1. Arrangement of the Future Permanent Mechanism

The future permanent mechanism is crucial to thesuccess of the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) and the long-term stability and security in global cyberspace. The UN framework for responsible State behaviour in the use of ICTs (hereinafter referred to as “Framework”), the valuable consensus reached among member States through over 20 years’ discussions, is the cornerstone of international rules and order in cyberspace as well as the important foundation of the work of the future permanent mechanism. China bears the following views in this regard:

First, upholding and developing the Framework is an important task of the UN ICT security process. There are two representative review mechanisms in the field of disarmament. One is the review mechanism of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the other is the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (PoA).The two mechanisms are essentially different. The NPT review mechanism is based on the treaty, which establishes a normative framework from scratch for the international community. Without the treaty, nuclear non-proliferation would not have become an international consensus. All the following NPT review mechanisms are aimed at implementing and strengthening thenormative framework. The PoA is different, as it represents a strong international consensus on addressing the issue of illicit trade and excessive accumulation of small arms and light weapons. There is no need to establish a new normative framework, and countries only need to take concrete actions to achieve this common goal. Over the past 20 some years, the greatest achievement in the filed of ICT security has been establishment of the normative Framework from scratch. In this sense, the ICT security process bears more resemblance to NPT than PoA. Therefore,upholding and continuously developing the normative Framework is the core task of the future mechanism on ICT security.

Second,it is essential to uphold the Five Pillars (threats, norms,internationallaw, confidence-building measures, capacity-building) to adhere to the Framework. The Five Pillars are not the pillars of OEWG,but the pillars of the Framework. Organizing meetings strictly in accordance with the Five Pillars demonstrates our commitment to the Framework. If, as some member States suggest, the future mechanism discusses specific issues such as ICT resilience and deviates from the Framework, it will inevitably lead to the result that the Framework will gradually be abandoned over time. Therefore, when considering the future permanent mechanism, especially the issue of dedicated thematic groups,we must explicitly adhere to the Five Pillars.

Lastly, I would like to remind everyone that the third annual progress report explicitly writes that the dedicated thematic groups are to be established by decisions of the future permanent mechanism. Therefore,dedicated thematic group is not a requisite for achieving success of the final session in July. Meanwhile, I would like to emphasize again that China believes issues such as data security, supply chain security and attribution evidence should be given priority in future discussions, andcould be topics of future dedicated thematic groups. China is ready to conduct further discussions with all parties.

2. Modalities on the Participation of Other Interested PartiesandStakeholders,including Businesses,Non-governmental Organizations and Academia

Regarding the participation of other interested parties and stakeholders, including businesses, non-governmental organizations and academia (hereinafter referred to as “stakeholders”), we need to clarify some basic but very important facts at first.

First,the participation of stakeholders is an important supplement but not a must. History has proved that we can achieve significant results without the participation of stakeholders. None of the previous UN GGEs have involved participation of stakeholders. It is the member States’ joint efforts that have led to the formulation of the 11 norms of responsible State behaviour and the current Framework.

Second, there are many occasions outside the OEWG where stakeholders can discuss cyber and digital issues, such as the IGF. But member States only have one platform, that is the OEWG. Exploiting the issue of modalities on stakeholder participation to hold back or even obstruct the discussions of the OEWG is extremely unfair to member States.

Third, the vast majority of stakeholders are non-politicized professional groups, but we also regret to note that quite a few stakeholders have become certain State governments’ tools for spreading disinformation for geopolitical gains. It has been recently disclosed by media that some stakeholders even accepted direct funding from foreign governments and serve their political goals. Some of these stakeholders also applied for accreditation to the OEWG. Therefore, as a principleChina welcomes the participation of stakeholders, but such participation is not unconditional. It must be based on the prerequisite of not infringing upon the prerogative of member States and abiding by the rules jointly agreed by member States.

Taking the participation of stakeholders as a “political correctness” is a bubble lack of factual basis. It is time to burst this bubble.

I would like to make it clear that China does not support the modalities on stakeholder participation in the current draft. The core point is that a member State has no obligation to engage in so-called “informal consultations” after its objection to a stakeholder. Meanwhile, I would like to reaffirm that China, in its good political will and on the basis of safeguarding the rights and interests of member States, is ready to discuss with all member States to make appropriate amendments to the current draft to find a fairer solution.

3. Concluding Remarks after the Adoption of the Final Report by Consensus

It’s a great pleasure for all that the session has just adopted the final report, and in particular, reached important consensus on establishing the first permanent Global Mechanism on security of and in the use of ICTs.There is no doubt that today is a successful day of special and far-reaching significance.

First, the result today indicates that our mechanism has passed an important stress test. In today’s challenging geopolitical environment,regional wars and conflicts are still ongoing, and some States’ enthusiasm in multilateralismis fading away. At such a time when the international system is facing grave difficulties, the achievements today have strengthened the confidence of all parties in multilateralism.

Second, in terms of multilateral ICT security process, we haveachieved a new milestone today. As early as in 1998, ICT security first became an agenda of the UN. Recalling the past 27 years, we have achieved two most significant milestones: one is the formation of the framework for responsible State behaviour, and the other is the establishment of a permanent Global Mechanism agreed today.With the development of technology, many new topics for international discussions have emerged. The achievements we have made through the past 27 years in the ICT field can also serve as an important model for global governance in other emerging areas.

Third, China always supports multilateralism, supports the UN and supports international rules. We all admit that the current multilateral system is not perfect, international rules are not developed well enough,and countries’ compliance with the rules is also far from satisfactory.However, China believes that we should strengthen and improve the existing mechanism through multilateral efforts rather than simply walk away from it or even abandon it. Without a multilateral system, the international community would fall into a jungle world where all parties contest from a position of strength. Probably only a few States could be at the table, while more States would be on the menu. Therefore,the multilateral system holds special significance for all member States,especially for small and medium-sized ones.

Finally, I would like to express special gratitude to Mr. Chair,Ambassador Gafoor. Thanks to your belief in multilateralism, rich experience in diplomacy and profound understandings in cyber issues and concerns of member States, our session can reach a final success. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Chair’s team and the Secretariat for their significant contributions.

The achievement today is a victory for multilateralism, a victory for all member States, and a victory for each and every cyber diplomat here in this room.