“以规则为基础的国际秩序”之批判

Criticism of“Rules-Based International Order”

“以规则为基础的国际秩序”的产生可以追溯到以美国为主导的自由主义国际秩序的兴起,并因其政治属性而受到诸多国家推崇。理论上,“以规则为基础的国际秩序”存在效力的不确定性、适用范围的模糊性以及制度霸权的特征。实践中,“以规则为基础的国际秩序”所展现出的是一种双重的评判标准。南海仲裁裁决以及我国加入世界贸易组织时的替代国条款,这两个实例都揭示了“以规则为基础的国际秩序”中的制度霸权与压制异己属性。推崇规则之治实为意图不遵守国际法,削弱国际法在国际秩序中的权威。中国倡导“以国际法为基础的国际秩序”,并在国内法治建设过程中将国际法纳入考量,在参与全球治理实践中积极践行国际法之治。

The emergence of the“rules-based international order”can be traced back to the rise of the liberal international order led by the United States,and it has been advocated by many countries for its political attributes.In theory,the“rules-based international order”has the characteristics of indeterminacy of effectiveness,ambiguity of scope of application and institutional hegemony.In practice,the“rules-based international order”shows a double standard of judgment.The arbitration decision in the South China Sea and the substitution clause in China s accession to the world trade organization reveal the institutional hegemony and suppression of dissent in the“rules-based international order”.Advocating rules-based governance actually was an attempt to disobey international law and weaken its influence in the international order.China advocates an“international law-based international order”,takes international law into account in the construction of the rule of law at the national level,and actively practices international law in its participation in global governance.