Introduction
Over the past two decades, China has emerged as the world’s second-largest economy and has been expanding its influence worldwide, aiming to regain its centrality not only in the international system but also in global governance institutions. In recent decades, China has been challenging the Western-led liberal international order, providing alternative Chinese-led models to the world. Under the leadership of Xi Jinping, China aspires to alter the architecture of global governance. This ambition led to the development of Chinese-led regional groupings, economic collaborations, and politico-economic international institutions to legitimize China’s global governance.
In order to perceive China as a global power and gain the acceptance of Chinese values and norms, the global institutions play a significant role. In pursuit of manifesting the Chinese multifaceted global governance strategy, China has established an international mediation-based body in Hong Kong, a new chapter in global governance. On May 30, 2025, China signed the Convention on the Establishment of the International Organization for Mediation (IOMed), setting up the global mediation body which will be on par with the International Court of Justice. The signing ceremony presided over by the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was attended by the representatives of 85 countries across Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America. The convention was co-signed by the 33 countries on site, ranging from Pakistan, Indonesia and Belarus, to Cuba, Venezuela, and Papua New Guinea.
The Objective and Nature of IOMed
IOMed, according to the Chinese officials, is the first formal intergovernmental legal organization dedicated to settling international disputes through mediation. The organization is primarily focused on mediating international disputes of an economic and political nature. Although not completely excluded, armed conflicts are not highlighted as the key priorities of the organization. Given its sensitivity to the nature of sovereignty and domestic governance, China is unlikely to expand the scope of the organization’s work to internal state conflicts, civil wars, and local insurgencies.
According to the deputy director general of the department of treaty and law of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sun Jin, IOMed covers three types of cases: interstate, international commercial, and investment disputes. The principles of legal proceedings would be quite similar to international arbitration, with the notable exception of legally enforceable rulings of arbitration.
Therefore, the IOMed is presented as a multilateral institution rather than a state mediation actor that is akin to the International Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice. Sun characterized the IOMed as a healthy supplement to current dispute settlement approaches and institutions.
Implications for China’s Global Governance
China’s approach to the liberal international order is marked by selective acceptance of certain aspects while rejecting or sidestepping others. China backs international norms, agreements, and institutions that align with its values, goals, and norms. The prime examples are the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the World Bank, etc. Whereas, it deviates from the norms of the existing system that differ from its interests, such as the matters of human rights, sovereignty, etc. On the matters in which Beijing deviates from the norms of the current world order, it aims to subvert those principles and establish alternative models and institutions. Hence, the International Organization for Mediation is an evident manifestation of China’s multipronged approach to global governance.
The Xi administration seeks to advance a notion of China as a new kind of global actor that is essentially distinct from the other great powers. China aims to be perceived as a global power that will not repeat the transgressions and mistakes of the past imperialist colonizers. The CCP attempts to manifest this fundamental distinction both in China’s bilateral relations and in its initiatives at the global level. In this regard, the regional groupings, multilateral forums, and global governance institutions play a significant role in projecting the Chinese notion of being a distinct global power.
Chinese initiatives encompass the range of more or less formal international bodies and regional forums such as BRICS, BRI, AIIB, Silk Road Fund, FOCAC, etc. International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) is a new addition to this list. IOMed is expected to open up new avenues in the realm of international dispute resolution through mediation, placing itself as a potential competitor to current international dispute settlement mechanisms. According to Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Minister, the establishment of IOMed will help surpass the zero-sum approach of win or lose and promote the amicable resolution of international disputes.
Future Prospects
The future trajectory of IOMed is closely linked with the strategic ambitions of China and the restoration of Hong Kong’s international image. Anticipated to go operational by the end of 2025 or early 2026, IOMed is positioned as a keystone of China’s broader vision of reforming global governance.
Hong Kong: A Mediation Hub
The selection of Hong Kong as the headquarters of IOMed offers a distinct legal environment. As a multilingual English-Chinese jurisdiction with foundations in common law and connections to civil law, China believes that Hong Kong’s strategic location can bridge the East and West. Moreover, according to the 2025 survey conducted by Queen Mary University, Hong Kong, tied with Singapore, has been recognized as the second most preferred arbitration, just behind London. Hence, Hong Kong as a mediation hub has reinforced its already established status as a global arbitration site.
Furthermore, IOMed is also envisioned to play a significant role in the post-pandemic and post-protest economic revival of Hong Kong. Hong Kong, according to the officials – including Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu and Secretary for Justice Paul Lam – will expand the city’s status from being an international financial hub to an international legal-service hub. IOMed has the potential to create job opportunities, catalyze economic growth, and stimulate the hospitality and legal sectors.
Apart from the suggested potential of IOMed, there are also challenges to the credibility associated with the Chinese approach of choosing Hong Kong as a strategic location for mediation. Critics contend that the impartiality of IOMed is called into question due to China’s growing influence and shrinking political liberties of Hong Kong.
Global South Advocacy
With its ambition to reform the global governance structure, China also aims to position itself as a leader of the Global South. Beijing’s goal to influence global governance by providing alternative forums that emphasize mediation over adjudication is a paradigm that aligns more with the Global South perspective. The establishment of IOMed affirms China’s leadership of the Global South and strengthens the voice of the Global South in the domain of international law. To settle commercial disputes and international investment, especially those arising from China’s Belt and Road initiative, the development of legal forums is necessary and a growing need.
The Road Ahead
The success of IOMed and its recognition on par with the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the International Court of Justice remains to be seen. Despite the optimism from the Chinese leadership, there are reservations regarding the non-binding nature of mediation, and the absence of major global and legal powers could hamper the credibility of IOMed.
To thrive, IOMed needs to produce tangible results and successful high-profile mediations that are regarded as just and efficient. Therefore, the legitimacy of IOMed mainly depends on independence and impartiality, along with procedural competence. The organization will be at risk of being ignored if it is perceived as nothing more than a China’s soft power instrument. Nevertheless, it has the potential to emerge as a serious competitor to existing international dispute settlement institutions if it functions on the principles of inclusiveness, legal rigor, and transparency.
In conclusion, the International Organization for Mediation stands at a crossroads. Its future and efficacy depend on how it navigates institutional legitimacy and geopolitical skepticism. In the short term, China’s led IOMed is unlikely to replace the existing global legal institutions since, currently, Western exclusion is evident. However, in the long term, IOMed potentially can challenge the existing international system if it succeeds in developing a legitimate and distinct alternative mechanism to settle disputes through mediation. Hence, there is a long way to go for IOMed, and it will require time to demonstrate where on the spectrum IOMed will fall.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
Tahniyat Mobeen is a graduate of international relations from Kinnaird College for Women. As an aspiring researcher, her primary areas of interest encompass strategic studies, political economy, and foreign policy analysis. With a profound understanding of global affairs, she aims to provide meaningful insights into complex geopolitical issues.