China which refused to participate Ukraine Peace Summit in Switzerland is once again on the ver

   On June 15, the International Peace Summit to discuss the Ukrainian problem and the Russo-Ukrainian war opened in Switzerland with the participation of more than 90 countries. Except for some small extraterritorial countries that have nothing to do with the Russian-Ukrainian issue and have no intention or ability to participate in the meeting, almost all of the world's major powers and countries with more connections to Russia and Ukraine are attending. Although this meeting is dominated by Western countries that support Ukraine, relatively neutral and even pro-Russian countries such as Brazil, India, Serbia and Hungary are also participating in this summit.

   The only two major countries that are absent from this summit, countries related to the Russia-Ukraine issue, are Russia and China. It goes without saying that Russia, as a party to the invasion of Ukraine and without the sincerity to withdraw its troops and stop the war, was not invited. However, China, as a third party, actively refused to attend the Swiss summit (even though Zelensky and the West very much hope that China will participate), which is quite disturbing and worrying to the author and many knowledgeable people.

   The author is disturbed and worried not only because China's absence from the summit will not be conducive to peace in Russia and Ukraine, but also because, judging from this event and many other indications, in recent years China has increasingly given up its attempts of the 1980s to integrate itself into the mainstream of the international community and the civilized order, and has gone back to being closed off and in strong antagonism with the West. This has already caused serious harm to China, and there will be more and more dire consequences in the future.

    After the founding of the People's Republic of China, due to the domestic and foreign affairs and the international environment, in the 1950s-1970s, was a long time in a state of relative isolation, and a high degree of antagonism with the West. 1970s, although with the United States, Europe and Japan and other countries to improve relations, but the Chinese society as a whole is still closed.

   It was not until 1978, when Deng Xiaoping and other leaders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) decided to reform internally and open up to the outside world, that China reopened its doors to the world and once again had positive exchanges with the world. China has set up a number of special economic zones to attract investment and is eager for foreign talents. Despite subsequent political changes, China has remained actively engaged with the world in the economic, scientific, technological, and academic spheres. Under Jiang Zemin, China has become more integrated into the globalization process and has become the "factory of the world". The convening of the World Conference on Women, China's accession to the WTO, the hosting of the Beijing Olympics and the Shanghai World Expo, and the holding of the China-Africa/China-Europe/China-ASEAN Cooperation Forums are typical examples of China's active integration into the world and in-depth exchanges with the international community.

    Over the past decades, China's open-door policy has greatly contributed to China's economic development, progress in science, education, culture and health, the improvement of China's national living standards, and the deepening of China's ties with the world. While accepting foreign influences, China has also gained greater influence and power abroad, enhancing its international reputation, expanding its national interests, and promoting world prosperity and integration.

    Of course, due to the imbalance of international political and economic development, and the fact that China's own background is inferior to that of developed countries, China has long been in the downstream of the industrial chain in the international economic and trade division of labor, selling labor and natural resources to earn income, and most of the benefits have been gained by developed countries such as the U.S., Japan, Europe, and so on. China's local industry and agriculture also suffered from the impact of international enterprises. The imbalance and unfairness of the international political and economic order has also kept China on the periphery of the international order dominated by Western countries, which is not fully commensurate with its size. In short, China has indeed suffered losses in the current international system and globalization process.

   But even so, in the process of opening up to the outside world and integrating into globalization, China's gains have far outweighed its losses, and its benefits have far outweighed its losses. Moreover, the reason why China is in the downstream of the industrial chain and on the edge of the international order lies precisely in the fact that China did not join the family of nations at an early stage (or had already joined it before 1949, but withdrew for some reasons), and that it has long been actively outside the mainstream of the international community, and has not been able to keep up with the tide of the Third Industrial Revolution (technological and scientific revolution) after the World War II, and the current of globalization, and has not been able to keep up with the ever-changing world, thus making China "One step behind, one step behind."

   Half of the credit for China's transformation from "penniless" in the late 1970s to the world's second-largest economy, and from having the world's lowest GDP per capita to surpassing the world's average, should be attributed to its internal reforms, and the other half lies in opening up to the outside world, which are interrelated and indispensable to each other.

    Although the international system and the related rules and order dominated by Western countries in Europe and the United States are not entirely fair and have many serious flaws, and developing countries have indeed suffered losses, it is still the most humane, peaceful and prosperous international system in the history of mankind, and it has maximized the promotion of economic development and improvement of people's rights and livelihoods. Compared with the ancient and even modern empire bloody conquest, colonial oppression, monarchy, genocide and other norms of the world, in recent decades the international community dominated by Europe and the United States is not calm and harmonious, but the killing and destruction is 95% less is not an exaggeration.

   It is also worth mentioning that China's victory in the War of Resistance Against Japan and the International Anti-Fascist War was made possible by China's active appeal for international mediation and the sympathy and support of many governments and civil society organizations around the world. With such experience, the Chinese people should be more supportive of the international community's intervention in the Russian-Ukrainian war, and support Ukraine's struggle against aggression, in defense of sovereignty, and in pursuit of peace; they should also be more supportive of and join the international multilateral cooperation system based on humanity and peace, and universal values.

   The universal values advocated by the West, such as freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law, are indeed the direction in which mankind should move forward. Even China, Russia and other countries do not deny these concepts, but believe that the connotation and realization are different from those of the West. As far as practice is concerned, Europe and the United States are clearly better than China and Russia in practicing universal human rights. If China and Russia had replaced Europe and the United States as the dominant players in the international order, the situation of human rights in the world would have been far worse than it is now. I am afraid that the human rights situation in the world is far less optimistic than it is now. In addition, Europe and the United States are significantly ahead of other countries in terms of scientific, technological and cultural innovation and creation, environmental protection, and the building of a pluralistic and inclusive society.

  Therefore, integrating into the Western-dominated international system and complying with the relevant rules and order will do more good than harm. Moreover, if China truly integrates into the universal value system, with its population and economic scale, deep cultural heritage, and the various contributions it has made to the world since World War II, it can fully join the West as a member or even the chief of the rule-setting and dominant order. Japan and South Korea in recent decades close to the West, successful integration, but also become more influential than most of the Western countries in the international order of participants and shapers, is worthy of China's emulation of the former example. And India in these past years has been rising rapidly and actively participating in international affairs, becoming a pivotal force in the international community. India's attitude in the Russo-Ukrainian war has successfully balanced India's relations with the West, with Ukraine, and with Russia in a way that is much more astute and beneficial to its own economy and foreign relations than that of China, which also has friendly relations with Russia.

   In recent years, China has taken a different and rather worrisome path that is almost completely opposite to the previous paths of other countries and China itself. Unlike the 1980s and 2000s, when China was firmly committed to reform and opening up, drawing closer to the West, and focusing on economic construction, in recent years China has increasingly emphasized the issues of "political security," "economic security," and "security," putting emphasis on maintaining the system. "China has also put the maintenance of institutional stability at the forefront of its efforts to "decouple" itself from the West and reduce its dependence on the West.

    China has not only refused to join Western-dominated systems and organizations, but it has also "started a new one" by intensifying its relations with Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cambodia, etc., and has explicitly criticized the positions and policies of the West, rejected its actions, and confronted the West and even the broader liberal-democratic camp. And regardless of the specific rights and wrongs of the disputes, China tends to "go against" the West. China's behavior on the Taiwan issue, the Sino-Philippine conflict in the South China Sea, and the Russo-Ukrainian war, among others, fully reflect this tendency.

  Although China has repeatedly expressed its disapproval of the "decoupling" of China and the US/China, and its leaders often visit Europe, the US, Canada and Australia, and have introduced unilateral visa waivers and other facilitation measures to attract people from all over the world to travel to China, these limited enlightened words and actions cannot hide the overall tendency to re-close the door to the rest of the world. Just as in the early 1970s, when China opened the door to visits by friendly people from all over the world, organized translations of books into foreign languages, and reduced the amount of propaganda criticizing "imperialism," this did not change the overall situation of closed-door isolation.

   China's refusal to attend the Swiss Peace Summit, its hard-line approach on the Sino-Philippine conflict, and its fierce criticism of European and American policies related to China better reflect the essence of China's stance in the foreign sphere than technical and enlightened measures. China's domestic political and economic reforms have stagnated or even regressed, making China more incompatible with the Western-dominated international system, and China's tendency to become more and more closed off has become more and more obvious. The shrinking of Hong Kong's status as a financial center in the past few years, and the control of entry during the "zero" period of the new crown, are also examples of China's decreasing foreign exchanges.

  This Swiss peace summit was supposed to be an opportunity for China to show its influence as a great power, to promote international peace, and to win more favor and benefits for China. Ukrainian President Zelensky made several overtures to China before the conference, hoping that China would participate in the summit and contribute to the withdrawal of Russian troops. Western countries also want China to participate in the meeting. But China has refused to participate, and it has sometimes implicitly and explicitly sided with Russia. China has put forward an "alternative proposal" to achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine, but that proposal is clearly in favor of Russia, and does not require Russia to withdraw its troops, return occupied Ukrainian territories, and opposes Western military assistance to Ukraine, which Ukraine is of course unwilling to accept.

   China's refusal to participate in the Swiss summit and its refusal to engage in direct dialogue with Zelensky means that China has thrown away the olive branch handed to it by Zelensky and the West, and that it would rather jeopardize the relations between China and Ukraine, China and Europe, and China and the United States than side with Russia.

   This is not in China's national interest (or even detrimental to it), but Chinese officials are still adamant about it. This is a reflection of China's diplomatic principles and undertone of anti-Westernism, refusal to join the Western-dominated international system, and rejection of an international order based on universal values, which it has upheld for years. This is not in line with China's national interests, contradicts the modern norms of humanitarian and peaceful international relations, and does not represent the will of the majority of Chinese nationals.

   But I am afraid that China's diplomatic position and policy will continue for a long time. There is nothing the author can do about it. However, as a Chinese national, I would like to use this article to express my personal attitude and concerns about China's foreign policy.

   Practice has proved that opening up to the outside world is the right way for China to become prosperous and strong. Some years ago there were heated controversies over the introduction of foreign capital and technology and accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), and many nationals were afraid of opening up. The subsequent prosperity proved that the introduction of foreign capital and accession to the WTO were correct. The closure of the 1950s and 1970s, and the "zeroing out" of the 2020s and 2022s, have brought about economic stagnation and the impoverishment of the people. Doesn't this lesson illustrate the importance of opening up to the outside world and actively engaging in foreign exchanges?

  When it comes to international issues, one should not decide on policies based on dogma and gambling like "whatever the West supports is opposed, whatever the West opposes is supported", but should make judgments and decisions based on the rights and wrongs of the matter itself. For example, on the Palestinian-Israeli issue, China can criticize the West's favoritism towards Israel; but in the Russia-Ukraine war, China should oppose Russia's invasion. In this way, China can win more respect from all countries, instead of just forming a small circle with Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cambodia and other countries to "entertain themselves".

   The author hopes that Chinese people from all walks of life, especially foreign affairs decision-makers, should understand the value of opening up to the outside world, the benefits of globalization, the necessity of following the modern international order, and put aside their narrow-mindedness and dogma, and be reasonable and rational in their foreign relations, basing all their decisions on the interests of the country and people's livelihoods. When Chinese officials are unable to fulfill such a responsibility, Chinese civil society, including people in all fields, should actively promote China's reasonable, ethical and beneficial exchanges with the outside world for the sake of China's national interests and national honor. In this way, China will gain the respect of more countries and become a force for peace and human rights in the international community in the twenty-first century with great influence.