Fact Check: Does China have a reputation and history of making good on their words on an international platform?

Does China Have a Reputation and History of Making Good on Their Words on an International Platform?

Introduction

The claim that China has a reputation and history of making good on their words on an international platform invites scrutiny of the country's compliance with international law and its commitments to global governance. This inquiry is particularly relevant given China's growing influence in international affairs and the complexities surrounding its adherence to treaties and agreements.

What We Know

1. Compliance with International Law: China's compliance with international law is described as "mixed" and "complicated." While it may fulfill the letter of some agreements, it often does not adhere to the spirit of these commitments, particularly in areas such as international trade 4.

2. Reputation as a Compliance Mechanism: The concept of reputation plays a significant role in international relations, where states may be influenced by their standing among peers. Research indicates that China's reputation is affected by its actions, particularly when it comes to violations of international law, which have led to increased "naming and shaming" by other states 2.

3. Indifference to Treaties: Some sources argue that China exhibits a notable indifference to international legal conventions. A 2023 article states that this indifference is a critical aspect of understanding China's approach to international agreements 5.

4. Evolving Global Governance Strategy: Under President Xi Jinping, China's approach to global governance has evolved, focusing on initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative and adapting its strategies in response to global challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic 6.

5. Human Rights Treaties: China's adherence to international human rights treaties has been scrutinized, with some reports indicating that while China acknowledges the legitimacy of these treaties, its actual compliance remains questionable 9.

Analysis

The evidence surrounding China's reputation and compliance with international commitments is multifaceted and often contradictory.

• Source Reliability: The sources cited range from academic papers to think tank reports. For instance, the Brookings Institution is generally regarded as a credible source, but it is essential to consider potential biases in its analysis of China's role in international law 13. Similarly, the Council on Foreign Relations provides valuable insights but may also reflect a particular geopolitical perspective 6.

• Conflicting Perspectives: There is a clear divide in the literature regarding China's reputation. While some sources highlight a pattern of compliance with certain treaties, others emphasize a tendency to disregard international norms when they conflict with national interests 45. This inconsistency raises questions about the overall reliability of claims regarding China's reputation.

• Methodological Considerations: The methodologies employed in these studies often vary, with some relying on qualitative assessments of China's actions in international forums, while others may use quantitative measures of treaty compliance. A more comprehensive understanding would benefit from a unified framework that evaluates compliance across various international agreements.

• Additional Information Needed: To further evaluate China's reputation, additional data on specific instances of treaty compliance or violations would be beneficial. Case studies examining China's actions in particular international disputes or agreements could provide deeper insights into its adherence to commitments.

Conclusion

Verdict: Mostly False

The claim that China has a reputation and history of making good on their words on an international platform is assessed as "mostly false." The evidence indicates that while China may comply with certain international agreements, it often fails to uphold the spirit of these commitments, particularly when they conflict with national interests. Reports suggest a pattern of indifference to international legal conventions and a reputation that is negatively impacted by violations of international law.

However, it is important to recognize the complexity of this issue. The available evidence is often contradictory, with some sources highlighting instances of compliance while others emphasize disregard for international norms. The methodologies used in these analyses vary, which complicates the ability to draw definitive conclusions.

Readers should be aware of these limitations and critically evaluate the information presented. The nuances of international relations and the evolving nature of China's global strategy necessitate a careful consideration of claims regarding its reputation and adherence to international commitments.

Sources

1. Brookings Institution. "International law with Chinese characteristics: Beijing and the 'rules-based global order'." Link
2. Northeastern University. "Reputation as a Compliance Mechanism: The Efficacy of Shaming the People's Republic of China." Link
3. Brookings Institution. "International law with Chinese characteristics: Beijing and the 'rules-based global order'." Link
4. European Parliament. "China's compliance with selected fields of international law." Link
5. Center for European Policy Analysis. "Do Treaties Matter? Not to China." Link
6. Council on Foreign Relations. "China's Approach to Global Governance." Link
7. JSTOR. "REPUTATION, COMPLIANCE, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW." Link
8. Taylor & Francis Online. "Formal Commitments and States' Interests: Compliance in International Relations." Link
9. SAGE Journals. "China's adherence to international human rights treaties." Link
10. Oxford Academic. "State Reputation and Compliance with International Law: Looking through a Chinese Lens." Link