as law, culture, and bureaucracy, someone else has come along and effectively has sought to make that, and undercut the value of the entire enterprise. That would be bad enough, certainly, but hardly worth any effort that reaches the masses. What makes this worthy of mass line dialectics is the way that the alternative suggests the value of a chaos and instability that directly threatens the core ontological premise of Chnese Leninism in its new era. THAT, certainly, is worth a response.
 |
| Pix credit here (1972, The American Nuclear Bomb is nothing but a paper tiger) |
That intervention and response was set out in a prominently situated ion an opinion article: 不能任由世界滑向“无规则”深渊（寰宇平） [The World Cannot Be Allowed to Slide into the Abyss of "Lawlessness" (Global Perspective)].
"Although the 2026 World Economic Forum annual meeting has concluded, the concerns raised during the meeting about the world sliding into an era of "lawlessness" continue to resonate in the international community." [世界经济论坛2026年年会虽已落幕，但年会期间关于世界正滑向“无规则”时代的忧虑仍在国际社会持续发酵。] (不能任由世界滑向“无规则”深渊). The criticism. of course, was directed not at the middle powers, whose alarm warmed the hearts of the ancien regime intellectuals and those who look nostalgically at what could have been but for the failing, incompetence, shortsightedness, se4lfishness, and arrogance of the humans charged with its fulfillment (see here). Rather it is directed who rejecting the fundamental organizing managerialism of the bureaucrat and institutionalist, jas robusytñy put forward a sort of post global imperial transactional anarchy (order without a center) that would not merely compete with but seek to upend the structures and premises of the order that China itself has invested heavily and that reflects its own cognitive cages of global management and rationalization.Some countries pursue a logic of might makes right and self-serving dominance, and their bullying behavior is undisguised and unrestrained, whether towards their neighbors or allies. History and reality show that in a world without the constraints of international rules, the foundation of peace and development will inevitably be shaken, and contradictions and conflicts will become increasingly apparent. The international community must rediscover the spirit of unity, jointly safeguard international order and international law, and jointly resist the risks and challenges brought about by hegemonism and power politics. [个别国家奉行实力至上、唯我独尊的逻辑，其霸凌行径无论是对其近邻抑或盟友皆不加掩饰、毫不克制。历史和现实昭示，一个失去国际规则约束的世界，和平与发展的根基必将动摇，矛盾冲突将日益显现。国际社会必须重拾团结精神，共同维护国际秩序和国际法，共同抵御霸权主义、强权政治带来的风险挑战。] (不能任由世界滑向“无规则”深渊).
But, of course, China doesn't care about "some countries"--it cares very much about the conceptual rearrangement that once mocked bit which has become dangerous to it that becomes the foundation of the American rebooting of the global order to its own liking.
 |
| Pix credit here ["The Third World; the world's people can not be bullied; the people of China can not be intimidated." c. 1960s.] |
It divides the criticism in three parts.
Part one seeks to draw the discourse within tyhe now well developed Chinese tropes of US hegemonism, which themselves are well worm relics from the Cold War Era repurposes from its Soviet ham handed utilization to something perhaps more elegant.
The new changes in US policy towards Europe clearly demonstrate the logic of hegemony: nothing is off the table. The "powerlessness" that Europe is exhibiting in the face of these multiple shocks is, to some extent, the price it is paying for its long-term strategic dependence on the US. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's remarks reflect the mental adjustment Europe is undergoing: "Nostalgia is part of human history, but nostalgia cannot bring back the old order. And delaying things, hoping that everything will soon return to normal, will not solve our existing structural dependencies." (不能任由世界滑向“无规则”深渊).
Part two then weaves the Davos criticisms within the also well developed discursive tropes of anarchism, and with it if lawlessness. This is not anarchism as order without a center; is is Soviet anarchism as disorder organized around a center that is an empty space.
An article on the website of the American bimonthly journal *Foreign Affairs* points out that the United States is leading the world into a state of anarchy "far more chaotic than ever before." * * * Although the international order established after World War II was not perfect, it played an important role in maintaining overall world peace, promoting relatively open global trade, and fostering international cooperation, and is the foundation for the orderly functioning of the world today.* * * Now, the risk of a "ruleless" world is forming a complex of interconnected and superimposed systemic risks in multiple areas, profoundly affecting the living environment of all members of the international community—From the perspective of political security, the principle of sovereign equality is being crushed by the logic of power.
Part three then aligns the discourse of hegemony with the dangers of anarchy to suggest the emergence not of a post global system but of a state of constant lawlessness beyond the power of institutions to manage. The object is to transform the international order, its structures and systems, into an anti hegemonic coalition against the United States.
"More and more people are realizing that we cannot return to the previous state of the international order," Michael Froman, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, remarked at the World Economic Forum annual meeting. * * * Now, the United States' bullying and wanton destruction of the international order have caused widespread suffering in the international community. The international community must recognize the grave risks and jointly shoulder the responsibility. To prevent the world from sliding into the abyss of "lawlessness," international rule of law must be defended.
Behind all of this is an abhorrence of chaos. That is a constant without the discourse of Chinese Leninism in the 21st century and perhaps the one great remembering of that period of sustained dialectic between the 1960d and the late 1970's. And it was the foundation of the great discursive turn in response to the situation in Hong Kong in 2019. (here; Chapter 20: Monday 18 November 2019; Open-Shut (bai he 稗閤) Strategies: 习近平;止暴制乱 恢复秩序是香港当前最紧迫的任务 [Xi Jinping; Stopping the storm and restoring order is Hong Kong’s most urgent task at present] pp. 255-262). The critical normative trope: 止暴制乱 (Zhǐ bào zhì luàn). This makes perfect sense from the Chinese perspective. It is increasingly incomprehensible in Washington whose core transactional organizing premises are fundamentally incompatible with the foundational ordering premises of institutionalist ordering systems.
The text of 不能任由世界滑向“无规则”深渊（寰宇平） [The World Cannot Be Allowed to Slide into the Abyss of "Lawlessness" (Global Perspective)] follows below in the original Chinese and in a crude English translation. For the relevant Davos Speeches:
 |
| Pix credit here |
1. Davos 2026 Part 1--Remarks of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney
2. Davos 2026 Part 2--Remarks of U.S. President Donald Trump
3. Davos 2026 Part 3--Remarks of China's Vice Premier He Lifeng
4. Davos 2026 Part 4-- Remarks of EU President Ursula von der Leyen
5. Davos 2026 Part 5-- Remarks of Argentina President Javier Milei
6. Davos 2026 Part 6--Address by the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy
《人民日报》（2026年02月02日 第 03 版）
“无规则”风险正在多领域形成相互关联、叠加的系统性风险复合体。国际社会必须重拾团结精神，共同维护国际秩序和国际法，共同抵御霸权主义、强权政治带来的风险挑战
世界经济论坛2026年年会虽已落幕，但年会期间关于世界正滑向“无规则”时代的忧虑仍在国际社会持续发酵。
个别国家奉行实力至上、唯我独尊的逻辑，其霸凌行径无论是对其近邻抑或盟友皆不加掩饰、毫不克制。历史和现实昭示，一个失去国际规则约束的世界，和平与发展的根基必将动摇，矛盾冲突将日益显现。国际社会必须重拾团结精神，共同维护国际秩序和国际法，共同抵御霸权主义、强权政治带来的风险挑战。
（一）
“世界秩序断裂”，有西方媒体指出，美欧跨大西洋关系的裂痕已无从遮掩，盟友互信正跌向历史低谷。
美国新版国家安全战略报告把美欧矛盾上升到“文明消亡”的价值观层面，美国步步推进欲夺丹麦格陵兰岛，关税恫吓愈演愈烈，贬低北约国家作用……这一系列举动让欧洲日渐认识到，在美国强权政治逻辑下，盟友身份并不能帮欧洲挡风遮雨。
美国对欧政策的新变化，清楚展现了霸权的行事逻辑：没有什么是不能被摆上餐桌的。欧洲面对重重冲击表现出的“无力感”，某种程度上也是在为自身长期对美战略依赖埋单。欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩的一番话，反映出欧洲正在经历的心态调整：“怀旧是人类历史的一部分，但怀旧无法让旧秩序回归。而拖延时间，寄希望于一切很快恢复原状，也无法解决我们现有的结构性依赖问题。”
当前，美欧关系深陷龃龉，从一个侧面折射出世界面临的深层危机。今年以来，从对委内瑞拉悍然动手，到赤裸裸欲夺格陵兰岛，霸权国家正在无差别、肆无忌惮地践踏国际法治和国际秩序，加速将世界推向“无规则”状态。法国总统马克龙警示：“我们正在走向一个没有规则的世界。在这个世界中，国际法被践踏在脚下，唯一重要的法律似乎只有强者的法律。帝国主义的野心正在重新浮出水面。”德国总理默茨也呼吁欧洲人提升自身防卫能力和经济竞争力，以便在新形势下生存。
（二）
美国《外交》双月刊网站文章指出，美国正引领全球步入一种“混乱程度远超以往”的无政府状态。
二战后建立的国际秩序虽然并非完美，却为维系世界整体和平、推动全球贸易相对开放、促进国际合作发挥了重要作用，是当今世界有序运转的基础。然而，近年来，当初曾深度参与构建现有国际秩序的国家，出现急剧政策转向，霸权主义、单边主义、保护主义抬头，日益成为国际法治和国际秩序的破坏者、拆台者。
如今，“无规则”风险正在多领域形成相互关联、叠加的系统性风险复合体，深刻影响国际社会所有成员的生存环境——
从政治安全看，主权平等原则被强权逻辑碾压。当大国可基于自身判断随意界定合法性并采取强制行动，国际体系赖以运转的规则基础就会遭到侵蚀，“强权即公理”大行其道，对全球治理体系稳定构成根本威胁。欧洲《现代外交》认为，基于“实力”的胁迫性做法可能会引发地区动荡，激化内部冲突。从长远来看，可能导致世界更加分裂、不稳定且易于爆发冲突。
从经贸合作看，共赢工具正异化为对抗武器。《2026年全球风险报告》将“地缘经济对抗”列为首要风险。贸易、投资等原本有利于全球繁荣的经济纽带，正被个别国家系统性“武器化”，直接扰乱了全球产业链供应链体系，严重冲击多边贸易规则。在一个“无规则”的经贸秩序下，任何经济联系都可能在地缘因素作用下成为打击目标，确定性、稳定性无从谈起，全球经济将滑向阵营化、碎片化。
从多边协作看，合作平台陷入失能困境。霸权国家大肆“退群”、百般攻讦，导致联合国、世界贸易组织等全球治理核心机构正遭遇前所未有的危机。多边主义衰退将侵蚀全球治理体系的完整性和有效性，加剧世界和平发展面临的挑战。
巴西总统顾问阿莫林借用量子物理学的“不确定性原理”形容当下：任何事情都可能随时发生。在一个漠视规则、迷信实力的环境中，各国都将难以有效保障自身权益。当约束不存，不可预测性本身就成为一种强大的破坏力量，世界或将滑向更失序、更不可控的状态。
（三）
“越来越多人意识到，我们回不到以前的国际秩序状态。”美国外交关系委员会主席迈克尔·弗罗曼在世界经济论坛年会现场作出如此感慨。
回望二战结束以来的历史，霸权的威胁始终存在。西方一些人热衷于谈论“黄金过往”，只不过是因为在相当长一段时间内，霸权国家出击的焦点在别处，“痛”不在自己身上而已。如今，美国恃强凌弱、肆意破坏国际秩序的行为，已使国际社会普遍感到痛楚。国际社会必须认清严峻风险，共同挺膺担当。
防止世界滑向“无规则”深渊，必须捍卫国际法治。历史学家玛格丽特·麦克米伦指出，可预见性对和平至关重要，而这正是当前世界所稀缺的。国际法治是文明进步的结果，是各国特别是中小国家主权、安全与发展利益的最有力保障，是避免弱肉强食、确保共同安全的“文明公器”。
当今时代，以《联合国宪章》宗旨和原则为核心的国际法和国际关系基本准则，是世界和平稳定所系，也是解决国际争端的重要依据。维护这一全球基础公共产品的权威性与有效性，就是维护各国的共同利益。全面、充分、完整遵守国际法和国际关系基本准则，确保规则统一适用，不搞“双标”，才能防止“丛林法则”成为世界的主导逻辑。
防止滑向“无规则”深渊，必须重拾团结精神。各国命运与共，强权面前明哲保身不是出路。各国应从共同利益出发，在对全球性风险形成共同认知的基础上，夯实团结合作的根基，共同抵御霸权主义与强权政治的挑战。
二战后建立的国际秩序为这个世界遮风挡雨80多年，应该对其固本强基、改革完善，而不是拆梁毁柱、釜底抽薪。有观点认为，在旧秩序“破裂”之处，坚持独立自主和务实合作的新生力量将获得越来越大的“定义规则的空间”。从这个角度来说，“乱”也是“变”的序章。就像熵增定律描述的开放系统一样，无序度在增加，但也为新秩序孕育了可能。国际社会应在历史的曲折发展中看清方向，坚持要平等相待、不要以强凌弱，要合作共赢、不要赢者通吃，推动国际秩序朝着更加公正合理的方向发展。
世界正处于关键的十字路口，国际社会不能坐视世界被推向“无规则”深渊。唯有共同维护以联合国为核心的国际体系、以国际法为基础的国际秩序，以对话与合作凝聚确定性，才能引领人类走向光明的未来。
The World Cannot Be Allowed to Slide into the Abyss of "Lawlessness" (Global Perspective)
People's Daily (February 2, 2026, Page 3)
The risk of "lawlessness" is forming a complex system of interconnected and overlapping risks across multiple fields. The international community must rediscover the spirit of unity, jointly safeguard international order and international law, and jointly resist the risks and challenges brought about by hegemonism and power politics.
Although the 2026 World Economic Forum annual meeting has concluded, the concerns raised during the meeting about the world sliding into an era of "lawlessness" continue to resonate in the international community.
Some countries pursue a logic of might makes right and self-serving dominance, and their bullying behavior is undisguised and unrestrained, whether towards their neighbors or allies. History and reality show that in a world without the constraints of international rules, the foundation of peace and development will inevitably be shaken, and contradictions and conflicts will become increasingly apparent. The international community must rediscover the spirit of unity, jointly safeguard international order and international law, and jointly resist the risks and challenges brought about by hegemonism and power politics.
(I)
"The world order is fracturing," some Western media outlets have pointed out, noting that the cracks in the transatlantic relationship between the US and Europe are undeniable, and mutual trust among allies is plummeting to a historical low.
The new US National Security Strategy report elevates US-European contradictions to the level of "civilizational demise" in terms of values. The US is steadily advancing its efforts to seize Greenland from Denmark, escalating tariff threats, and belittling the role of NATO countries... This series of actions has made Europe increasingly realize that under the logic of US power politics, being an ally does not protect Europe from harm.
The new changes in US policy towards Europe clearly demonstrate the logic of hegemony: nothing is off the table. The "powerlessness" that Europe is exhibiting in the face of these multiple shocks is, to some extent, the price it is paying for its long-term strategic dependence on the US. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's remarks reflect the mental adjustment Europe is undergoing: "Nostalgia is part of human history, but nostalgia cannot bring back the old order. And delaying things, hoping that everything will soon return to normal, will not solve our existing structural dependencies."
Currently, the deep discord in US-European relations reflects, from one perspective, the profound crisis facing the world. This year, from the blatant intervention in Venezuela to the brazen attempt to seize Greenland, the hegemonic power is indiscriminately and recklessly trampling on international law and order, accelerating the world's descent into a "ruleless" state. French President Macron warned: "We are heading towards a world without rules. In this world, international law is trampled underfoot, and the only law that seems to matter is the law of the strongest. Imperialist ambitions are resurfacing." German Chancellor Merkel also called on Europeans to enhance their defense capabilities and economic competitiveness in order to survive in the new situation.
(II)
An article on the website of the American bimonthly journal *Foreign Affairs* points out that the United States is leading the world into a state of anarchy "far more chaotic than ever before."
Although the international order established after World War II was not perfect, it played an important role in maintaining overall world peace, promoting relatively open global trade, and fostering international cooperation, and is the foundation for the orderly functioning of the world today. However, in recent years, the countries that were deeply involved in building the existing international order have undergone a dramatic policy shift. Hegemonism, unilateralism, and protectionism are on the rise, increasingly becoming destroyers and disruptors of international law and order.
Now, the risk of a "ruleless" world is forming a complex of interconnected and superimposed systemic risks in multiple areas, profoundly affecting the living environment of all members of the international community—
From the perspective of political security, the principle of sovereign equality is being crushed by the logic of power. When great powers can arbitrarily define legitimacy and take coercive actions based on their own judgment, the rule-based foundation on which the international system operates is eroded, "might makes right" prevails, posing a fundamental threat to the stability of the global governance system. According to the European publication *Modern Diplomacy*, coercive practices based on "power" may trigger regional instability and intensify internal conflicts. In the long run, this could lead to a more fragmented, unstable, and conflict-prone world.
From the perspective of economic and trade cooperation, win-win tools are being transformed into weapons of confrontation. The *Global Risks Report 2026* lists "geoeconomic confrontation" as the primary risk. Trade and investment, economic ties that were originally beneficial to global prosperity, are being systematically "weaponized" by certain countries, directly disrupting the global industrial and supply chain system and severely impacting multilateral trade rules. In a "ruleless" economic order, any economic connection could become a target under the influence of geopolitical factors; certainty and stability are impossible, and the global economy will slide towards bloc formation and fragmentation.
From the perspective of multilateral cooperation, cooperation platforms are facing a crisis of dysfunction. Hegemonic powers are withdrawing from international agreements and engaging in relentless attacks, leading to unprecedented crises for core global governance institutions such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. The decline of multilateralism will erode the integrity and effectiveness of the global governance system, exacerbating the challenges facing world peace and development.
Brazilian presidential advisor Amorim used the "uncertainty principle" of quantum physics to describe the current situation: anything can happen at any time. In an environment that disregards rules and worships power, it will be difficult for all countries to effectively protect their own interests. When constraints are absent, unpredictability itself becomes a powerful destructive force, and the world may slide into a more disordered and uncontrollable state.
(III)
"More and more people are realizing that we cannot return to the previous state of the international order," Michael Froman, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, remarked at the World Economic Forum annual meeting.
Looking back at the history since the end of World War II, the threat of hegemony has always existed. Some in the West are fond of talking about a "golden past," simply because for a considerable period, the focus of the hegemonic power's actions was elsewhere, and the "pain" was not felt by themselves. Now, the United States' bullying and wanton destruction of the international order have caused widespread suffering in the international community. The international community must recognize the grave risks and jointly shoulder the responsibility.
To prevent the world from sliding into the abyss of "lawlessness," international rule of law must be defended. Historian Margaret MacMillan points out that predictability is crucial for peace, and this is precisely what the world currently lacks. International rule of law is the result of civilized progress, the most powerful guarantee of the sovereignty, security, and development interests of all countries, especially small and medium-sized countries, and a "civilized instrument" to avoid the law of the jungle and ensure common security.
In today's era, international law and the basic norms of international relations, centered on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, are the foundation of world peace and stability, and an important basis for resolving international disputes. Maintaining the authority and effectiveness of this global public good is to safeguard the common interests of all countries. Only by fully and completely abiding by international law and the basic norms of international relations, ensuring the uniform application of rules, and avoiding double standards, can we prevent the "law of the jungle" from becoming the dominant logic in the world.
To prevent sliding into the abyss of "lawlessness," we must rediscover the spirit of unity. The destinies of all countries are intertwined; self-preservation in the face of powerful forces is not a viable solution. Countries should proceed from common interests, build a solid foundation for unity and cooperation based on a shared understanding of global risks, and jointly resist the challenges of hegemonism and power politics.
The international order established after World War II has sheltered the world for more than 80 years. It should be strengthened and improved, not dismantled and undermined. Some argue that where the old order "breaks down," emerging forces that adhere to independence, self-reliance, and pragmatic cooperation will gain increasing "space to define the rules." From this perspective, "chaos" is also the prelude to "change." Just like the open system described by the law of entropy increase, disorder is increasing, but it also breeds the possibility of a new order. The international community should discern the direction in the tortuous development of history, insist on treating each other equally and not allowing the strong to bully the weak, and pursue win-win cooperation rather than winner-take-all, promoting the international order towards a more just and reasonable direction. The world is at a critical crossroads, and the international community cannot stand idly by while the world is pushed into an abyss of lawlessness. Only by jointly upholding the international system centered on the United Nations and the international order based on international law, and by building certainty through dialogue and cooperation, can we guide humanity towards a brighter future.
No comments:
Post a Comment