The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is using money, collaboration with authoritarian allies, and manipulation of rules to shift the international human rights system’s priorities and discussions to advance narratives and issues that are friendly to China. For example, Beijing has secured the inclusion of independent experts in the United Nations Special Procedures system who work on issues that align with Beijing’s interests and is populating the U.N. with Government Organized NGOs (GONGOs) that act as mouthpieces for the Chinese government.
In the past, the experts in the Special Procedures system and civil society organizations have played a crucial role in spotlighting China’s human rights abuses. But now Beijing is utilizing them to promote issues and narratives that align with China’s interests.
China and the U.N. Special Procedures
Among Beijing’s targets are the U.N. Special Procedures, which comprises roughly 60 independent experts who focus on a theme or country. The Special Procedures have spoken out about the worsening repression in China, issuing over two dozen joint statements expressing alarm about the PRC’s crackdown on Hong Kong, human rights defenders, and ethnic groups, particularly the Uyghur community, with some of the statements attracting over 40 signatures.
While the majority of Special Procedures focus on crucial human rights issues, such as torture or freedom of expression, and demonstrate integrity, China and other authoritarian countries have begun creating Special Procedures with mandates that favor their views, such as the Special Rapporteur on “Unilateral Coercive Measures,” a term intended to give sanctions a negative gloss, and the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Development, to name a few.
Even though sanctions have long been a human rights tool, including to resist apartheid in South Africa, China and other countries that have been the target of sanctions managed to secure passage of a 2014 Human Rights Council (HRC) resolution that created a Special Rapporteur on Unilateral Coercive Measures.
Despite opposition from a number of liberal democracies, including the U.S., the resolution, which was introduced by Iran, created in the United Nations an independent expert to examine “the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures.” It passed following a contentious vote with support from nations such as China, Russia, and Venezuela.
After securing the creation of this position, Beijing and other authoritarian countries have cooperated with the mandate holder and provided funding. For example, since 2015, Russia, China, and Qatar – which are categorized as “not free” by Freedom House – have donated $1,325,000 (with roughly $800,000 coming from China) to the mandate on unilateral coercive measures. Although rapporteurs do not receive a salary from the U.N., states can use donations to a specific Special Procedure to help support the mandate holder’s work by funding travel, staff, and research assistance. Most Special Procedures receive only enough funding to cover two trips per year and one staff position to support the independent expert. Therefore, additional funding can elevate and amplify a particular Special Procedure mandate.
The current mandate holder serving as the Rapporteur on Unilateral Coercive Measures is from Belarus. Following a May 2024 visit to China, she criticized the use of sanctions imposed in response to Beijing’s genocidal campaign against the Uyghur ethnic minority and called on states to lift sanctions against China.
A Contradiction in Terms: GONGOs
The Chinese government is similarly misusing platforms intended for independent civil society to have a voice in the United Nations by flooding the global body with GONGOs. Unlike genuinely independent civil society, these organizations are either led by a Chinese government official or an official of the CCP. As the Washington Post noted, GONGOs pledge loyalty to the CCP or were established from the start by the Chinese party-state.
According to a recent investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the Chinese government has encouraged Chinese GONGOs to seek U.N. consultative status, even coaching them and conducting training on the process. As a result, there are nearly 60 PRC GONGOs with U.N. consultative status.
Consultative status allows civil society to speak at U.N. events, access the U.N. premises, and deliver statements in the U.N. PRC GONGOs are delivering statements sympathetic to China and express positions aligned with the Chinese government. For example, during the Human Rights Council’s Biennial on the Right to Development in 2024, Jeremy Young, a Hong Kong district council member, delivered the statement for the Beijing NGO Association for International Exchanges. Young asserted that “Hong Kong has stepped up the pace of development on all fronts thanks to the national security law and fine tuning the district governance model. There were projects that were stuck in political stalemates that are now completed…”
Similarly, during the 2022 Biennial Panel on sanctions, the Center for China and Globalization stated that “the majority of unilateral sanctions did not meet the permitted international rights obligations and standards… some Western countries overlooked the achievements of China in terms of poverty relief while blaming China for its policies against minority ethnic groups in Xinjiang Uyghur and Tibetan Autonomous Regions.”
This proliferation of PRC GONGOs shrinks space for genuinely independent NGOs to speak during U.N. sessions. When there are time constraints, some NGOs are not afforded time to speak and can only resort to uploading their statement to the HRC Extranet. China’s expanding reach into the United Nations comes at a time when many of the civil society groups that used the Council to hold authoritarian governments like China accountable are facing a funding crisis as the U.S. government and other key donors have shifted funding priorities.
China is using a similar tactic in the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a U.N. agency that facilitates cross-border operations of technology. China has advanced proposals in the ITU that could ease government surveillance of internet-connected devices, and is now increasing its influence in this body.
Over 45 Chinese companies are registered with the ITU as sector members, and they align with the Chinese government’s positions. As a participant in the ITU put it, “Sector members from China are fully aligned with the Chinese government. This is essentially increasing the Chinese government’s influence, and it is challenging the idea of one member, one vote.”
Resisting China’s Offensive
Resisting and reversing China’s efforts is possible if nations that want to preserve the U.N. human rights regime work in concert. In Geneva, they can begin by sitting on the Human Rights Council’s Consultative Group, which makes recommendations on the individuals to serve in the Special Procedures system and holds the HRC president accountable for selecting individuals with integrity. Instead of selecting individuals like Alena Douhan, a professor from Belarus who has labeled sanctions “illegal,” as the Special Rapporteur on Unilateral Coercive Measures, they can support the nomination of individuals who will offer balanced assessments and possess a genuine commitment to human rights.
In the U.N. and similar bodies, such as the ITU, it should be pointed out that the Chinese government’s totalitarian rule means that companies and civil society organizations are not independent. In New York, countries in the U.N. Economic and Social Council, and its subsidiary body, the U.N. NGO Committee, should insist that the U.N. enforce its own rules that stipulate that organizations should be independent of governments to qualify for consultative status. These nations should open a debate to discuss whether some of the PRC GONGOs should be stripped of their consultative status and require the U.N. to vet civil society applicants more thoroughly.
For decades, the People’s Republic of China has used a combination of manipulation of U.N. rules (such as invoking the no-action motion economic leverage) and political influence to prevent the U.N. Human Rights Council from criticizing China’s record, including defeating a 2022 HRC resolution that called for debate over Xinjiang. Beijing is maneuvering to turn the U.N. into a venue where China can advance its official positions and propagate PRC propaganda about its achievements, rather than a forum for accountability.
While the U.N. member states have always been susceptible to PRC influence, now other parts of the United Nations appear to be succumbing to China’s influence.
