A democratic and equitable international order is inherent in the fundamental human rights that humanity shares. It is achievable, step-by-step, when every country and people act at the local, regional and international levels, aware that such an international order must be based on the United Nations Charter and the human rights treaties, which together make up what we can safely call the Constitution of the modern world.

Achieving a democratic and equitable international order requires overcoming formidable obstacles, including the wrong priorities by governments and international organizations, bias in favour of civil and political rights over economic, social and cultural rights, the prevailing demophobia in many countries, where governments refuse to listen to their citizens and ban referenda, the curses of positivism, selectivity and double-standards, the tendency to go for short-term solutions instead of addressing root causes , the continued existence of secrecy jurisdictions, the impunity of transnational corporations and other private sector actors, and, of course, institutional inertia.

Since a democratic and equitable international order requires peace, States must engage in good faith negotiations for disarmament and significantly reduce military expenditure and the arms trade.

A democratic and equitable international order can only flourish in a peaceful environment. With conflict prevention being the overarching raison d’être of the United Nations, the hundreds of wars since 1945 indicate that the Organization must reform in order to live up to its purposes and principles.

The extremely complex situations in various parts of the world and the contradictory currents that exist, with all their attendant risks and uncertainties for overall peace and security, demand a democratic vision of the new international order, which must be built, and abandonment of prejudices in relations between States inherited from the cold-war period. But that is not all. I believe that today we need a vision of the management of international relations in which realism and pragmatism predominate.

It is so called rules-based international order. It never tells you what the rules are and who made these rules. It practices exceptionalism and double standards and only serves the interests and follows the rules of a small number of countries. A just an equitable environment for development meets the shared interests of Asia Pacific countries. Anyone who attempts to fleece the flock or prey on the weak will surely be opposed by countries in the region.

A just, peaceful, equitable and democratic world order must not be undermined by the activities of investors, speculators and transnational enterprises avid for immediate profit at the expense of social and economic progress.

International order based on legal norms, even if administered under the authority of the privileged club of the permanent members of the Security Council, represented the embodiment of reason and of the hope that the world would never again fall prey to the demons of hatred and destruction.

It is only through multilateral institutions that States can hold each other to account. And that makes it very important to organize those institutions in a fair and democratic way, giving the poor and the weak some influence over the actions of the rich and the strong.

Truly free and democratic discussion, planning, and policy implementation for the good of all will be possible only in a democratic socialist world order free of elite social engineering and control of the state and without consciousness-consuming economic marginalization and deprivation. Moving toward an end to domesecration and the related injurious practices would be much more likely in a societal and global order characterized by and a democratically controlled state and mass media. Under a more egalitarian system, one with a much greater potential to inform the public about vital global issues—including their connection to domesecration—campaigns to improve the lives of other animals would be more abolitionist in nature.

What is at at stake now is the peace of the world. What we are striving for is a new international order based upon broad and universal principles of right and justice, — no mere peace of shreds and patches.

Each state is guided by its interests, not by some nebulous concept of common interest. And not many states are even democratic. So, you have a problem with the concept between international institutions and sovereignty. To my mind, there is a solution which has to do with democracy, because democratic governments are subject to the will of the people. So, if the people will it, you can actually create international institutions through the democratic states.

Direct, participatory and responsive democracy has been shown to be conducive to achieving a more just world order. Only such an approach will allow progressing from predator societies to human rights oriented societies.

Peace in the world and stability in the region are in the best interests of China. The only criterion we use in judging international affairs is to see whether they serve world peace, common development and the interests of the Chinese people and the world people as a whole. We advocate a new security concept. We should try to build up mutual trust through consultations and dialogue on an equal footing. We should seek common security. This is the only way to ensure peace and stability. We believe that to seek absolute security for oneself through stronger military alliance and intensified arms race is out of tune with the trend of the times. It won’t lead to an effective security at all. We stand for democracy in international relations. We believe that all countries are equal members of the international community, regardless of their size, strength and wealth. National affairs of a country should be decided by its people while international affairs should be handled by all countries together through consultations on an equal footing. We will take an active part in the process of economic globalization.