Foreign
So-called “rules-based international order” reveals U.S. hegemony
By Huan Yuping, People’s Daily
Some people in the United States, to hype the Group of Seven (G7) Summit to be held in Japan’s Hiroshima, are raising their pitch in peddling the so-called “rules-based international order.”
However, what they say is not new. The so-called “rules-based international order” is just a disguise that’s been used by the United States more and more frequently in forcing bloc confrontation and pressuring other countries.
Saddling other countries with its own wills and standards and replacing international law widely accepted by the international society with rules that only suit itself and its allies, the United States is indeed pursuing hegemonism and power politics. The international community is deeply aware of the harm of these practices.
I.
The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative fabricated by the United States is totally groundless.
In 1945, the World Anti-Fascist War secured a great victory, and justice defeated evil. The making of the UN Charter laid a cornerstone for the modern international order and established contemporary basic norms governing international relations. Over the past more than 70 years, it is widely accepted by the international community that there is only one international system in the world, namely, the international system with the United Nations at its core; there is only one international order, which is the one underpinned by international law; there is only one set of rules, namely, the basic norms governing international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative fabricated by the United States has no relation at all to the international order widely accepted by the international society today.
This narrative is not written in the UN Charter nor included in the resolutions of the UN General Assembly or the UN Security Council. The “rules-based international order” is not recognized by the international community, and only works in the clique formulated by the United States and parts of its allies.
The “rules-based international order” never has a clear explanation on who should be making the rules, what rules should be made, how the rules should be obeyed or what rules should be protected. The explanation by the U.S. side is quite arbitrary and selective.
Some commented that the “rules-based international order” narrative of the United States is just a blurred term that never exists in international law established after the World War II, one that has no concrete connotation.
Fabricating the so-called “rules-based international order” narrative, the United States aims at explaining and applying international law at its own will and monopolizing the right to define international rules and order. The more ambiguous the “rules” and “order” are, the more discretion the United States enjoys. Any country could be labeled as a “rules and order breaker” for any practice that touches upon the hegemonic interests of the United States.
American columnist Peter Beinart noted that “Since the ‘rules-based order’ is never adequately defined, America’s claim to uphold it can never be disproved.”
A British scholar called the discussion over the term which American politicians have never defined a fight against the mist.
The U.S. doesn’t have to peddle the so-called “rules-based international order” narrative, if it really wants to safeguard the international order. All it should do is to uphold the international system with the United Nations at its core and the international order underpinned by international law.
The United States should pay its long overdue contributions to the UN regular budget and peacekeeping budget, ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, stop standing alone in obstructing the resumption of the negotiations on a verification protocol under the Biological Weapons Convention, stop refusing to implement the ruling of the International Court of Justice, and stop violating WTO rules again and again.
The United States has long been seeking supremacy. It takes a selective approach to international rules, and uses international organizations when they suit its interests and abandon them otherwise. The United States is undermining international order in the name of safeguarding it. Its true intention is to set up an “American order” outside the existing and recognized international system and order, so as to safeguard its hegemony and private interests.
II.
The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative of the United States stems from and serves American hegemony.
The United States has become the only superpower in the world since the Cold War ended, gaining a supreme position in the globe. To get rid of the restrictions from the UN system and international law, the United States fabricated the “rules-based international order” narrative to gloss over American hegemony.
According to scholar Paul Poast from the University of Chicago, the “rules-based international order” emerged in 1990s and was more and more frequently used by the White House after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. The “rules-based international order” has been synchronized with the expansion of the U.S. hegemony since the end of the Cold War.
The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative of the United States, though literally comes with “rules” and “order,” always has two standards.
From the perspective of the “rules-based international order,” combating extreme and violent terrorists is considered counter-terrorism in the United States but a human right issue in other countries; safeguarding national security is considered necessary in the United States but a violation of democracy and freedom in other countries; supporting international exchanges is justified in the United States but considered propaganda and infiltration in other countries.
Such double standards exactly indicate the remarks by American historian Alfred McCoy that “You must follow international law unless you’re America.”
Under the disguise of verbal tricks, U.S. hegemonic, domineering and bullying practices of military intervention, economic sanctions and technological blockage all hypocritically become a part of the “rules-based international order.”
From the wars the United States launched in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, to the color revolutions it started in European and Asian countries, and to the unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction it imposed on dozens of countries, the “rules-based international order” has brought no stability to the world at all, but only turbulence and disasters.
The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative of the United States is also a tool of the country to rope in its allies and start bloc confrontations.
The United States is addicted to containing its “imaginary enemies.” All “rivals” or “competitors” of the United States are labeled “rule breakers” or “order subverters.”
However, the frequent trouble-making by the United States in the name of “rules-based international order” has presented a clearer and clearer picture to the international society that behind the narrative is the hegemony of the United States that places everything after its own interests, and the major threat against the stability of the international order is exactly the U.S.-led group politics under the disguise of the so-called “rules-based international order” narrative.
III.
In today’s world, multiple challenges and crises are intertwined. As a community with a shared future, humanity needs to work hand in hand to tackle these challenges and crises. Under such a background, it is more necessary and urgent for the international community to jointly safeguard the UN-centered international system, the international order based on international law, and the basic norms of international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
The United States should come to realize that the world does not need a country dictating other countries, nor does the world need a “coalition of shared values.” What the world needs is mutual respect despite difference in ideology, values and development level, solidarity and joint efforts in line with the UN Charter and international law in order to tackle global challenges together.
The international community’s determination to choose justice over hegemony has become even stronger today. Developing countries are gaining an increasingly higher awareness for strategic independence and are more active on safeguarding the international order. They believe it’s important to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and safeguard true multilateralism.
Having suffered among the heaviest casualties in the world anti-fascist alliance during WWII, and as a founding member of the UN and the first country to sign the UN Charter, China sees it as its solemn duty to defend the authority of the UN and uphold the post-war international order. The country has the best record in abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, international law and the basic norms of international relations.
To contain China, the United States has done everything to label China a challenger to the international order. However, such defaming cannot affect the international community’s opinion.
The international structures of power are going through profound changes, with the international system and order in intensive reform. To oppose hegemonic “might is right” practices, transcend the outdated mindset of bloc confrontation, jointly safeguard the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, and follow the golden rules in state-to-state interactions such as equal sovereignty and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs is not a proposal of only China, but a common aspiration of most countries in the world. Only by recognizing this point, can a country play a constructive role in safeguarding the stability of the international order.
The exclusive clique established by the United States cannot represent the international system with the UN at its core. The so-called “rules-based international order” narrative of the United States cannot replace the international order underpinned by international law. The laws and rules applicable to only the United States and its allies cannot represent the basic norms governing international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The international order will only become fairer and more equitable, which can never be stopped by the hegemony of a few countries.
My people of Benue State,
I am not speaking to you today as a politician. I am speaking as a brother whose family was held up by Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa, MKA, when we had no one else to hold onto.
My elder brother, Verem Ukaa-Ikuan, was not just my blood. He was a very dear and close friend to Chief MKA. When my brother fell ill and was diagnosed with liver damage caused by poisoning, MKA didn’t treat it as someone else’s problem. He took it on as his own.
He worked closely with Verem during his time as Attorney General of the Federation, and when the sickness came, he moved immediately. Searches were conducted, and Apollo Hospital in India was earmarked for a liver transplant. Every travel arrangement was made personally by Chief MKA.
But we hit a wall. Verem was too weak to fly a long commercial flight. Only an air ambulance could get him to India alive. At that time, there was only one functional air ambulance in the entire country, owned by Julius Berger. It was completely out of reach for even the most high-profile citizens.
Chief MKA went all out. He did not give excuses. He did not delay. He used every connection and every ounce of influence he had to secure that air ambulance for my brother.
On the day it was secured, Barr. Terna Yaji, his Senior Special Assistant, called me a few minutes after 6pm. He told us to prepare Verem for departure and take him to Makurdi airport very early the following morning. I informed him, my brother passed on at exactly 6 o’clock a few minutes ago. I told Barr. Terna Yaji, and I saw a devastated MKA.
During the burial, Chief MKA was out of the country on national assignment. He was pained that he could not be there physically. His entire team, led by the late Onov Tyuulugh, represented him fully. And his message to us at the burial has never left me:
“If death were law, as the Attorney General, a law would have been made no matter what to ensure Verem will just not die but live forever.”
That is who Mike Kaase Aondoakaa is when nobody is watching. He does not abandon his people. He does not forget. He stood with our family then, and he has stood with us till date.
Now he is asking for the chance to govern Benue State.
Benue needs a governor with a heart like that. A governor who fights for you even when there’s no political gain. A governor who sees you as family, not as a vote.
I am standing with Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa for Governor of Benue State.
For compassion that moves to action.
For loyalty that does not fade.
For leadership that proves itself in the darkest hour.
Join me. Let us give Benue a leader who has already shown what he will do for us.
God bless Chief Mike Kaase Aondoakaa.
God bless Benue State.
Brahms Tor-Ikuan, a beneficiary of MKA’s benevolence writes from Makurdi
By Guo Jiping
At the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping, U.S. President Donald Trump will pay a state visit to China from May 13 to 15.
After many twists and turns, China-U.S. relations have arrived at a new historical juncture. The year 2026 carries special significance for both countries. China is embarking on its 15th Five-Year Plan period (2026-2030), while the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary.
Amidst increasing global uncertainty and volatility, the international community looks to Beijing, hopeful that this high-level engagement will offer clarity and stability for the future trajectory of China-U.S. relations.
Observers note that over the past decade, the relationship has weathered two significant periods of strain. The first began in 2018 with the U.S. initiation of trade tariffs against China. Stabilization was achieved only after extensive dialogue and complex interactions spanning several years. The second period of tension occurred more recently in 2025. Remarkably, the cycle from rising friction to renewed stability unfolded within just a few months this time.
The progression from years-long to months-long stabilization cycles, and from repetitive friction-dialogue patterns towards clearer strategic direction and consensus-building, reflects China’s consistent approach: readiness to negotiate combined with firm adherence to principles and clear boundaries. China’s demonstrated resilience has garnered international respect and created conditions conducive to resolving differences through dialogue.
Today, China-U.S. dialogue occurs on a more equitable basis. Communication is increasingly pragmatic, with clearer articulation of respective bottom lines. This resilience suggests the potential for a new, more stable chapter in the relationship.
Head-of-state diplomacy plays an irreplaceable strategic guiding role. Last year, when a wave of tariff tensions rattled the world, the two presidents steered China-U.S. economic and trade ties back on course.
Under the guidance of the consensus reached by the two presidents, the teams from both sides have so far held six rounds of consultations and are currently engaged in a new round of talks.
Since the meeting between the two heads of state in Busan last October, China-U.S. relations have generally maintained a stable and improving momentum — a trend widely welcomed by both peoples and the international community.
The strategic guidance provided by the two heads of state helps identify “dangerous reefs” ahead in China-U.S. relations. The Taiwan question is the most important and most sensitive issue at the very core of China-U.S. relations, and it concerns the political foundation of bilateral ties.
Xi has repeatedly elaborated China’s principled position on the Taiwan question to Trump, emphasizing that Taiwan is China’s territory, and China must safeguard its own sovereignty and territorial integrity, and will never allow Taiwan to be separated. Clearly defining principles and bottom lines is precisely the responsible approach needed to prevent serious risks in China-U.S. relations.
The aspiration of the Chinese and American business communities to deepen ties and cooperation has never changed. At present, more than 7,000 Chinese-funded enterprises operate in the United States, while about 80,000 American-invested enterprises are active in China.
These firm choices made at the forefront of the market clearly and powerfully demonstrate the true nature of China-U.S. economic and trade relations: mutual benefit and win-win cooperation.
As China enters the 15th Five-Year Plan period, its commitment to high-quality development and high-standard opening up will create broader incremental space for China-U.S. cooperation.
The will of the people stands as a profound and enduring force shaping the trajectory of China-U.S. relations. Whether at those pivotal moments when China and the United States seized every moment to break the ice, or when bilateral relations slid to a low ebb, the sincere aspiration of the two peoples for mutual understanding and friendship has never changed.
As exchanges deepen and produce tangible results, perceptions are improving positively. More Americans are actively participating in fostering people-to-people friendship, contributing greater rationality and constructive perspectives to the relationship.
In the face of profound changes unseen in a century, China and the United States, as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and the world’s two largest economies, shoulder even greater responsibilities. Promoting global development, safeguarding peace and security, and improving global governance all require cooperation between the two countries.
This year, China will host the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting and the U.S. will host the G20 Summit. Whether the two sides can demonstrate the vision and responsibility expected of major countries, and deliver more tangible benefits to the world, bears directly on the well-being of both peoples and the future of humanity.
China-U.S. relations cannot return to the past, but they can move toward a better future. Both sides should proceed from a sense of responsibility to history, to the people, and to the world, and explore ways to build a strategic, constructive, and stable China-U.S. relationship featuring mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation.
By He Yin, People’s Daily
China recently unveiled its economic performance for the first quarter of 2026. Its GDP reached 33.4193 trillion yuan ($4.9 trillion), up 5 percent year on year in real terms, accelerating by 0.5 percentage points from the fourth quarter of last year.
The figures have drawn close attention from the international community, which generally believes that amid rising global uncertainty, China’s economy has demonstrated resilience and vitality, injecting much-needed stability and positive momentum into the world.
At present, global instability is intensifying. The spillover effects of geopolitical conflicts are expanding, and international organizations such as the UN and the Asian Development Bank have warned of growing downside risks. The global economy is moving forward under pressure.
In the face of mounting external uncertainties, China’s economy continues to display strong resilience, robust internal momentum, and proactive, effective macroeconomic policies. Phrases such as “better than expected” and “growth against the headwinds” have frequently appeared in international media coverage.
Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, noted that China’s economy has shown resilience, possesses immense potential, and will have a positive impact on the world.
Driven by innovation, high-quality development surges forward. In the first quarter, China’s equipment manufacturing sector contributed nearly 50 percent to the growth of value added in industrial enterprises above designated size. In the first two months of the year, high-tech manufacturing accounted for more than half of the increase in total industrial profits, underscoring the growing role of new growth drivers.
China’s industries are advancing rapidly toward high-end, intelligent, green and upgraded development, delivering continuous breakthroughs in fostering new quality productive forces.
Exports of green products such as electric vehicles, lithium-ion batteries, and wind turbines and their components rose by 77.5 percent, 50.4 percent, and 45.2 percent, respectively. Meanwhile, investment in frontier fields including AI and humanoid robotics increased by 45.5 percent year on year, and the business vitality index of technology-driven enterprises rose by 8.1 percent.
Global media outlets have observed promising signs: China’s thriving clean energy technologies are creating huge economic value, and robust demand for AI devices is driving steady growth of China’s foreign trade. These positive trends vividly demonstrate China’s progress in developing new quality productive forces.
Domestic demand has also shown overall improvement, creating favorable conditions for sustained economic expansion.
Promoting a development model driven more by domestic demand, consumption, and endogenous growth reflects China’s strategic response to changes in its development stage and the evolving international environment.
In the first quarter, retail sales of consumer goods grew by 2.4 percent year on year, while fixed-asset investment returned to positive growth, indicating that the domestic market continues to deepen and expand.
At the sixth China International Consumer Products Expo held in Hainan province, a wide range of global debuts, Asia-Pacific premieres, and China launches were showcased, further strengthening China’s reputation as a premier global destination for quality consumption.
The country’s vast market continues to empower economic development. Some U.S. media outlets observed that China is transitioning toward a more diversified growth model, one that benefits not only China itself but also offers valuable lessons for the global economy.
Amid profound adjustments in the global economic landscape, China remains committed to high-level opening up, creating broad opportunities for the world through its own development.
A series of opening-up measures have been rolled out, including the launch of island-wide independent customs operations at the Hainan Free Trade Port, revisions to the Foreign Trade Law to better align with international rules, and an expanded version of the Catalogue of Encouraged Industries for Foreign Investment. These steps are improving both the quality and scale of trade cooperation.
In the first quarter, China’s total goods trade exceeded 11 trillion yuan for the first time in the same period, maintaining double-digit growth and reaching the highest quarterly growth rate in five years.
Its trade with Belt and Road partner countries accounted for 51.2 percent of the total, while trade with Africa grew by 23.7 percent. Trade with ASEAN, Latin America, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and other APEC economies also recorded double-digit growth. China’s role as a “world market” continues to generate positive spillover effects globally. A more open China will remain a steady anchor for the world economy as it navigates challenges.
The year 2026 marks the opening of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan period (2026-2030). Stable economic growth provides a solid foundation for a strong start to this new phase, while also serving as a stabilizer for the global economy amid turbulent conditions. China will continue to inject sustained confidence and strong momentum into global development.
EID-EL-KABIR: BELLO BABAYO BELLO COMMENDS TINUBU, SHETTIMA, GOMBE GOVERNOR AS HE FELICITATES WITH MUSLIMS NATIONWIDE
Dogara Celebrates Eid El-Adha, Urges Nigerians to Embrace Unity, Sacrifice, and Compassion
BREAKING: Court Declares Goodluck Jonathan Eligible for 2027 Presidential Race
-
Uncategorized5 years agoFG, states urged to harness flooding for ranching, others with technology – Agbaje
-
Headlines10 years agoBreaking: EFCC seals Borno House of Assembly, as Hon members take to their heels
-
News12 years agoNigeria Security Operatives Stage Manhunt For Homosexual Perpetrator
-
News9 years agoHow 21-year-old Girl fled community over accusation of lesbianism
-
News10 years agoYobe Gov Moves Against Deputy
-
Opinion7 years ago7 signs she has friend zoned you
-
Technology5 years ago
Online job placement company headhunts women
-
Headlines10 years agoBorno Dep Gov Abducts Another Church Leader