Many of the G7s hopes and wants for the world appear to have been lifted directly from official documents of the Communist Party of China (CPC). Theres no real benefit to debating whether the G7 is copying the CPCs policy program, although it smells of plagiarism. China is pleased that more countries are willing to study, absorb and even copy China’s experience. There are so many similarities between the G7 communiqu and China’s propositions, there is no reason to be unhappy.

China’s foreign ministry was rightly outraged by the G7s communiqu from last months summit in Hiroshima, Japan. A section titled “China” reiterated the Wests anti-China trope, suggesting it was not committed to peace and equality in its global development goals. The communiqu also had the temerity to once again interfere with Chinas domestic affairs, which is not worth discussing here.

How ironic it was that after reading the entire 40-page communique, I found many of the G7s hopes and wants for the world appear to have been lifted directly from official documents of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

For example, Article 1 of the G7 communiqu mentions it hopes to “strengthen our partnerships with African countries and support greater African representation in multilateral forums, which is precisely a key goal of China’s foreign policy. Over the past few decades, the first country Chinese foreign ministers visit each year is in Africa.

Article 8 of the G7 communiqu talks about “addressing potential risks to the stability, resilience and integrity of the monetary and financial system,” which exactly matches one of the three major domestic development objectives proposed by China in 2017.

Article 10 of the G7 communiqu states that “achieving the sustainable development goals by 2030, reducing poverty, responding to global challenges including the climate crisis, and addressing debt vulnerabilities in low and middle-income countries are urgent, interrelated and mutually reinforcing”, which is a foundational concept of Chinas 14th five-year plan. The communiqu never mentions China’s extraordinary contributions to the UN’s 2030 goals, nor the vast amount of aid it has provided to low and middle-income countries.

Article 14 of the communiqu goes on to “stress the importance of narrowing the infrastructure investment gap in low and middle income partner countries, including by delivering financing for quality infrastructure. Interesting isnt it, that this is exactly what Chinas Belt and Road Initiative has been doing since 2013.

Over the past ten years, China has signed cooperation agreements under the Belt and Road Initiative with 151 countries, raising more than US$700 billion for infrastructure and other cooperation projects. The G7 Communiqu, meanwhile meekly reads “We reaffirm our shared commitment to the G7 Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) and working together and aiming to mobilise up to $600 billion by 2027.”

I can only hope this better-late-than-never gesture doesnt end as yet another broken promise and a pile of excuses.

So, we can see that the spirit of cooperation advocated in the G7 communiqu is the same as that of the Chinese Communist Party. Article 3 of the G7 communique, even uses the term “achieve a world that is human-centred.”

“Human-centred” is the key ethos found in Chinese President Xi Jinpings report to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2017, and reiterated in the report of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2022.

Theres no real benefit to debating whether the G7 is copying the CPCs policy program, although it smells of plagiarism. China welcomes countries to emulate Chinas development success. Over the past decade, many developing countries have followed the concepts embedded in Chinas five-year plan. Some governments are learning how to implement the process by studying the teaching of China’s Party school system. Chinas Party school is training qualified officials, who are learning much needed skills to form an efficient bureaucracy to better govern their country.

China is pleased that more countries are willing to study, absorb and even copy China’s experience. There are so many similarities between the G7 communiqu and China’s propositions, there is no reason to be unhappy.

The focus of this column isnt to argue about whether there can be a violation of intellectual property rights of a policy agenda. Its to point out that when realist international competition is discarded, its obvious that the G7 and China are striving to build a better world and satisfy people’s yearning for a better life.

When we look objectively at a number of development markers we see that since the turn of the century, China has done far better than the G7 in pursuing a better world and a better life for its people.

Chinese cities are far safer than those in the United States, France, Britain, and Italy. China has twice the length of high-speed railways than all the G7 countries combined. Chinese people spend 10 times as much as people in G7 countries using electronic payments, and its possible China will become the world’s first cashless society. The growth of China’s digital economy is faster than any of the G7 countries. This has led to lowering costs and increasing ultra-efficient express delivery, food delivery, and electronic ride hailing, enabling low- and middle-income earners to enjoy cheaper services in China.

Chinese infrastructure contractors are working on projects in more than 190 countries and regions around the world, accounting for about a quarter of the global infrastructure market, involving transportation, electricity, housing, communications, petrochemicals, environmental protection and other fields. They are helping African countries build more than 10,000 Kilometres of roads, more than 6,000 kilometres of railways, more than 80 large-scale power facilities, nearly 20 ports, numerous airports, and more than 80 percent of their communication infrastructure. These vital and pragmatic projects have significantly contributed to the growing prosperity and sustainable development of African countries.

Chinas development and unequaled progress has also been achieved without going to war. Lets not forget that Britain, France, and Italy, brutally colonised the underdeveloped world in 18th century, or Germany and Japans murderous fascism in the 20th century, and the US wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, military interventions in South America, and which now continues to fuel the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

China is achieving its success in manner that is the antitheses of the dreadful historical practices of G7 countries.

The history of the early 21st century will clearly show China is the winner in the unnecessary competition between China and the G7 countries in making a better world. Perhaps communiqu drafters of the G7 countries were reflecting on this fact, and that is why so many of China’s long-held policies are found in this years G7 communiqu.

I agree with FT Columnist Martin Wolf who wrote “G7 must accept it is no longer top dog as BRICS group advances.” His reference to Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa clearly shows the G7 is no longer able to dominate the world.

But the diminished role of the G7 isnt due to the rise of BRICS countries. Its because the G7 continues to cling to its own self interest, and developing counties can clearly see the G7 has long been playing with a stacked deck.

China is fine with the G7 copying its policy provisions, but also wants to see it match Chinas results. We are reminded of a Confucius saying from 2,200 years ago: “When you see the virtuous think the same.” If the G7 can really help create a better world, China will be happy to learn from the G7, just as it used to do in the 1980s.

The future world will not be realpolitik under the logic of realism. Whether it is the United States, or other G7 countries, or China, the key to winning the future is not to defeat the other, but to do better.

In this regard, China, the G7 and BRICS countries have to work harder together.