Erik Brattberg, David Whineray
{
"authors": [
"David Whineray"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "EP",
"programs": [
"Europe"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
The G2 at the UN: The United States and the People’s Republic of China at the United Nations Before COVID-19
The role and powers of the World Health Organization (WHO), for example, have emerged as a canvas onto which a variety of actors have projected their visions of the future of multilateralism.
Source: United Nations Center for Policy Research
Events surrounding the COVID-19 crisis have brought into focus the extent to which multilateralism generally, and the United Nations specifically, will be a central theatre for engagement between the United States and China in the years ahead. The role and powers of the World Health Organization (WHO), for example, have emerged as a canvas onto which a variety of actors have projected their visions of the future of multilateralism. However, to see how these engagements will play out, it is important to first have an understanding of the deeper, longerterm trendlines regarding US-China engagement at the UN before COVID-19 hit. This study aims to assist in providing that context.
This article was originally published by the Financial Times.
About the Author
Former Nonresident Fellow, Europe Program
David Whineray was a nonresident fellow in the Europe Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC.
- How Europe Views Transatlantic Relations Ahead of the 2020 U.S. ElectionArticle
- The Pros and Cons of a European Security CouncilCommentary
David Whineray
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Network and Structural Power: The Four Trend Lines Weakening U.S. LeveragePaper
Networks—from international payments platforms to key economic sectors—underlie many aspects of U.S. power. But they are suffering under an extractive approach to foreign policy.
Daniel W. Drezner
- Why Europe Cannot Negotiate a New Yalta with RussiaCommentary
While Russia is not ready to sue for peace on Europe’s terms, it could still either seek a ceasefire in Ukraine or try escalation. Brussels needs to prepare for both and prioritize that preparation over normative discussions.
Kadri Liik
- Kurdish Rebel Groups Are Wary of Tehran’s Next MoveCommentary
Following its deal with the United States, Iran may act against Iraq-based dissidents.
Wladimir van Wilgenburg
- A Thousand Days After October 7, Washington Still Has No Strategic PlanCommentary
Five major trends are shaping U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller
- Will American Power in Europe Run Out?Paper
American power is entrenched in Europe. Yet the depth of this relationship has become a source of unease in Europe and Europeans are working to reduce their exposure to the vicissitudes of U.S. politics wherever they can.
Sophia Besch, Tara Varma