CGTN：（高蕾）The GSI: Reshaping international security order with Chinese wisdom
（来源：CGTN 2025-04-21）
Editor's note: Gao Lei, a special commentator for CGTN, is an associate professor at the Center for Xi Jinping Thoughts on Opening-up, Research Institute of Globalization and China's Modernization, University of International Business and Economics in Beijing. Xia Lu, a special commentator for CGTN, is a research fellow at the National Academy for Development and Strategy and the Academy of Xi Jinping Thoughts on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era at Renmin University of China; he is also deputy dean of the School of Marxism Studies at Xinjiang University, China. The article reflects the authors' opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.
The Global Security Initiative (GSI), one of the three major initiatives put forward by China between 2021 and 2023 alongside the Global Development Initiative (GDI) and the Global Civilization Initiative, represents China's alternative solution to global issues.
The world today is experiencing "profound changes unseen in a century," marked by shifting power structures, rising non-traditional security threats, and heightened tensions rooted in cultural and ideological differences. Traditional security doctrines, centered on zero-sum thinking, military blocs and hegemonic dominance, have shown fatal flaws in dealing with changes and challenges.
They regard security as a zero-sum asset, leading to confrontation through exclusive military alliances while the intrinsic link between development rights and security rights is frequently ignored. Some countries are attempting to safeguard their own security interests by pursuing decoupling and breaking supply chains, further increasing the danger of global economic fragmentation.
Disregard for cultural plurality has compounded the issue with some actors seeking to impose a singular value system on a diverse world and heightening the risk of cultural security crises. Against this background, security dilemmas are no longer confined to localized conflicts but have expanded into the economic, technological and cultural spheres, making the global security landscape more complex.
The GSI is grounded in the principle of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, presenting an alternative to the Western-centric security outlook and ushering in a new paradigm for international security.
It opposes the notion of major powers being entitled to privileges or exemptions from global rules, emphasizing that all countries are equal stakeholders in the international security order, regardless of size or strength. By advocating the reform of the United Nations Security Council and promoting regional security mechanisms like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the GSI seeks to build a multi-polar and balanced framework for global security governance structure, in stark contrast to the dominance-oriented "hub-and-spoke" alliance system led by the U.S.
Crucially, the GSI broadens the security agenda beyond traditional military concerns to encompass non-traditional threats such as food insecurity, climate change and cyber vulnerabilities. In practice, China combines the GSI with the GDI. For instance, in the Horn of Africa, a joint program to strengthen food and nutrition resilience has been implemented, leading to a marked decline in famine-related suffering by 2024.
Through such efforts, China underscores a security-through-development approach, providing a counterpoint to the frequent Western reliance on economic sanctions as a primary means of coercion.
The GSI champions dialogue over confrontation to resolve conflicts. A typical case is the China-brokered reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran in early 2023. Unlike traditional proxy war models involving great power manipulation, this breakthrough was achieved by building multilateral dialogue platforms and confidence-building measures, representing a model of regional security reconstruction free from external interference.
In contrast, the U.S.'s one-sided military aid strategy in the Middle East has led to the escalation of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, underscoring the limitations of the confrontation-based mindset.
Furthermore, the GSI challenges the Western tendency to frame global politics in binary terms, such as "democracy vs. authoritarianism." Instead, it promotes a more inclusive vision of security rooted in mutual respect and civilizational dialogue. Initiatives like the Conference on Dialogue of Asian Civilizations and campaigns to safeguard Asian cultural heritage demonstrate China's efforts to foster cross-civilization understanding and security consensus.
In June, a group of independent experts appointed by the Parties to the 2005 UNESCO Convention will present recommendations to protect the diversity of cultural expressions in the digital environment. Guided by the spirit of the GSI, China will offer its perspective on how to address cultural security threats in a world increasingly shaped by algorithm.
Through theoretical reinterpretation, practical innovation and cultural integration, the GSI has broken the shackles of the hegemonic security concept and the Cold War mindset. It seeks to translate the cooperative ethos of Chinese modernization into a new paradigm of global governance, one that fosters predictability and resilience in a turbulent and fast-changing world.
What distinguishes the GSI is its infusion of traditional Chinese wisdom – "harmony in diversity" – into modern international relations. Unlike British philosopher Thomas Hobbes's view of global anarchy, which envisions a world lacking an overarching authority and descending into a perpetual state of war, or German philosopher Immanuel Kant's utopian vision of perpetual peace, China's sustainable security concept recognizes the legitimacy of diverse national interests while emphasizing institutional coordination and collective responsibility. This offers a new path beyond the dilemmas of Western modernity.
The GSI, with its conceptual depth and pragmatic flexibility, is reshaping the architecture of international security. This process is not merely about redistributing global power; fundamentally, it is about forging new norms for coexistence among civilizations and reimagining a shared human future.
History affirms that the only viable path out of persistent global insecurity lies in moving beyond the zero-sum logic of hegemonic security. It is through cooperation, mutual respect and inclusive governance that lasting peace becomes truly attainable.
