As these lines are drawn the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China sits in its fourth plenary session (20-23 October 2025). Beijing’s brand of diplomacy has made extensive achievements in the process of reform and opening up despite the tangled and complex domestic and international situations.

It has earnestly sought to achieve progress through stability, promote reform through openness, and raise the capacity of openness to expand international cooperation. China’s diplomacy also pursues an unparalleled “firm and resolute” independent peaceful policy, and pushes to build a community of common destiny based on respect and application of common values. Therefore, Chinese diplomacy has put forward the four global initiatives namely development, security, civilization, and governance with the aim of achieving international multilateralism on the basis of fairness and justice and respect for the rights and sovereignty of all countries to achieve peace and sustainable development.

Hence, it is necessary to pay attention to reform and openness by uniting efforts, mobilizing forces, achieving progress in all seriousness and vitality, and then completing the construction of a modern and strong system.

The Importance of Success of Chinese diplomacy

Beijing put forward a set of initiatives and ideas that are in harmony with the spirit and aspirations of international law to resolve most international issues. The importance of this lies in the reconsideration of the current international system to work on a sound and just basis, doing away from strengthening the control of one or some parties over the international decision-making process in order to achieve special interests, or reduce respect for the sovereignty and rights of states or interfere in their internal affairs of others. For China every state is equal under the international law in rights and duties.

Chinese diplomacy has come through with a series of initiatives towards the most outstanding international issues. These initiatives offer actual solutions in line with local and international aspirations and laws. Beijing did not impose solutions in order to build alliances against any party, nor did it seek to compliment one party at the expense of the rights of others. China’s aim has been of one of re-activating international institutions to resolve fundamental issues. The absence of multilateralism in international governance means the formation of groups and alliances in order to strengthen control away from the Rule of Law, Justice and international consensus.

Therefore, the importance of supporting the success of the goals and principles of Chinese diplomacy is a collective responsibility that everyone bears by cooperating with China to solve vital international issues, especially since the success of the goals of that diplomacy concerns not only the Chinese, but also others with the goal of achieving sustainable peace and development. The world is going through complex challenges and circumstances, and this requires strengthening cooperation and joint action from all parties in order to achieve collective and common benefit in maintaining international peace and security, as well as sustaining the effectiveness of the two international covenants on human rights in 1976, the International Covenant on civil and political rights and the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights.

2013: Landmark Year: Belt and Road is Launched

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping launched the Belt and Road Initiative, which the Chinese leadership considers a successful attempt to strengthen regional and international communication to embrace a more stable, open and prosperous future on the basis of equality among all without exception, based on mutual respect and benefit. Between 2021-2025, Chinese President Xi Jinping also launched the Four Global Initiatives for:

1.Development 2. Security 3. Civilization 4. Governance  

in order to collectively confirm that all of humanity has a historic opportunity to promote unity, sustainable cooperation, human solidarity, and civilized exchanges.

Accordingly, Chinese diplomacy is seeking to support and strengthen the work of the United Nations to be more effective to solve various international core issues. Multilateralism is at the core of Beijing’s foreign and security policy.

Effectiveness of Chinese diplomacy in the international system

The United Nations Organization was founded in 1945 after the Second World War. The Charter of the United Nations specified that the purpose of its establishment is to protect international peace and security, and the development of international relations between states on the basis of mutual respect for all regardless of the size, wealth and power of each state, as well as respect for the principle of equal rights. In this context, Chinese diplomacy aims to strengthen the role and status of the international system by emphasizing the international consensus. In Beijing’s frame of mind domination by any strong member state must be ruled out.

The Middle East region has been living in a state of instability as a result of the continued absence of a solution to the Palestinian issue, eroding international peace and security.

The root cause of the ME instability is the disregard of influential countries to abide by international law. Chinese diplomacy seeks through effective cooperation with the countries of the region to promote Arab and regional unity and solidarity in order to arrive at inclusive stability and prosperity.

The Global Governance Initiative, recently launched by President Xi Jinping, coinciding with the anniversary of Victory Day in September 2025, emphasizes the importance of the governance of the international system to be more powerful and effective in solving all international issues. Salient among these is the governance of the Middle East through the resolution of its outstanding issues.

Primary task is to address the Palestinian issue on the basis of justice, equity and the rule of international law. This is the only way to achieve security therefore peace, stability and prosperity.

With the forty years free ride on Northern Cyprus and a sea incursion of Southern Cyprus clearly in the making, it is high time we carefully examined the war crimes committed: transplantation of tens of thousands of settlers into the occupied foreign territory has been a palpable fact, a liability for which Ankara so far paid no price. By so doing Turkey destroyed the fabric of Cypriot society, be it Turkish or Greek Cypriot.

The Cypriot President has been too complacent in his approach. He patiently waited for the first Turkish sea incursion (October-December 2014) to pass by reiterating his resolve to return to the talks for a comprehensive settlement in Cyprus. Bowing to an inexplicable UN envoy proposal (and/or US pressure?) to discuss sovereignty over natural resources in the talks before settling the bounds of sovereignty of the state-to-be, President Anastasiades conceded to discuss the issue of hydrocarbons, whilst it is the RoC’s sovereign inalienable right to exploit them as the government of Cyprus deems appropriate.

Anastasiades’ thoughtless concession was immediately met by another big brother type provocation: Barbaros, the Turkish seismic research vessel – which, it should be noted, never left Cypriot waters, only docking once more unlawfully in the closed port of Famagusta pending orders from Ankara – returns to incur in the sea zones overlapping the internationally recognized Cyprus EEZ as close as seventeen nautical miles south of Limassol! The new incursion, announced by big brother Ankara, will last for three months, exceeding in length and intensity the previous one (see our analysis above: ‘Warm Waters: 70 Hot Days Ahead’).

How do these Turkish actions translate in the wider context of energy resources exploration in the Levantine basin and the much debated European energy security? It becomes abundantly clear that Ankara acts as the big brother and is bent on exercising the upper hand on the Eastern Mediterranean hydrocarbon reserves irrespective of the provisions of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Ankara appears disrespectful of multilateralism whereas the Republic of Cyprus has painstakingly over the past ten years entered into negotiations and arrived into negotiated sea delimitation agreements with most of its neighbours.

Put simply, Cyprus acts within the framework of international law and multilateralism, the principle that should guide international relations. Turkey, on the opposite end violates international law and continues to act outside its framework.

The Turkish policy record, a short illustration of which is offered above, should sober down all those who ponder over emboldening Ankara even further by suggesting the construction of gas pipelines from the Eastern Mediterranean sea to the Turkish mainland.