Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

Editor's Note:
With the global governance system facing deficits in representation, authority, and effectiveness, the China-proposed Global Governance Initiative (GGI) offers an Eastern approach to addressing the challenges of our times. It responds to the international community's call for a more fair and equitable global governance system and has garnered widespread resonance worldwide. Daniel González Palau (Palau), director of the Galician Institute of International Analysis and Documentation, shared his understanding of the initiative and its implications for global governance with Global Times (GT) reporter Zhang Ao. "The GGI advocates for a new global governance model that seeks, at its core, effectiveness and inclusiveness," he said.

GT: Against the backdrop of the 80th anniversary of the founding of the UN, what significance and urgency does the proposal of the GGI hold?

Palau: The world faces many urgent challenges. From Europe's perspective, the foremost urgency is to minimize the risks of the new arms race and nuclear war that we are currently experiencing. In addition, addressing the climate crisis and ensuring human development for the vast majority of the planet are urgent priorities, as they are all interconnected.

To confront challenges and threats of this magnitude, solutions must be comprehensive, original, and profoundly renewing. The global scale and risks of the polycrisis compel us to open up a new kind of global dialogue and to adopt new governance frameworks. China's role in neutralizing this polycrisis will be crucial.

GT: What specific problems in global governance does the GGI address?

Palau: If we look at the debates at last year's UN Summit of the Future, we can identify three clear systemic deficits in the current model: (a) a legitimacy deficit, particularly in the realm of global economic institutions (representation of the Global South no longer corresponds to today's reality), (b) an effectiveness deficit (in areas such as security, health, or climate), and (c) a normative deficit linked to the digital revolution in general and space exploration.
 
The GGI is significant because it rethinks the future of the UN and multilateralism with these deficits in mind. To put it simply, the GGI advocates for a new global governance model that seeks, at its core, effectiveness and inclusiveness, without dismantling the edifice and legacy of the UN's 80-year history. 
 
GT: "Staying committed to international rule of law" is the fundamental safeguard for global governance and the second core concept of the GGI. In your eyes, how is the international rule of law promoted by the GGI different from the "rules-based international order" in mainstream Western discourse? 

Palau: We need new lenses to understand the reality of the world in 2025, which is very different from that of 1945. Historical inertia leads us to fragment problem-solving through state-centered solutions, but globalization - from the digital economy to climate change - requires a deeper, shared vision. A new global governance that truly works must go beyond the traditional and sacrosanct "reason of state."

When we speak of international norms, the fundamental difference lies in the "mental coordinates" through which concepts such as sovereignty, human rights, and international legitimacy are interpreted. This makes their mutual translation problematic. The GGI emphasizes non-interference and multiple paths to development, whereas the Western liberal order prioritizes the promotion of their own visions of democratic values and human rights as integral to its norms. 

However, the accumulated mutual distrust is profound, which is why we need leaders in both traditional powers and emerging powers who are capable of renewing traditional mental frameworks and making bold decisions. For effective dialogue, Europe must accept that it does not have a monopoly on universal ideas such as human rights.
 
GT: What challenges is the international rule of law facing now? What expectations do you have for countries to stay committed to the international rule of law after the GGI was proposed?

Palau: International norms are deeply degraded, particularly because they have been abandoned by their chief architect, the US. This is why the GGI generates the expectation that a major power such as China can lead by example. 

GT: In your take, what kind of Chinese wisdom does the GGI embody? What reference does it have for the world?

Palau: China has learned a lot along its peaceful rise. The GGI draws from these lessons as well as from China's own millennia-old history. From these sources, the discourse of global governance in the GGI can be condensed into four core ideas that connect with this history.

The first is the primacy of the UN. For China, multilateral legitimacy comes from reforming and revitalizing existing institutions, particular the Security Council and the global development finance system. The second is a holistic, interconnected conception of security and development. Development is seen as the "master key" to peace and sustainability: without equitable progress, there can be no lasting stability, and without security, growth cannot be guaranteed. The climate crisis adds to this equation, reinforcing the idea of structural interdependence. The third is a commitment to plural modernities. China believes that there are multiple legitimate paths to modernization, and no single one should impose its formula as an ideological precondition for cooperation. It is about promoting mutual respect. Finally, the fourth is procedural pragmatism.