China champions what is right through diplomatic means rather than military might, according to Adrian Severin, Romania's former deputy prime minister and foreign minister.

In this episode of "Diplomacy Talk," Severin says China prioritizes dialogue and partnership, while Western countries increasingly resort to economic sanctions and military strength to get their way. He points to China's four global initiatives — covering development, security, civilization and governance — as examples of how Beijing is promoting international cooperation.

Severin, who first visited China in the 1990s and has worked with Chinese officials for over 30 years, also discusses how Romania connects East and West, how Eastern European countries balance their relationships with both China and the United States, and how Belt and Road projects can boost trade and cultural exchange.

The veteran diplomat also talks about the Chinese cultural values of harmony and solidarity that he says are essential for reforming outdated international institutions, and calls on the Global South to take a greater leadership role in global governance.

Following is the transcript of the interview.

Diplomacy Talk: How many times have you been to China and what feels new or different on this trip?

Adrian Severin: It's hard to say how many times, because I didn't count them. My first visit in China took place in the 1990. The developments in China, they were amazing. And "amazing" is an understatement. Indeed, impressive. And what is also impressive is the fact that this development, this progress is due basically to genuine Chinese efforts and Chinese thinking. I would say that many achievements were made possible against the opposition of others, of foreign actors. So the rise of China was not applauded and supported by everybody in this world. And this was a reason for which I was even more impressed about what I saw here.

I saw the important cultural sites in China. I was in many other places. China is, somebody said, a continent; some others say it's a planet. I would say it's a universe. Certainly, it's difficult in a life time to know and understand the universe. But I think that parts of the Chinese universe I have met and I have appreciated, and I say I appreciate this fantastic development.

Diplomacy Talk: You have served as both Romania's deputy prime minister and foreign minister. Looking back, what experiences or moments most shape the way you think about diplomacy?

Adrian Severin: As a matter of principle, I think that any country has two armies. It's a classical military army, and it's the army of the diplomats. And if the military army is really in action only during wars; the diplomatic army is in action all time, including and maybe especially during the war.

My interaction with the Chinese policymakers and with the Chinese diplomats was very enriching and very inspiring. I believe that the diplomatic army is more important than the military army. Certainly, you were able to develop and you should develop a military army. Everybody is doing that. And certainly, the last resort of any diplomatic endeavor is the military one. But this is the last resort, not the first resort in the Chinese approach of the international relations. China is looking for the might of the right, the might of diplomacy and not the might of military. This is extremely important to me.

It's also important for your internal development, because you know most of your efforts are directed toward the economic and social development. It's also important for the international relations. Unfortunately, today, what we see is that there are countries which are able to win all wars, but they cannot win peace. And it's meaningless to win a war if you cannot win peace. Indeed, it is also true that some would like to see endless wars. And this is because they do not look for a new order, but they look for selling weapons and enriching the military-industrial complexes and maybe for dividing the world in order to rule it better, to control it better.

But for me, war is the means which should be used as little as possible. This is the China approach. This inspired me and encouraged me to go the same way. It was my approach as well. Always.

Diplomacy Talk: You have called Central and Eastern Europe a bridge between the East and the West. How do you see Romania helping to build better understanding and stronger cooperation between the two?

Adrian Severin: Romania is a good bridge, good gate and good anchor, if you want, and a good interpreter of the West for Eastern understanding and of the Eastern messages for Western understanding. It’s the best anchor for the Chinese ship in the European "big harbor." Certainly, we understand much better the Eastern philosophies, the Eastern mentalities, than some other Westerners. And probably we also understand better the Western mentalities than the people coming from the Far East. So, we could indeed facilitate the understanding, and this is very important.

Diplomacy Talk: China and Romania have had diplomatic ties for 76 years, with trade exceeding $10 billion for the past four years. So what do you think has kept these economic ties strong despite global challenges?

Adrian Severin: First of all, I think any sustainable policy is pushed ahead not by choice but by necessity. In Romania, we have a deep respect for China. And we consider that among the major global actors, China was always on Romania’s side, always friendly to Romania, even more than friendly sometimes, helpful to Romania. China was able to undertake risks in international relations in order to support Romania when Romania was in trouble or under threat. So Romanians noted that and remember that, and this could indeed explain why in spite of the difficulties, the relations are growing.

Romania is a member of the European Union. It's also a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. We have, of course, to align our policies with the policies of other members of the European Union who are our allies. To my mind and to my taste, we are aligning it too much. I think that we are full-fledged members of these bodies. And we have the full right to say no. It's not compulsory to always say yes. We are not subject of others. We are partners of the others. And certainly, as equal partners, we should say, "OK, there are a few things which are unacceptable for us, or they are compulsory for us." In one way or another, I'm happy to tell you that we made, at least at the level of the words, this clarification. For instance, we said: "Look, China is our objective strategic partner. And there are limits in our alignment with your policies when it's about China. From this point of view, we can support some other policies, some other plans, but nothing which would harm China."

We want China to be more involved in developing infrastructure in Romania. We want China to cooperate in the IT field. We certainly are interested in the development of projects within or linked to the Belt and Road Initiative under this name or without mentioning this title.

The European Union does not understand that if it wants to be meaningful in this world, if it wants to raise at the level of a global player, it has to develop and to achieve a very comprehensive, very deep and very broad strategic partnership with China. And again, my answer is there is no other possibility but to choose China. Of course, politicians somewhere are giving wrong answers to the right questions, but the history would push them in the right direction.

These wrong answers are temporary as the guys who give these answers are also temporary. And we should not be discouraged by them. They think they have to rule the world and to isolate the world. Instead, they are self-isolating.

Diplomacy Talk: How do you see Central and Eastern European countries handling the China-U.S. relationship?

Adrian Severin: We are more or less treated as secondhand Europeans. And even in relations with China, there is some kind of a discrimination at the level of the European Union, because states like Germany or France will have no problem if they want to develop the dialogue with China, to come to China and talk. But on the other hand, the European Commission advises us, in the strongest terms, not to develop direct relations with China but to develop them only through the European institutions where our interests regarding the relations with China are basically ignored.

The European Union does not treat us fairly. It does not allow us to develop our own relations, which could compensate the lack of development which we expected from the European Union. It is a fight, believe me. It is a fight between our interests and the directives, the orders coming from Brussels. These orders are synthesizing the interests of the different Western capitals in the European Union. And we have to fight this battle. And I'm sure that will be successful in the end.

But for the time being, these are slowing down our capacity to integrate the offers and the programs we have agreed and developed with China. But these programs, nobody, neither China nor us, should give up. Not, I repeat it, neither China nor us. China should not say,"OK, it's difficult. It's impossible. Let's forget about it, let's try something else." No. China is able to try many things without dropping this relation, which is necessary for everybody and which will prevail in the end.

The geostrategic game is basically changed now. After the disappearance of the Soviet Union and after the rise of China, the rise of other powers like India, for instance, and powers in Africa and some other Asiatic powers, after Turkey is willing to regain its strategic autonomy and so on ... so, there are other places in the world where the United States thinks that they have more interests to spend energies and money, rather than in Europe.

Europe does not have much to offer now to the United States, and therefore, the United States is contemplating the possibility to leave alone the European Union. Certainly, they don't want to leave behind a strong power. So therefore, even in this "war" with Russia in Ukraine, it was, in fact, a "war" against the European Union as well. And the European Union was put in the knees economically, at least by being pushed into this war.

On the other hand, Europe doesn't find any appealing offer from the United States. Until recently, it was the nuclear umbrella, but it's less and less probable that the United States would extend the offer or keep this umbrella to guarantee the European security.

To my mind, the European security is not so much threatened. The only thing we have plenty is our debts. And I'm not sure that anybody will come to conquer us for taking our debts or to attack us for taking our debts. Otherwise, we have very little to offer as Europeans. As I said, the Americans have very little to offer to the Europeans. They are not keen to keep ensuring our security, military security. The energy security they are offering us is extremely expensive and is ruining our economy.

What else could they offer? From the point of view of technological progress, I think there are many other better offers in the world. Generally speaking, to the whole world, America could offer now only to sell weapons for making wars which are not the wars of the buyers. So, we buy weapons to fight wars which are not ours.

What else could they offer? The great American industries are in China. I'm afraid that the hat of Mr. Trump, on which it is written "Make America Great Again," which means that he accepts America is not any longer great. Otherwise, you would have said "Keep America Great," but no. He wants, and he is right to want, the greatness of America to be back because it is lost. But that hat, that very hat I am almost sure that it is made in China.

The American debts are huge. They could offer just the possibility to buy these debts and in the end to reduce their values by playing with the dollar. The influence of the dollar is going to be less and less real. If they are going to freeze or even to confiscate the Russian deposits in their banks, this would give again a terrible blow to the credibility of its financial market. Together with the American dream, Hollywood, economy, American army, dollar was the important weapon for assuring the supremacy of the United States in the world.

The dollar is not any longer the real support for international economic health, but, on the contrary, undermining the international economic health. The American dream is not appealing anymore. We have different dreams, and that one faded away. So, what else? Only the army, but I said the army was unable to win the peace.

I have to mention it. Some might misunderstand me. I'm not an anti-American. I think that it would be bad if America would simply collapse and would be kept out of the process of a new world order building. For the time being, they are sanctioning and isolating everybody. In fact, the more they are sanctioning and isolating the so-called "bad ones," they remain alone on the axis of good. In fact, they are not the global majority, but they are becoming a global minority. And this is not good for them, not good for anybody.

I hope that they will understand that it's another historical moment, and they have to play the game of this time, forgetting what was the past. The past is over. And the future is now of course with Asia, with Asiatic countries, and I would say mainly with China.

Diplomacy Talk: While visiting China's Guizhou province, you mentioned that bridges are not only technological masterpieces, but also bonds connecting humanity. So my question is, how do you think Belt and Road projects can boost both Romanian's economy and people-to-people ties?

Adrian Severin: Absolutely. And I think that there is a spiritual, a cultural Belt and Road. Routes and bridges will not circulate only the merchandise, goods, or services or capitals. It will circulate the ideas. It will circulate the feelings. It will circulate the cultures. And this is extremely good. We will be certainly keeping our identities. But at the same time, we'll be able to evaluate our identities better by comparing with the others and by understanding not that we are superior or inferior, but we understand that we can take inspiration from the others. And we can live together by being different, also by understanding each other better.

So, every bridge you build here in China would make you closer to the other countries. And every bridge you build outside of China would put us in contact from the spiritual point of view. And this is very important. When I understand you better,I don't hate you, even if I dislike something. If you understand me better, even you dislike some of my habits, you don't hate me, and you try to relate with me in a compassionate way.

Diplomacy Talk: You have mentioned the Chinese cultural values converge to form a new vision to build a better world. So which aspects of Chinese culture do you think have most influenced its path to modernization? And how might they inspire a new vision for the world?

Adrian Severin: The old civilization is still alive, the Chinese one, so it's again your time for inspiring the world order in accordance with your cultural traditions. Your cultural tradition includes the concepts of harmony, of solidarity, of compassion, of communitarian development, which we can see you are building bridges, not only cars. In the United States and also in the UK, they are building weapons and not hospitals.

So for how long could those who are building mostly weapons without building hospitals survive and dominate the world? Not forever. It's the time for this model, which I very much respect and admire, but it's more than respect and admiration at the same time. And I think it is necessary for our world. We are in an unbalanced world, an unequal world, an uncompassionate world, an unpeaceful world. We have to develop a different order, even if the masters of the old world, the so called "pax Americana," American peace, are unhappy.

And I can understand that they are unhappy. It's always good to be number one. But it's sometimes also good to be one of the group, equal amongst the others. The first among the equals, so we are all first, but without thinking that we must be first by dominating the others. We could be first by inspiring the others. We cannot be first by sanctioning the others, but by helping the others, by stimulating the others. I've been always in favor of stimulus rather than sanction. If you behave in a way which I don't like, I can give you incentives to behave differently, but not to sanction you for not behaving in accordance with my desire. I think this is a completely different way of thinking. This is the inspirational contribution of the Chinese culture in building a better world order.

Diplomacy Talk: On Sept. 1,2025, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the Global Governance Initiative at the "SCO Plus" meeting in Tianjin. So how do you see this initiative helping to tackle today's global challenges?

Adrian Severin: Now, we have the fourth initiative after the initiative for global development, initiative for global security, initiative for global civilization. And now is the fourth one, initiative for global governance, which, to my mind, was a logical complement for the others. We cannot have a new order without a vision. To the best of my knowledge, China is the only country who provided a vision. The others have some ideas, of course. We are criticizing the old order from different points of view. We have some suggestions for plumbing here and there the old order, but we don't have a vision.

A new order cannot be implemented without people. And you need educated, aware people. And in China and many other places all over the world in fact, but mainly in the Global South, we have already huge number of educated people who could understand this vision, develop it and implement it. And certainly, it could not last, this vision, without institutions. And to my mind, this initiative of global governance is precisely about institutions.

We built up the World Trade Organization. And now, everywhere we see new barriers against trade. IMF, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development—do they bring development anywhere? On the contrary, they are controlled by those who do not produce any longer the biggest part of the global national product. But now things are dramatically changed. China produces more. The BRICS countries produce more than the G7. And the G7 still thinks that they have to guide the world and to control the international financial organizations, not to say that these financial organizations transform themselves from, let's say, global organizations into global oligarchies. They are super state oligarchies trying to rule things for the sake of a small group of powerful actors, and not for the whole world.

So everything should be either reformed or replaced. If they cannot be reformed, they should be replaced with something else. An organization like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is a beginning of a new institutional piece of a new world order. The BRICS is an institutional piece of the new world order. They are at the beginning. It's a process, but it's very important to understand what does not function any longer in the present order and what we should, let's say, change.

Diplomacy Talk: What kind of role will the Global South play in the future?

Adrian Severin: We all have to get rid of some prejudices. The West suffers from a complex of superiority, and therefore, we have to teach the others. The Global South suffered, at least until recently, and in some of these parts still suffers from a complex of inferiority. Now the Global South should understand that it's time not to contribute only but to take the lead. And also when speaking about China particularly, I think that China should take the lead in its own manner, not in the American manner.

I always said we don't need a second United States. We need China with its characteristics to inspire, not to impose; to stimulate, not to sanction; to gather, not to exclude. These are, I believe, Chinese characteristics, which are not something which was invented today, something which was built along many centuries, even millennia.

Diplomacy Talk: As deputy prime minister and foreign minister of Romania, you often engaged with Chinese officials. Have you noticed any changes in how China approaches diplomacy now compared with then?

Adrian Severin: I think that China always has its own kind of diplomacy. You have a certain elegance in your international behavior. I remember that I was invited personally in Belgium, when President Xi Jinping came to Europe soon after he became the head of the Chinese state, for an absolutely excellent speech he made. It was a marvelous speech he made at the beginning of his presidentship. And I was extremely happy to be invited and to listen to that speech and to be one of the very first to have the inputs from your president. And starting from that point, I followed his gestures, his decisions, his policies, his speeches. And I could understand something, which is also very important, the coherence of his vision.

Diplomacy Talk: What are your overall impressions of China, the Chinese people and its leadership?

Adrian Severin: One could be only impressed, fascinated, by what the Chinese people were able to achieve. I am impressed by this link existing between the Chinese leaders and the Chinese people. It is not very well understood in the West. We do not want to acknowledge that differences do not mean that the others are inferior, but maybe simply are different.

We should never forget that China is a huge territory. You cannot manage such a country as you manage a country of a few million of people and a few thousand square kilometers. One cannot have the same relations between leadership and the people as here. It is a very interesting link between respect for the leader and the obligation of the leader to assure the equality of the people. The leader has an obligation to protect you and to provide the environment for all of you to feel equal and to live an equal quality of life.

Presenter: Xu Rong

Production supervisor: Li Xiaohua

Co-production supervisor: Zhang Liying

Executive producer: Zhang Ruomeng

Editors: Zhang Heling, Jiao Yuan, Lyu Yiyi, Xia Fangting

Produced by chinadiplomacy.org.cn