The Security Dilemma, Order Evolution, and China’s Approach in Cyberspace

With the rapid development of internet technology, cyberspace governance has shifted from the initial, purely “internet governance” to a more comprehensive governance encompassing the political, security, and economic domains. The connotation and practical significance of the cyberspace order are constantly evolving and being reshaped. Finding a coordinated path between the game of national interests and diverse governance models, and building a stable, just, and sustainable global cyberspace order, has become a major issue commonly faced by the international community. This article aims to analyze from three dimensions—the security dilemma, conceptual adjustments, and China’s approach—to clarify the evolutionary trends and challenges facing the global cyberspace order, and then to explore the feasible pathways of global governance as a solution.

随着互联网技术的迅猛发展，网络空间治理已从最初单纯的“互联网治理”转向更为广泛的政治、安全与经济领域的综合治理，网络空间秩序的内涵和实践意义不断演变与重塑。如何在国家利益博弈与多元治理模式之间找到协调路径，构建一个稳定、公正和可持续的全球网络空间秩序，成为当前国际社会共同面临的重大问题。本文旨在从安全困境、理念调整与中国方案三个维度展开分析，厘清全球网络空间秩序的演变态势、面临挑战，进而探讨全球治理作为解决方案的可行性路径。

The Security Dilemma Facing Global Cyberspace

全球网络空间面临的安全困境

In the process of constructing the global cyberspace order, the most prominent and profound challenge is undoubtedly the cyberspace security dilemma. This security dilemma is not only an extension and amplification of the traditional national security dilemma but also presents new complexities and uncertainties due to the special attributes of cyberspace, such as its virtuality, transnationality, and openness. An in-depth analysis of the causes and manifestations of the cybersecurity dilemma and its impact on the construction of the global cyberspace order is particularly important for understanding the difficulties currently faced in building that order.

在全球网络空间秩序的构建过程中，最为突出、最为深刻的挑战当属网络空间安全困境。这种安全困境不仅体现为传统国家安全困境的延伸与放大，更由于网络空间的虚拟性、跨国性和开放性等特殊属性而呈现出全新的复杂性与不确定性。深入分析网络安全困境的成因、表现及其对全球网络空间秩序构建带来的影响，对于理解当前全球网络空间秩序建构所面临的困境尤为重要。

Traditional security dilemma theory holds that in the anarchic state of the international system, when one state enhances its defense capabilities for its own security, this is often interpreted by other states as an offensive intention, triggering an arms race and a vicious cycle of insecurity. The cybersecurity dilemma includes not only security challenges and crises arising from unclear intentions between states but, more importantly, security dilemmas caused by the inherent defects of cyber technology itself. Cyberspace is built on code, and system code inevitably contains errors. At the same time, different programmers have different understandings of code. When the volume of code is large enough, later developers cannot fully understand the original code, leading to program conflicts and vulnerabilities. The security risks caused by the inherent defects of cyberspace are characterized by the generalization of security risks, the difficulty of measuring risks, and the blurring of security boundaries.

传统安全困境理论认为，在国际体系的无政府状态下，一国为了自身安全而增强防御能力，往往被其他国家解读为进攻意图，从而引发军备竞赛与不安全的恶性循环。网络安全困境不仅包含因国家之间意图不明确引发的安全挑战与危机，更重要的是网络技术自身存在缺陷所引发的安全困境。网络空间建立在编码基础之上，而系统编码存在难以避免的错误。同时，不同程序员对于编码的理解存在差异，当编码数量足够大时，后来者难以全面理解最初的编码，并因此导致程序冲突和漏洞。网络空间自身缺陷导致的安全风险具有安全风险泛化、风险难以测度、安全边界模糊等特征。

The primary characteristic of the cybersecurity dilemma is the widespread existence of risks. Code, as the foundation of digital technology, contains vulnerabilities and security risks that exist extensively in almost all information systems. Some even argue that there is an error in every ten lines of code. Taking Microsoft as an example, despite its powerful code writing and checking capabilities, the vulnerabilities in Microsoft operating systems are countless, requiring frequent “patching” to ensure system security. At the same time, cybersecurity threats are difficult to measure and verify. The generalization of security risks, combined with the concealment, virtuality, and transnationality of cyberspace, greatly increases the difficulty of measuring cybersecurity risks and verifying malicious behavior. In the traditional field of arms control, the characteristics of weapons and their launch time and location can be detected through certain technical means, which plays a key role in determining responsibility. However, the impact of cyberattacks is often difficult to simply measure; many influencing factors are uncertain and can only be assessed after the event. For example, the “Mirai virus” incident, which caused a prolonged large-scale internet outage in the eastern United States, was actually caused by virus software developed by three students to attack game servers, and its consequences and impact far exceeded the designers’ original intentions. Furthermore, attribution in cybersecurity is extremely difficult. The virtuality and transnationality of the network make a large number of cyberattacks difficult to detect, and even if detected, the attacking party can deny it through various means. In existing cyberattacks between states, almost no state admits to being the initiator of the attack. Due to a lack of evidence, the international community has no way to apply pressure, making it difficult not only to determine responsibility but also to effectively implement relevant norms and build bilateral or multilateral mutual trust in cyberspace. Additionally, strategic competition among major powers and unilateralism are another cause of the cyberspace security dilemma. Western countries, led by the United States, pursue unilateralist and hegemonic strategies in cyberspace, such as defining cyberspace as a “global commons” while strictly protecting their own cyberspace sovereignty, demonstrating obvious double standards. This approach not only severely damages the foundation of international cooperation but also prompts other countries to adopt similar unilateral measures, further exacerbating confrontational trends in cyberspace.

网络安全困境的首要特征是风险的广泛存在。代码作为数字技术的基础，其所包含的漏洞和安全隐患广泛存在于几乎所有的信息系统里，甚至有观点认为，每十行代码就会有一个错误。以微软为例，尽管拥有强大的代码编写和检查能力，微软操作系统的漏洞还是不计其数，必须通过频繁“打补丁”来保证系统安全。同时，网络空间安全威胁难以测度和验证。安全风险的泛化与网络空间的隐蔽性、虚拟性、跨国性结合，大大提升了测度网络安全风险和验证恶意行为的难度。在传统军控领域，武器的特征及其发射时间、地点都可以通过一定的技术手段进行检测，这对责任的认定起到关键作用。但是，网络攻击所造成的影响往往难以简单测度，很多影响因素存在不确定性，只能在事后予以评估。例如，曾经让美国东部长时间大断网的“米拉病毒”事件，实际上是由三名学生为攻击游戏服务器而开发的病毒软件所致，其后果和影响远远超出设计者的初衷。再者，网络安全归因极为困难。网络的虚拟性和跨国性使得大量网络攻击行动难以被发现，而即使被发现攻击方也可通过多种方式抵赖。在现有的国家之间的网络攻击行动中，几乎没有国家承认自己是攻击发起者。由于缺乏证据，国际社会无从施加压力，不仅责任难以认定，还使得相关规范难以有效实施，网络空间的双边或多边互信难以建立。此外，大国战略博弈与单边主义是导致网络空间安全困境的另一个原因。以美国为首的西方国家在网络空间推行单边主义与霸权主义策略，如将网络空间定义为“全球公域”，同时却对自身网络空间主权进行严格保护，体现出明显的双重标准。这种做法不仅严重损害了国际合作的基础，更促使其他国家采取类似的单边措施，进一步加剧网络空间的对抗性趋势。

Due to the characteristics of cyber technology and cyberspace itself, the cyberspace security dilemma, compared to the traditional security dilemma, features asymmetry, cross-domain nature, and the normalization of low-intensity conflict. First, there is a clear asymmetry between security threats and defense measures in cyberspace. Cyberattacks are highly concealable and difficult to attribute, with relatively low attack costs but extremely high defense costs. This characteristic of “easy to attack, difficult to defend” makes relevant states more inclined to adopt proactive offensive strategies rather than passive defense. For example, the Stuxnet virus incident shows that even highly sensitive targets with relatively high security levels, such as Iran’s nuclear facilities, find it difficult to effectively defend against cyberattacks. This offensive advantage prompts states to develop offensive cyber capabilities to seek a dominant position in cyberspace.

由于网络技术和网络空间自身的特点，网络空间的安全困境与传统安全困境相比，具有不对称性、跨领域性和常态化低烈度冲突等特点。其一，网络空间的安全威胁与防御手段之间存在明显的不对称性。网络攻击具有高度的隐蔽性和难以归因的特点，攻击成本相对较低而防御成本却极高，这种“攻击易、防御难”的特点使相关国家更倾向于采取主动进攻性战略而非被动防御。例如，“震网”病毒（Stuxnet）事件表明，即使像伊朗核设施这样高度敏感、安全等级相对较高的目标，也很难有效防范网络攻击。这种进攻优势促使各国倾向于发展进攻性网络力量，以谋求在网络空间中占据主动地位。

Second, the cyberspace security dilemma has a strong tendency to spread and is cross-domain in nature. The dual-use nature of cyber technology means that security issues in cyberspace are not limited to the traditional military domain but also spread to the economic, social, and political domains. For example, cybersecurity incidents like “Cambridge Analytica” behind “hackers interfering in elections” not only have a profound impact on political security and ideological security but also pose serious threats to economic security and personal information security. Furthermore, the rise of social media manipulation and information warfare blurs the boundaries between traditional and non-traditional security sectors, exacerbating suspicion and distrust among states.

其二，网络空间安全困境具有极强的扩散性与跨领域性。网络技术的军民两用性特征，导致网络空间的安全问题不仅限于传统军事领域，也扩散到经济、社会与政治领域。例如，“黑客干预选举”背后的“剑桥分析”等网络安全事件不仅表现为对政治安全、意识形态安全的深刻影响，也对经济安全、个人信息安全等造成严重威胁。此外，社交媒体操纵与信息战的兴起，使得传统安全部门和非传统安全部门之间的界限逐渐模糊，加剧了国家之间的猜疑与不信任。

Third, the cyberspace security dilemma shows a trend toward the normalization of low-intensity conflict. Currently, cybersecurity incidents occur frequently, but few reach the legal threshold of “armed conflict” under traditional international law. Incidents such as the “PRISM” scandal, the Stuxnet incident, the Sony Pictures hack, and the “WannaCry” virus incident all indicate that sovereign state actors are increasingly active in cyberspace, with increasingly diverse means, targets, and motives, leading to more intense conflicts. Some scholars define these cyber operations as low-intensity cyber conflicts. Although such low-intensity conflicts do not directly trigger large-scale war in the short term, their long-term corrosive effect on international relations and mutual trust cannot be ignored. Because state-conducted cyber operations do not reach the level of triggering war, existing international law struggles to effectively constrain and regulate them. This results in long-term, frequent low-intensity conflicts, which easily increase the risk of miscalculation between states, thus creating a hidden danger of conflict escalation.

其三，网络空间的安全困境呈现低烈度冲突常态化趋势。当前网络空间安全事件频发，但很少有事件达到传统国际法中“武装冲突”的法律门槛，“棱镜门”事件、震网事件、索尼影业事件、“想哭”病毒事件等都表明，主权国家行为体在网络空间的行动越来越频繁，手段、目标和动机也越来越多样，引发的冲突愈发激烈，一些学者将这些网络行动界定为低烈度网络冲突。这种低烈度冲突虽然短期内不会直接引发大规模战争，但其对国际关系与互信的长期侵蚀作用却不容忽视。国家开展的网络行动由于没有达到触发战争的程度，现有国际法难以对其作出有效约束和规范，由此形成长期频繁的低烈度冲突，容易导致国家之间风险误判增加，从而构成冲突升级的隐患。

The complex security dilemma in cyberspace greatly increases the risk of strategic miscalculation between states, thereby continuously raising the possibility of cyber conflict escalation. This is especially true in the absence of cyberspace rules and order, where both offensive and defensive parties are prone to miscalculation. For example, during the 2018 U.S. midterm elections, the United States attacked the Russian Internet Research Agency, which was suspected of interfering in the U.S. election, forcing it offline for a day. The U.S. side believed this was sending a deterrent signal to Russia, warning it not to interfere in the U.S. election. However, this signal may not necessarily be accepted and understood in the same way by Russia. As the attacked party, Russia might consider such an attack an “act of war,” thus adopting more aggressive countermeasures and triggering a wider range of cyber conflicts.

网络空间复杂的安全困境导致国家之间形成战略误判的风险大大增加，进而使网络冲突升级的可能性不断上升，尤其是在网络空间规则与秩序缺失的情况下，攻防双方极易产生误判。例如，2018年美国中期选举期间，美国就对涉嫌干预其大选的俄罗斯互联网研究局进行了攻击，迫使其断网一天。美方认为这是在向俄罗斯发出威慑信号，警告俄方不要干涉美国选举。但这种信号并不一定会被俄方接受并作出同样的理解，作为被攻击方的俄罗斯有可能认为这种攻击是“战争行为”，因此采取更加激进的反击手段，引发更大范围的网络冲突。

The Impact of the Security Dilemma on the Construction of Cyberspace Order

安全困境对网络空间秩序构建的影响

The security dilemma has a deep-level impact on the security, order, and stability of cyberspace. The security dilemma not only promotes the militarization of cyberspace but also exacerbates the risk of fragmentation of cyberspace; at the same time, the process of rule-making in cyberspace is influenced by the security dilemma, making it difficult to achieve substantive breakthroughs, and the international community has long been unable to reach a basic consensus on cyber order. Moreover, precisely because of the existence of the cybersecurity dilemma, the order of cyberspace exhibits trends such as militarization, “Balkanization,” and the failure of mechanisms and rules.

安全困境对网络空间安全、秩序与稳定造成深层次影响。安全困境不仅促使网络空间军事化，也加剧网络空间分裂的风险；同时，网络空间规则制定进程受到安全困境的影响而难以取得实质性突破，国际社会迟迟无法就网络秩序达成基本共识。此外，正是因为网络安全困境的存在，网络空间秩序呈现军事化、“巴尔干化”以及机制和规则失灵等趋势。

The trend of militarization of cyberspace is becoming increasingly evident. The trend of militarization of cyberspace can easily trigger an arms race among states, leading to a continuous weakening of strategic mutual trust in the field of cybersecurity. Major powers all hope to safeguard their own national interests and strategic security by gaining an advantage in cyber military operational capabilities. This competitive mentality makes states more inclined to adopt offensive and confrontational strategies in their interactions in cyberspace, rather than actively seeking cooperation. When states’ perceptions of cyberspace tend toward pessimism and competition, it becomes difficult to form effective crisis management and conflict de-escalation measures. In the long term, the militarization of cyberspace has to a certain extent suppressed international cooperation, and the rule-making for global cyberspace governance has thus fallen into a deadlock. At the same time, the asymmetry of cyber offense and defense makes it difficult to maintain cybersecurity through defensive measures alone, forcing states to establish offensive cyber means. Major powers such as the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France have all elevated the status of cybersecurity in their national strategies and increased investment in cyber military capabilities. For example, the United States established the “United States Cyber Command” and upgraded it to an independent unified combatant command, clearly proposing the strategies of “defend forward” and “persistent engagement,” and abolishing previous administrative restrictions on cyber operations. Another example is Russia, which in its *Doctrine of Information Security of the Russian Federation* proposed strengthening the construction of cyber military forces, emphasizing active defense and strategic deterrence.

网络空间军事化趋势日益明显。网络空间军事化趋势极易引发国家间的军备竞赛，导致网络安全领域的战略互信不断削弱。大国都希望通过在网络军事行动能力方面占据优势，来维护自身的国家利益和战略安全。这种竞争心态使得国家在网络空间互动中，更倾向于采取进攻性和对抗性策略，而非积极寻求合作。当各国对网络空间的认知趋于悲观与竞争性时，就难以形成有效的危机管理和冲突降级举措。长期来看，网络空间军事化一定程度上抑制了国际合作，全球网络空间治理的规则制定也因此陷入僵局。同时，网络攻防的不对称使得仅仅通过防御举措难以维护网络安全，迫使各国建立进攻性的网络手段。美国、俄罗斯、英国和法国等大国纷纷提升网络安全在国家战略中的地位，加大对网络军事能力的投入。例如，美国成立“网络司令部”（United States Cyber Command）并将其升级为独立的联合作战司令部，明确提出“前置防御”与“持续交手”战略，废除对网络行动的原有行政限制。又如，俄罗斯在《俄罗斯信息安全学说》中提出加强网络军事力量建设，强调积极防御与战略抑制。

The risk of fragmentation and “Balkanization” of cyberspace is intensifying. The “Balkanization” of cyberspace refers to the characteristics of fragmentation and division of the internet due to various factors such as technology, commerce, politics, nationalism, religion, and different national interests. Under the cybersecurity dilemma, states have adopted data localization policies and strengthened jurisdictional claims over cyber sovereignty, causing the originally open and interconnected global cyberspace to gradually split into different digital geopolitical regions. For example, Russia’s introduction of the “Sovereign Internet Law” and its testing of internet disconnection, the European Union’s enactment of the *General Data Protection Regulation* (GDPR), and the United States’ attempts to “decouple” from China in the field of information and communication technology—these actions have all, to a certain extent, promoted the trend of camp formation in cyberspace. This trend of camp formation not only increases the difficulty of global cyberspace governance but also seriously hinders the integrated development of the global digital economy.

网络空间分裂与“巴尔干化”风险加剧。网络空间“巴尔干化”，指互联网因技术、商业、政治、民族主义、宗教和不同的国家利益等各种因素而出现分裂和分化的特征。在网络安全困境下，各国纷纷采取数据本地化政策、强化网络主权管辖权，导致原本开放互联的全球网络空间逐渐分裂为不同的数字地缘区域。例如，俄罗斯出台的《主权互联网法》（Sovereignty Internet Law）与测试断网行为，欧盟颁布的《通用数据保护条例》（GDPR），美国试图在信息通信技术领域与中国“脱钩”，这些行为都在一定程度上推动了网络空间的阵营化趋势。这种阵营化趋势不仅增加全球网络空间治理的难度，也严重阻碍全球数字经济的融合发展。

“Balkanization” poses a serious threat to the order of cyberspace. Its core is that governments of various states act independently, formulating cyberspace policies based on their own concepts. This not only undermines the technical compatibility and interoperability of cyberspace but also more easily triggers conflicts between states. On the one hand, cybersecurity challenges are constantly increasing, with cybersecurity incidents such as large-scale surveillance, intelligence collection, intellectual property theft, social media manipulation, and vulnerabilities in critical information infrastructure emerging one after another. On the other hand, certain states continue to promote offensive cybersecurity policies. In particular, after the Trump administration significantly adjusted its cybersecurity strategy on the pretext of so-called “hacker interference in the election,” the United States adopted radical and destructive methods that greatly impacted the already fragile process of building cyberspace order, further exacerbating the vicious cycle between the cybersecurity dilemma and the “Balkanization” of order.

“巴尔干化”对网络空间秩序构成严重威胁，其核心是各国政府各自为政，根据自身的理念来制定网络空间的政策，不仅会破坏网络空间在技术上的兼容和互操作性，也更容易引发国家之间的冲突。一方面，网络空间安全挑战不断增加，大规模监听、情报收集、知识产权窃密、社交媒体操纵、关键信息基础设施漏洞等网络安全事件层出不穷；另一方面，某些国家持续推进进攻性网络安全政策。尤其是特朗普政府以所谓“黑客干预大选”为由大幅调整网络安全战略之后，美国采取激进、破坏性的方式对原本脆弱的网络空间秩序构建进程造成极大冲击，进一步加剧网络空间安全困境与秩序“巴尔干化”之间的恶性循环。

The cybersecurity dilemma leads to the failure of cyber governance mechanisms and the fragmentation of rules. The cyberspace governance process promoted by the United Nations is often hindered by the cybersecurity dilemma. To address the challenges posed by cybersecurity, the United Nations as early as 2004 began to establish the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts on Information Security (UNGGE), intending to build a rule system in the field of cybersecurity through this expert group mechanism to address conflicts among states in the field of cybersecurity. However, as the most important governance mechanism for cyberspace, this expert group itself has fallen into various disputes. Multiple sessions of the expert group have not only failed to achieve consensus on outcomes, but its own legitimacy and representativeness have also been widely contested. Major powers such as the United States and Russia have serious differences on issues such as the applicability of international law, state responsibility, and countermeasures, leading to a state of “pactophobia” in the application of international law in cyberspace. Due to the huge conflict between the United States and Russia over the “hacker interference in the election” incident, the 2016–2017 session of the UNGGE failed to reach a consensus. Another consequence of this was that the United Nations General Assembly established an Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) outside the expert group to compensate for the so-called lack of representativeness of the UNGGE. Subsequently, the OEWG formally replaced the expert group as the only legitimate global cyberspace governance mechanism. In reality, this change has not resolved the issue of the effectiveness of the governance mechanism. The main reason behind this is the distrust between states triggered by the security dilemma. Due to the strategic distrust and conflicts of interest caused by the security dilemma, it is difficult for the international community to reach an effective consensus on international rules for cyberspace, and the construction of governance mechanisms has fallen into a long-term predicament. In reality, the cyber sovereignty of many states is repeatedly violated, and interference in the internal affairs of other states occurs from time to time. Especially when dealing with cyber conflicts, some states often resort to unilateral sanctions rather than peaceful means.

网络安全困境导致网络治理机制失灵和规则碎片化。联合国推动的网络空间治理进程常常因网络安全困境而受阻。为应对网络安全带来的挑战，联合国早在2004年就着手组建联合国信息安全政府专家组（UNGGE），意在通过专家组机制建立网络安全领域的规则体系，以应对各国在网络安全领域的冲突。然而，作为网络空间最重要的治理机制，该专家组自身也陷入了各种纷争，多届专家组不仅未能取得成果共识，其自身的合法性和代表性也饱受争议。美国、俄罗斯等大国在国际法适用、国家责任与反措施等问题上产生严重分歧，导致国际法在网络空间的应用陷入“条约恐惧症”（Pactophobia）状态。由于美国与俄罗斯围绕“黑客干预大选”事件产生巨大冲突，导致2016～2017届联合国信息安全政府专家组未能取得共识。这导致的另一个后果是，联合国大会在专家组之外成立开放式工作组（OEWG）来弥补所谓联合国信息安全政府专家组的代表性不足问题。随后，开放式工作组又正式取代专家组成为唯一合法的全球网络空间治理机制。实际上，这种变化并未能解决治理机制有效性的问题，这背后的主因是安全困境所引发的国家间不信任。由于安全困境导致的战略不信任与利益冲突，国际社会难以就网络空间国际规则达成有效共识，治理机制构建陷入长期困境。在现实中，很多国家的网络主权屡遭破坏，干涉他国内政的情况时有发生。特别是在处理网络冲突时，有些国家经常采取单边制裁的方式而非和平手段。

The Impact of the Security Dilemma on the Construction of Cyberspace Order

安全困境对网络空间秩序构建的影响

The security dilemma has a deep-level impact on the security, order, and stability of cyberspace. The security dilemma not only promotes the militarization of cyberspace but also exacerbates the risk of fragmentation of cyberspace; at the same time, the process of rule-making in cyberspace is influenced by the security dilemma, making it difficult to achieve substantive breakthroughs, and the international community has long been unable to reach a basic consensus on cyber order. Moreover, precisely because of the existence of the cybersecurity dilemma, the order of cyberspace exhibits trends such as militarization, “Balkanization,” and the failure of mechanisms and rules.

安全困境对网络空间安全、秩序与稳定造成深层次影响。安全困境不仅促使网络空间军事化，也加剧网络空间分裂的风险；同时，网络空间规则制定进程受到安全困境的影响而难以取得实质性突破，国际社会迟迟无法就网络秩序达成基本共识。此外，正是因为网络安全困境的存在，网络空间秩序呈现军事化、“巴尔干化”以及机制和规则失灵等趋势。

The trend of militarization of cyberspace is becoming increasingly evident. The trend of militarization of cyberspace can easily trigger an arms race among states, leading to a continuous weakening of strategic mutual trust in the field of cybersecurity. Major powers all hope to safeguard their own national interests and strategic security by gaining an advantage in cyber military operational capabilities. This competitive mentality makes states more inclined to adopt offensive and confrontational strategies in their interactions in cyberspace, rather than actively seeking cooperation. When states’ perceptions of cyberspace tend toward pessimism and competition, it becomes difficult to form effective crisis management and conflict de-escalation measures. In the long term, the militarization of cyberspace has to a certain extent suppressed international cooperation, and the rule-making for global cyberspace governance has thus fallen into a deadlock. At the same time, the asymmetry of cyber offense and defense makes it difficult to maintain cybersecurity through defensive measures alone, forcing states to establish offensive cyber means. Major powers such as the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France have all elevated the status of cybersecurity in their national strategies and increased investment in cyber military capabilities. For example, the United States established the “United States Cyber Command” and upgraded it to an independent unified combatant command, clearly proposing the strategies of “defend forward” and “persistent engagement,” and abolishing previous administrative restrictions on cyber operations. Another example is Russia, which in its *Doctrine of Information Security of the Russian Federation* proposed strengthening the construction of cyber military forces, emphasizing active defense and strategic deterrence.

网络空间军事化趋势日益明显。网络空间军事化趋势极易引发国家间的军备竞赛，导致网络安全领域的战略互信不断削弱。大国都希望通过在网络军事行动能力方面占据优势，来维护自身的国家利益和战略安全。这种竞争心态使得国家在网络空间互动中，更倾向于采取进攻性和对抗性策略，而非积极寻求合作。当各国对网络空间的认知趋于悲观与竞争性时，就难以形成有效的危机管理和冲突降级举措。长期来看，网络空间军事化一定程度上抑制了国际合作，全球网络空间治理的规则制定也因此陷入僵局。同时，网络攻防的不对称使得仅仅通过防御举措难以维护网络安全，迫使各国建立进攻性的网络手段。美国、俄罗斯、英国和法国等大国纷纷提升网络安全在国家战略中的地位，加大对网络军事能力的投入。例如，美国成立“网络司令部”（United States Cyber Command）并将其升级为独立的联合作战司令部，明确提出“前置防御”与“持续交手”战略，废除对网络行动的原有行政限制。又如，俄罗斯在《俄罗斯信息安全学说》中提出加强网络军事力量建设，强调积极防御与战略抑制。

The fragmentation of cyberspace and the risk of “Balkanization” are intensifying. The “Balkanization” of cyberspace refers to the characteristic of the internet splitting and differentiating due to various factors such as technology, commerce, politics, nationalism, religion, and differing national interests. Under the cybersecurity dilemma, countries have successively adopted data localization policies and strengthened jurisdictional claims over cyber sovereignty, causing the originally open and interconnected global cyberspace to gradually split into different digital geopolitical regions. For example, Russia’s enactment of the Sovereign Internet Law and its testing of internet disconnection, the European Union’s issuance of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and the United States’ attempt to “decouple” from China in the field of information and communication technology—these actions have all, to a certain extent, promoted the trend toward bloc formation in cyberspace. This trend toward bloc formation not only increases the difficulty of global cyberspace governance but also severely hinders the integrated development of the global digital economy.

网络空间分裂与“巴尔干化”风险加剧。网络空间“巴尔干化”，指互联网因技术、商业、政治、民族主义、宗教和不同的国家利益等各种因素而出现分裂和分化的特征。在网络安全困境下，各国纷纷采取数据本地化政策、强化网络主权管辖权，导致原本开放互联的全球网络空间逐渐分裂为不同的数字地缘区域。例如，俄罗斯出台的《主权互联网法》（Sovereignty Internet Law）与测试断网行为，欧盟颁布的《通用数据保护条例》（GDPR），美国试图在信息通信技术领域与中国“脱钩”，这些行为都在一定程度上推动了网络空间的阵营化趋势。这种阵营化趋势不仅增加全球网络空间治理的难度，也严重阻碍全球数字经济的融合发展。

“Balkanization” poses a serious threat to the order of cyberspace. Its core is that governments act independently, formulating cyberspace policies based on their own concepts. This not only undermines the technical compatibility and interoperability of cyberspace but also more easily triggers conflicts between states. On the one hand, cybersecurity challenges are continuously increasing, with cybersecurity incidents such as大规模监听 [8]8 大规模监听 (dà guīmó jiān tīng): “mass surveillance,” referring to large-scale electronic monitoring and data collection activities, often associated with revelations about programs like those of the U.S. National Security Agency., intelligence collection, intellectual property theft, social media manipulation, and vulnerabilities in critical information infrastructure emerging one after another. On the other hand, certain states persistently pursue offensive cybersecurity policies. In particular, after the Trump administration substantially adjusted its cybersecurity strategy on the pretext of so-called “hacker interference in the election,” the United States adopted aggressive and destructive methods that dealt a severe blow to the already fragile process of building cyberspace order, further exacerbating the vicious cycle between the cybersecurity dilemma and the “Balkanization” of order.

“巴尔干化”对网络空间秩序构成严重威胁，其核心是各国政府各自为政，根据自身的理念来制定网络空间的政策，不仅会破坏网络空间在技术上的兼容和互操作性，也更容易引发国家之间的冲突。一方面，网络空间安全挑战不断增加，大规模监听、情报收集、知识产权窃密、社交媒体操纵、关键信息基础设施漏洞等网络安全事件层出不穷；另一方面，某些国家持续推进进攻性网络安全政策。尤其是特朗普政府以所谓“黑客干预大选”为由大幅调整网络安全战略之后，美国采取激进、破坏性的方式对原本脆弱的网络空间秩序构建进程造成极大冲击，进一步加剧网络空间安全困境与秩序“巴尔干化”之间的恶性循环。

The cybersecurity dilemma leads to the malfunction of cyber governance mechanisms and the fragmentation of rules. The cyberspace governance process promoted by the United Nations is often hindered by the cybersecurity dilemma. In response to the challenges posed by cybersecurity, the United Nations as early as 2004 began to establish the UN Group of Governmental Experts (UNGGE) on information security, intending to build a system of rules in the field of cybersecurity through the expert group mechanism to address conflicts among states in this area. However, as the most important governance mechanism for cyberspace, this expert group itself has fallen into various disputes. Multiple sessions of the expert group not only failed to reach consensus on outcomes but also faced controversy over its own legitimacy and representativeness. Major powers such as the United States and Russia have developed serious disagreements on issues like the application of international law, state responsibility, and countermeasures, leading the application of international law in cyberspace into a state of “pactophobia.” Due to the massive conflict between the United States and Russia over the “hacker interference in the election” incident, the 2016–2017 session of the UNGGE failed to reach consensus. Another consequence of this was that the UN General Assembly established an Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) outside the expert group to compensate for the so-called lack of representativeness of the UNGGE. Subsequently, the OEWG formally replaced the expert group as the only legitimate global cyberspace governance mechanism. In reality, this change has not resolved the issue of the effectiveness of governance mechanisms; the main reason behind this is the distrust between states triggered by the security dilemma. Due to strategic distrust and conflicts of interest caused by the security dilemma, the international community finds it difficult to reach effective consensus on international rules for cyberspace, and the construction of governance mechanisms remains in a long-term predicament. In practice, the cyber sovereignty of many states is repeatedly violated, and interference in the internal affairs of other states occurs from time to time. Particularly when dealing with cyber conflicts, some states often resort to unilateral sanctions rather than peaceful means.

网络安全困境导致网络治理机制失灵和规则碎片化。联合国推动的网络空间治理进程常常因网络安全困境而受阻。为应对网络安全带来的挑战，联合国早在2004年就着手组建联合国信息安全政府专家组（UNGGE），意在通过专家组机制建立网络安全领域的规则体系，以应对各国在网络安全领域的冲突。然而，作为网络空间最重要的治理机制，该专家组自身也陷入了各种纷争，多届专家组不仅未能取得成果共识，其自身的合法性和代表性也饱受争议。美国、俄罗斯等大国在国际法适用、国家责任与反措施等问题上产生严重分歧，导致国际法在网络空间的应用陷入“条约恐惧症”（Pactophobia）状态。由于美国与俄罗斯围绕“黑客干预大选”事件产生巨大冲突，导致2016～2017届联合国信息安全政府专家组未能取得共识。这导致的另一个后果是，联合国大会在专家组之外成立开放式工作组（OEWG）来弥补所谓联合国信息安全政府专家组的代表性不足问题。随后，开放式工作组又正式取代专家组成为唯一合法的全球网络空间治理机制。实际上，这种变化并未能解决治理机制有效性的问题，这背后的主因是安全困境所引发的国家间不信任。由于安全困境导致的战略不信任与利益冲突，国际社会难以就网络空间国际规则达成有效共识，治理机制构建陷入长期困境。在现实中，很多国家的网络主权屡遭破坏，干涉他国内政的情况时有发生。特别是在处理网络冲突时，有些国家经常采取单边制裁的方式而非和平手段。

Adjustment of Cyberspace Order Concepts under Interactive Game-Playing

互动博弈下的网络空间秩序理念调整

Although the militarization of cyberspace, the formation of conceptual blocs, and the fragmentation of rules caused by the security dilemma accelerate the disorder in cyberspace, states and non-state actors deeply involved in this process, after experiencing continuous collisions and frictions, are gradually integrating their corresponding governance concepts and pathways. This explains why, although security risks in cyberspace are continuously increasing, the frequency of diplomatic crises triggered by them is persistently declining. At the same time, this also reflects the consensus among all parties on reshaping the order of cyberspace.

尽管安全困境导致的网络空间军事化、理念阵营化和规则碎片化加速网络空间的失序，但深陷其中的国家和非国家行为体在经历持续的碰撞与摩擦之后，相应的治理理念、路径也在逐步融合。这解释了为何网络空间中的安全风险在不断增加，由此引发的外交危机频率却在持续下降。同时，这也反映出各方对于重塑网络空间秩序的共识。

Cyberspace has prominent characteristics such as interconnection and intercommunication, blurred boundaries, and transnationality, which determine that its governance cannot simply copy the traditional model of state sovereignty governance. In the traditional model, state sovereignty is the core basis for governance, but in cyberspace, the rapid flow and transnational dissemination of information make it difficult for the governance power of a single state to effectively address various challenges. Global governance is the regulation of interdependent relations in the absence of political authority. After the Cold War, the main tone of world politics is no longer limited to the mutual struggle of nation-states based on conflicts of interest, but rather focuses more on how, in a fragmented world and in the absence of a world government, numerous actors—states, non-state actors, multinational corporations, and interest groups—properly handle global affairs through mutual consultation, reconciling conflicts of interest, seeking consensus, and pursuing cooperation. In the governance of cyberspace, it advocates adopting a multistakeholder model to integrate multiple subjects such as states, the private sector, technical communities, and non-governmental organizations, jointly formulating international rules for cyberspace, and promoting the security and development of global cyberspace. As Joseph Nye pointed out, cyberspace consists of multiple governance mechanisms, among which internet governance focuses on the technical level and is a subset of cyberspace governance. Different governance mechanisms should be constructed according to different governance issues, allowing different actors to play a leading role.

网络空间具有互联互通、边界模糊与跨国性等显著特征，这决定了其治理不能简单照搬传统国家主权治理模式。在传统模式下，国家主权是治理的核心依据，但在网络空间，信息的快速流动和跨国传播使得单一国家的治理力量难以有效应对各种挑战。全球治理就是在缺乏政治权威的情况下，对相互依存关系的规范。冷战后，世界政治的主要基调不再局限于民族国家基于利益冲突的相互斗争，而是更多聚焦在一个分裂化的世界和世界政府缺失的情况下，国家、非国家行为体、跨国公司和利益集团等诸多行为体通过相互磋商、调和利益冲突、寻找共识、谋求合作来妥善处理全球事务。在网络空间治理方面，则主张通过多利益攸关方（Multistakeholder）模式，整合国家、私营部门、技术社群、非政府组织等多方主体，共同制定网络空间国际规则，推动全球网络空间的安全与发展。正如约瑟夫·奈所指出的，网络空间由多个治理机制组成，其中互联网治理聚焦于技术层面，是网络空间治理的一个子集，应当根据不同的治理议题，构建不同的治理机制，让不同的行为体来发挥主导作用。

The integration of cyberspace governance concepts. Currently, the international community is gradually moving from conflict to integration in the model of cyberspace governance, and the value of the multistakeholder governance model is increasingly recognized. The persistent existence and intensification of the cybersecurity dilemma have led the international community to gradually realize that independent actions by a single state or a small coalition of states can no longer effectively address the complex and diverse challenges of cyberspace. Achieving strategic stability and order construction in cyberspace requires the joint participation of the international community, taking global governance as a perspective, and promoting multi-actor collaboration and institutionalization. Global governance, as a governance concept that transcends the traditional model of international politics, emphasizes the participation, collaboration, and co-governance of multiple subjects. This characteristic is highly compatible with the special governance needs of cyberspace, providing new perspectives and ideas for the construction of cyberspace order.

网络空间治理理念的融合。当前，国际社会在网络空间治理模式上逐渐从冲突走向融合，多利益攸关方治理模式的价值逐步得到认可。网络空间安全困境的持续存在与日益加剧，使国际社会逐渐认识到，单一国家或少数国家联盟的独立行动，已难以有效应对网络空间复杂多样的挑战。实现网络空间的战略稳定与秩序构建，需要国际社会共同参与，以全球治理为视角，推动多方力量协作与制度化建设。全球治理作为一种超越传统国际政治模式的治理理念，强调多方主体的参与、协作与共治，这一特性与网络空间的特殊治理需求高度契合，为网络空间的秩序构建提供全新的视角和思路。

In terms of cyberspace governance concepts, two different cognitive models—“global commons” and “cyber sovereignty”—are moving from mutual independence toward mutual understanding. Global commons refers to certain domains and areas worldwide that no single state can control alone, on which all states depend for survival; these public domains are the connecting channels of the international system. The U.S. government regards cyberspace as a virtual space created by humans, possessing the attributes of a global commons, and incorporates it into its global commons strategy. But in reality, the strategic goal of the United States is to establish hegemony in the global commons, seize the spatial resources and power of these domains that lack clear state attributes, and at the same time, restrict the entry of its competitors into these spaces to obtain political, economic, and military resources. Another opposing view holds that cyberspace is built on information infrastructure, exists between states and societies, and has clear attributes of sovereignty. States have both the responsibility to promote the development of cyberspace, maintain its stability, and protect its security, and the power to exercise cyberspace management, combat cybercrime, and protect information privacy in accordance with the law. Therefore, cyberspace is not a so-called global commons; it is an important component of state sovereignty.

在网络空间治理理念上，“全球公域”与“网络主权”两种不同的认知模式正在从彼此独立转向相互理解。全球公域（global commons）是指在世界范围内，没有哪个国家可以单独控制所有国家都赖以生存的某些领域和地区，这些公共领域是国际体系的联通渠道。美国政府将网络空间视为由人类创造出来的虚拟空间，具有全球公域属性，并将其纳入美国的全球公域战略。但实际上，美国的战略目标是通过在全球公域建立霸权，攫取这些没有明确国家属性的空间资源与权力；同时，限制美国竞争对手进入这些空间，获取政治、经济、军事上的资源。另一种针锋相对的观点认为，网络空间建立在信息基础设施之上，存在于国家、社会之间，具有明确的主权属性。国家既有促进网络空间发展、维护网络空间稳定、保护网络空间安全的职责，也要依法行使网络空间管理和打击网络犯罪、保护信息隐私等权力。因此，网络空间不是所谓全球公域，它是国家主权的重要组成部分。

In the practice of global cyberspace governance in recent years, the continuous collision of various governance mechanisms has made advocates of both concepts realize that no single model can fully and objectively reflect the actual situation of cyberspace governance. Both governance models have certain stages and limitations; it has become a new trend for parties in cyberspace to seek consensus on the basis of each having its own emphasis while complementing each other—the “Global South” countries are gradually accepting the “multi-stakeholder” governance model (on the condition that the role of government is reasonably reflected); while developed countries are also gradually acknowledging the role of governments and intergovernmental organizations in cyberspace governance. For example, French President Macron proposed the “Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace” at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) held in Paris, which generally reflects the EU’s positions in global cyberspace governance, highly affirming the role of international law, and holding that the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and customary international law are universally applicable to cyberspace. The “Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace” embodies a trend of compromise and integration between the traditional multi-stakeholder model and the principle of national sovereignty, and also marks the awakening of the EU’s autonomy in global cyberspace governance.

在近年来的全球网络治理实践中，各种治理机制的持续碰撞使得两种理念的倡导者都意识到，任何一种模式都无法完全客观全面反映出网络空间治理的实际情况。两种治理模式都有一定的阶段性和局限性，网络空间中的各方在各有侧重且相互补充的基础上寻求共识成为新的趋势——“全球南方”国家逐步接受“多利益攸关方”治理模式（前提是政府作用要得到合理体现）；而发达国家也逐步承认政府与政府间组织在网络空间治理中的作用。例如，法国总统马克龙在巴黎召开的互联网治理论坛（IGF）上提出《网络空间信任与安全巴黎倡议》，总体上反映了欧盟在全球网络空间治理领域的主张，高度肯定国际法的作用，认为《联合国宪章》、国际人道法、习惯国际法普遍适用于网络空间。《网络空间信任与安全巴黎倡议》体现了传统多利益攸关方模式与国家主权原则之间的妥协与融合趋势，也标志着欧盟在全球网络空间治理中自主性的觉醒。

The integration of pathways for building a global cyberspace order. Although the game among parties in the field of global cyberspace governance remains intense, positive aspects are gradually emerging. Countries’ governance pathways for cyberspace are shifting from emphasizing their own uniqueness based on different political, economic, and cultural backgrounds, to emphasizing the integration of different viewpoints based on the objective attributes and laws of cyberspace. In addition, the international community is gradually realizing that no single party can dominate the process of cyberspace governance. The principles, concepts, and methods of global cyberspace governance need to be adjusted accordingly to adapt to the development of the situation. In summary, the overall goals of building a global cyberspace order include the following aspects.

构建全球网络空间秩序路径的融合。尽管全球网络空间治理领域各方博弈的态势依旧激烈，但是积极的一面也在逐渐显现。各国对网络空间的治理路径由基于不同的政治、经济、文化背景，强调各自的独特性，转向基于网络空间的客观属性和规律，强调不同观点之间的融合。此外，国际社会也逐步意识到，没有任何一方可以主导网络空间治理进程。全球网络空间治理的原则、理念和方式需予以相应的调整，以适应形势发展。归结起来，构建全球网络空间秩序的总体目标包含以下几个方面。

First, build a balanced international order that takes into account the interests of all parties. The interconnected and shared attributes of cyberspace determine that zero-sum games are not applicable to cyberspace; security, development, and stability in cyberspace are common goals pursued by governments, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations. At the same time, the mutually constraining relationship among the three issues of security, development, and stability means that no party can pursue its own absolute interests while ignoring the interests of other actors. On December 16, 2015, President Xi Jinping pointed out in his keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the Second World Internet Conference: “There should be no double standards in the information field. All countries have the right to safeguard their own information security. It is unacceptable to have one country being secure while others are not, or one part of the world being secure while another is not, still less should one seek the so-called absolute security of itself at the expense of the security of others.”

其一，构建一个能够兼顾各方利益的平衡型国际秩序。网络空间的互联、共享属性决定了零和博弈不适用于网络空间，网络空间的安全、发展、稳定是政府、私营部门和非政府组织共同追求的目标。同时，安全、发展、稳定这三个议题的相互制约关系，使得任何一方都不能忽视其他行为体的利益而追求自身的绝对利益。2015年12月16日，习近平主席在第二届世界互联网大会开幕式的主题演讲中指出：“在信息领域没有双重标准，各国都有权维护自己的信息安全，不能一个国家安全而其他国家不安全，一部分国家安全而另一部分国家不安全，更不能牺牲别国安全谋求自身所谓绝对安全。”

Second, promote the integration of a state-centered multilateral governance system with a multi-stakeholder governance system. The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in 2003 established the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG), and later the Internet Governance Forum. The report released by the WSIS in 2005 defined cyberspace governance as “the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.” In practice, cyberspace governance presents a state-led multilateral governance model and another multi-stakeholder governance model led by enterprises and civil society. The state-led multilateral governance model takes the United Nations as its main platform; the WSIS, the UN Group of Governmental Experts on Information Security, and the Internet Governance Forum provide effective venues for countries to formulate and negotiate international norms for cyberspace that align with their interests. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and other technical communities responsible for the allocation of critical Internet resources and technical standards are the main advocates of the multi-stakeholder model. Although these two platforms are led by different actors, their dialogue and exchanges are increasingly frequent, and each provides pathways for the other’s participation. More and more actors from industry, non-governmental organizations, and academia are participating in cooperative consultations on UN platforms. At the same time, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) of ICANN has received increasing attention. This trend reflects a consensus on cooperation between state and non-state actors, laying an institutional foundation for the formation of international rules for cyberspace.

其二，推动以国家为中心的多边治理体系与多利益攸关方治理体系的融合。2003年的信息社会世界峰会（WSIS）建立了互联网治理工作组（WGIG），后又设立互联网治理论坛。信息社会世界峰会2005年发布的报告将网络空间治理定义为“政府、私营部门和公民社会根据各自的角色，制定和应用共同的原则、规范、规则、决策程序和方案，以影响互联网的发展和使用”。在实践中，网络空间治理呈现一种以国家为主导的多边治理模式和另一种以企业、市民社会为主导的多利益攸关方治理模式。国家主导的多边治理模式以联合国为主要平台，信息社会世界峰会、联合国信息安全政府专家组、互联网治理论坛为各国制定、协商符合各国利益的网络空间国际规范提供了有效场所。互联网名称与数字地址分配机构（ICANN）、国际互联网工程任务组（IETF）等负责互联网关键资源分配、技术标准为代表的技术社群是多利益攸关方的主要倡导者。这两个平台虽然由不同的行为体主导，但是双方的对话交流日益频繁，彼此为对方提供了参与的路径。越来越多的产业界、非政府组织和学术界行为体参与联合国平台的合作磋商。同时，互联网名称与数字地址分配机构的政府咨询委员会（GAC）的受关注度不断提升。这种趋势体现了国家与非国家行为体的合作共识，为网络空间国际规则的形成奠定了制度基础。

Third, achieve the balanced development of cybersecurity and digital economy issues. The United Nations and other international organizations are gradually shifting their governance focus from purely cybersecurity issues to the coordinated development of the digital economy and cybersecurity, reflecting the comprehensiveness and integrity of governance objectives. Since 2020, the United Nations has successively released multiple policy reports, including the “Roadmap for Digital Cooperation” and “Beyond Recovery: Towards 2030,” emphasizing the importance of global digital economy development and cooperation, and calling for strengthening discourse power and leadership in the formulation of international rules for cyberspace. Driven by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, the United Nations has demonstrated its determination to lead the construction of a global digital economy governance system. The UN’s key push on global digital economy development issues will reset the agenda of global cyberspace governance, shifting the international community’s focus from security to development, from a single cybersecurity dominance to the equal emphasis on cybersecurity and the digital economy.

其三，实现网络安全与数字经济议题的并重发展。联合国及其他国际组织逐渐将治理的关注点从纯粹的网络安全议题，扩展到数字经济发展与网络安全的协调发展上，体现了治理目标的综合性与整体性。2020年以来，联合国先后发布《数字合作路线图》《超越重建：迈向2030》等多份政策报告，强调全球数字经济发展与合作的重要性，要求加强在网络空间国际规则制定领域的话语权与主导力。在联合国秘书长古特雷斯的推动下，联合国展示了主导构建全球数字经济治理体系的决心。联合国对全球数字经济发展议题的重点推动，将重新设定全球网络空间治理的议题，将国际社会的关注点从安全转向发展，从单一的网络安全主导转向网络安全与数字经济并重。

China’s Approach to Building Global Cyberspace Order

全球网络空间秩序构建的中国方案

Facing the practical challenges of the security dilemma and order chaos in cyberspace, building a global cyberspace governance system has become a key pathway. The virtual, transnational, and open nature of cyberspace means that security issues are no longer confined to a single country or region, but have global implications. As a responsible major country in the international community, China should play a constructive role in promoting the construction of a global cyberspace order, integrate Chinese wisdom and China’s approach into global cyberspace governance, promote the establishment of a fair and reasonable international order for cyberspace on the basis of national sovereignty, and jointly build a community with a shared future in cyberspace.

面对网络空间安全困境与秩序混乱的现实挑战，构建全球网络空间治理体系已成为关键路径。网络空间的虚拟性、跨国性和开放性，使安全问题不再局限于单一国家或地区，而是具有全球性的影响。中国作为国际社会中负责任大国，在推动全球网络空间秩序构建的过程中应当发挥建设性作用，并将中国智慧、中国方案融入全球网络空间治理，推动在国家主权基础上构建公正合理的网络空间国际秩序，共同构建网络空间命运共同体。

Leading the formulation of cyberspace rules with the concept of a community with a shared future in cyberspace. The concept of a community with a shared future in cyberspace proposed by China provides a new framework and new approach for global cyberspace governance. This concept is based on respect for cyberspace sovereignty, emphasizes international cooperation in cyberspace, and jointly addresses challenges such as security, development, and stability in cyberspace. Building a community with a shared future in cyberspace has dual theoretical value: on the one hand, it establishes the public nature of cyberspace, emphasizes that all countries enjoy equal governance rights and must bear common responsibilities, and clearly opposes technological hegemony and unilateralism; on the other hand, it reveals the necessity of international cooperation in cyberspace, calling on the international community to jointly respond to cross-border challenges such as data security and cybercrime, and to work together to build an open, inclusive, and secure digital world.

以网络空间命运共同体理念引领网络空间规则制定。中国提出的网络空间命运共同体理念为全球网络空间治理提供了新框架和新方案。这一理念以尊重网络主权为基础，强调网络空间国际合作，共同应对网络空间的安全、发展、稳定等挑战。构建网络空间命运共同体具有双重理论价值：一方面，确立网络空间的公共属性，强调各国享有平等的治理权利并需承担共同责任，旗帜鲜明地反对技术霸权与单边主义；另一方面，揭示网络空间国际合作的必要性，呼吁国际社会协同应对数据安全、网络犯罪等跨境挑战，携手建设开放、包容、安全的数字世界。

The community with a shared future in cyberspace provides the basic architecture for cyberspace order. As the core idea of this community, “respecting cyber sovereignty” is the premise and foundation, granting all countries equal status and rights to participate in global cyber governance; “maintaining peace and security” is the fundamental safeguard, ensuring that cyberspace is not abused or destroyed; “promoting openness and cooperation” is the path to achieving common development; “building a good order” is the goal and direction, aiming to establish a just and reasonable cyberspace governance framework. These “four principles” are interrelated and mutually reinforcing, together constituting the basic framework for building a community with a shared future in cyberspace. At the same time, the “five proposals” map out the practical path, including accelerating the construction of global cyber infrastructure to promote connectivity; creating an online platform for cultural exchange and sharing to promote mutual learning; driving innovative development of the cyber economy to promote common prosperity; ensuring cybersecurity to promote orderly development; and building an Internet governance system to promote fairness and justice. This system of proposals covers five dimensions—infrastructure, platform construction, development impetus, security safeguards, and institutional design—forming a systematic governance solution.

网络空间命运共同体为网络空间秩序提供了基本的架构，作为网络空间命运共同体的核心思想，“尊重网络主权”是前提和基础，为各国参与全球网络治理提供了平等的身份和权利；“维护和平安全”是基本保障，确保网络空间不被滥用和破坏；“促进开放合作”是实现共同发展的路径；“构建良好秩序”是目标和方向，旨在建立一个公正合理的网络空间治理格局。“四项原则”相互关联、相辅相成，共同构成构建网络空间命运共同体的基本框架。同时，“五点主张”擘画实践路径，包括加快全球网络基础设施建设，促进互联互通；打造网上文化交流共享平台，促进交流互鉴；推动网络经济创新发展，促进共同繁荣；保障网络安全，促进有序发展；构建互联网治理体系，促进公平正义。这一主张体系覆盖基础设施、平台建设、发展动力、安全保障和制度设计五大维度，形成系统化的治理解决方案。

Over the past decade, guided by the concept of a community with a shared future in cyberspace, China has extensively carried out multi-level cyberspace cooperation in

近十年来，中国以网络空间命运共同体理念为牵引，在国际社会中广泛开展多层次网络空间合作，与阿拉伯国家联盟、金砖国家等组织签署了多项合作协议，共同推动全球数字治理和国际规则制定。例如，中国与阿拉伯国家联盟秘书处发表的《中阿数据安全合作倡议》，以及《金砖国家网络安全务实合作路线图》，都是中国推动构建网络空间命运共同体的具体实践。此外，中国还通过数字丝绸之路等项目，向沿线国家提供能力建设、人才培养等援助，促进全球数字经济的共同发展。

Important progress has been made in building a community with a shared future in cyberspace. The year 2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the proposal of the concept of a community with a shared future in cyberspace. After a decade of development, the connotation of a community with a shared future in cyberspace has been continuously enriched, and its extension has been constantly expanded. Internally, it has become an important goal guiding the building of China’s strength in cyberspace; externally, it has become the main direction for promoting the construction of the global cyberspace order. In this process, the concept, objectives, and subjects of building a community with a shared future in cyberspace have continuously developed, forming a practical system that includes a development community, a security community, a responsibility community, and a community of shared interests.

网络空间命运共同体建设取得重要进展。2025年是网络空间命运共同体理念提出十周年。历经十年发展，网络空间命运共同体内涵不断丰富，外延不断扩展，对内成为引领网络强国建设的重要目标，对外成为推动全球网络空间秩序构建的主要方向。在这一过程中，构建网络命运共同体的理念、目标、对象不断发展，形成了包括发展共同体、安全共同体、责任共同体和利益共同体的实践体系。

The development community focuses on infrastructure connectivity and the co-building of innovation ecosystems. China relies on the World Internet Conference to build a global platform for digital technology exchange, pushing the governance of the “digital divide” from “equal access” to a new stage of “capacity empowerment.” In recent years, China has hosted events such as the China International Fair for Trade in Services, the China International Digital Products Expo, the World Internet Conference Wuzhen Summit, and the World Artificial Intelligence Conference, allowing the world to share in China’s digital development opportunities. China has promulgated and implemented regulations such as the Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China, continuously reduced the negative list for foreign investment access for several consecutive years, and sincerely welcomes enterprises from all over the world to develop in China. It has actively promoted the official entry into force of the world’s largest free trade agreement, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), actively applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and comprehensively advanced negotiations for China’s accession to the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA). It has promoted the formulation of the G20 Digital Economy Development and Cooperation Initiative, jointly launched the Belt and Road Digital Economy International Cooperation Initiative, and proposed the Global Initiative on Cross-Border Data Flow Cooperation.

发展共同体聚焦基础设施联通与创新生态共建，中国依托世界互联网大会搭建全球数字技术交流平台，将“数字鸿沟”治理从“接入平等”推向“能力赋能”新阶段。近年来，中国通过举办中国国际服务贸易交易会、中国国际数字产品博览会、世界互联网大会乌镇峰会、世界人工智能大会等，让世界共享中国数字发展机遇。中国颁布实施《中华人民共和国外商投资法》等法规，连续多年缩减外资准入负面清单，真诚欢迎世界各国企业到中国发展。积极推动全球最大自贸协定《区域全面经济伙伴关系协定》（RCEP）正式生效，积极申请加入《全面与进步跨太平洋伙伴关系协定》（CPTPP)，全面推进中国加入《数字经济伙伴关系协定》（DEPA）谈判。推动制定《二十国集团数字经济发展与合作倡议》，共同发起《“一带一路”数字经济国际合作倡议》，提出《全球数据跨境流动合作倡议》。

In addition, Chinese enterprises actively participate in international cooperation on the digital economy. Alipay has been implemented in more than 70 countries and regions, serving hundreds of thousands of merchants, and has practiced China’s “green cycling” approach in hundreds of cities worldwide. Arab countries have drawn on China’s experience in artificial intelligence and digital payments to co-build “Digital Silk Road” e-commerce platforms. Countries and regions participating in the Belt and Road Initiative are increasingly drawing on China’s digitalization experience, allowing local people to tangibly experience the convenience and benefits brought by the digital economy. Chinese enterprises have participated in multiple submarine cable projects connecting Africa with Europe, Asia, and the Americas; they have completed the construction of more than half of Africa’s wireless sites and high-speed mobile broadband networks, laid over 200,000 kilometers of optical fiber cumulatively, helped 6 million families achieve broadband internet access, and served over 900 million African people. Rahmanthala Osman, the African Union’s representative to China, thanked China for actively helping other developing countries accelerate poverty alleviation and achieve sustainable development through digital technology. He stated that “South-South cooperation can build a more inclusive and sustainable digital economy.”

此外，中国企业积极参与数字经济国际合作。支付宝已在超过70个国家和地区落地，服务数十万商家，并在全球数百座城市践行“绿色骑行”的中国方案。阿拉伯国家借鉴中国人工智能、数字支付经验，共建“数字丝绸之路”电商平台。“一带一路”共建国家和地区越来越多地借鉴中国数字化经验，让当地人民切实体验到数字经济带来的便利与实惠。中国企业参与多条连接非洲和欧、亚、美洲大陆的海底电缆工程；完成建设非洲一半以上无线站点及高速移动宽带网络，累计铺设超过20万公里光纤，帮助600万家庭实现宽带上网，服务超过9亿非洲民众。非盟驻华代表拉赫曼塔拉·奥斯曼感谢中国积极帮助其他发展中国家通过数字技术加快脱贫和实现可持续发展。他表示“南南合作可以建设更有包容性和可持续的数字经济”。

The security community responds to how China promotes multilateral and bilateral cybersecurity cooperation in the absence of a security architecture in the international cybersecurity field. China has continuously called for building a security architecture in cyberspace within the United Nations, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the BRICS countries, and the ASEAN Regional Forum, establishing trust mechanisms in cyberspace, and promoting timely information communication and crisis notification between states and between states and non-state actors to prevent cyber conflicts from escalating into real-world conflicts, thereby maintaining peace and stability in cyberspace. The National Computer Network Emergency Response Technical Team/Coordination Center of China (CNCERT) has established cooperative relationships with 274 Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) in 81 countries, coordinating the handling of over 100,000 cybersecurity incidents annually since 2001.

安全共同体回应在国际网络安全领域缺乏安全架构的情况之下，中国如何推动多边和双边网络安全合作。中国在联合国、上合组织、金砖国家以及东盟地区论坛中不断呼吁构建网络空间的安全架构，建立网络空间的信任机制，推动国家与国家、国家与非国家行为体通过及时的信息沟通和危机通报，避免网络冲突演变为现实冲突，维护网络空间的和平与稳定。中国国家计算机网络应急技术处理协调中心（CNCERT）与81个国家的274个计算机应急响应团队（CERTs）建立了合作关系，自2001年以来每年协调处理10万余起网络安全事件。

In response to the major threats of cybercrime and cyberterrorism in the field of cybersecurity, China firmly supports and promotes the United Nations Security Council in playing an important role in international cooperation against cyberterrorism. It participates in the work of mechanisms such as the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice and the United Nations Intergovernmental Expert Group on Cybercrime, and promotes the discussion and formulation of a global international legal instrument against cybercrime within the UN framework, contributing to the construction of a global legal framework against cyberterrorism. On December 24, 2024, China led and promoted the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime; Strengthening International Cooperation for Combating Certain Crimes Committed by Means of Information and Communications Technology Systems and for the Sharing of Evidence in Electronic Form of Serious Crimes. This is the first time the international community has reached a globally legally binding convention on combating cybercrime, marking a significant milestone in the development of international law in cyberspace.

针对网络安全领域重要网络犯罪和网络恐怖主义威胁，中国坚定支持并推动联合国安理会在打击网络恐怖主义国际合作问题上发挥重要作用，参与联合国预防犯罪和刑事司法委员会、联合国网络犯罪问题政府专家组等机制的工作，推动在联合国框架下讨论、制定打击网络犯罪的全球性国际法律文书，为构建全球网络反恐法律框架贡献力量。2024年12月24日，中国领导并推动《联合国打击网络犯罪以及为打击利用信息通信技术系统实施的某些犯罪并共享严重犯罪电子证据而加强国际合作公约》，这是国际社会首次就网络犯罪打击达成的一项具有全球性法律约束力的公约，对网络空间国际法发展有重要的标志性意义。

At the same time, China has strengthened efforts to jointly combat cybercrime with neighboring countries. In August 2024, China, together with Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam, jointly issued the Joint Statement on Strengthening Cooperation in Combating Transnational Crime under the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Framework, which advocates that member states prioritize cooperation in combating telecom and online fraud and various forms of online gambling crime, encourages the close coordination of law enforcement and security departments of the six countries, promotes information sharing, and strengthens border control. In September 2024, the China-Central Asia Supreme Court Presidents’ Meeting held a special seminar on legal application issues and transnational judicial cooperation in combating violent terrorism, drugs, corruption, and cybercrime, emphasizing the strengthening of regional international criminal judicial cooperation and joint efforts to combat transnational crime. As of now, China’s cooperation with neighboring countries in combating cybercrime has led to the joint investigation and resolution of hundreds of transnational cyber fraud cases.

与此同时，中国加强与周边国家共同打击网络犯罪活动的力度。2024年8月，中国与泰国、柬埔寨、老挝、缅甸、越南共同发布《澜湄合作框架下加强打击跨境犯罪合作的联合声明》，主张成员国将打击电信网络诈骗及各种形式的网络赌博犯罪作为优先合作事项，鼓励六国执法和安全部门为此密切配合，促进信息共享，加强边境管控。2024年9月，中国—中亚国家最高法院院长会议专题研讨打击暴恐、毒品、腐败、网络犯罪等涉及的法律适用问题和跨国司法合作，强调加强区域国际刑事司法合作，合力打击跨境犯罪。截至目前，中国同周边国家的打击网络犯罪合作，已联合侦破跨国网络诈骗案件超数百起。

A community of shared responsibility drives the improvement of global cyberspace governance mechanisms. First, China actively participates in the United Nations cyberspace governance process and promotes the establishment of a multilateral, democratic, and transparent international Internet governance system. In 2015, China submitted an updated draft of the “International Code of Conduct for Information Security” to the United Nations, the first document to systematically articulate norms of behavior in cyberspace. Within the framework of UN mechanisms, China actively encourages the role of entities such as enterprises, universities, and industry organizations. Second, China actively participates in the formulation of global digital governance rules. China emphasizes a path of global digital development based on cooperation, mutual benefit, and win-win outcomes, promoting the improvement and effective interaction of multilateral mechanisms through the reform of global digital governance mechanisms. In September 2020, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs released “China’s Position Paper on the 75th Anniversary of the United Nations,” calling for the use of cyberspace to promote economic and social development, international peace and stability, and human well-being. Finally, China proactively establishes cyberspace governance mechanisms. Since 2014, China has hosted the World Internet Conference, building a platform for global Internet sharing and co-governance. In July 2022, the World Internet Conference International Organization was established in Beijing, marking the transformation of this conference from an international event into a formal international organization, becoming another important entity participating in cyberspace governance.

责任共同体推动全球网络空间治理机制的完善。首先，中国积极参与联合国网络空间治理进程，推动建立多边、民主、透明的国际互联网治理体系。2015年，中国向联合国提交“信息安全国际行为准则”更新草案，是国际上首份系统阐述网络空间行为规范的文件。在联合国框架下的机制中，中国积极推动企业、高校、行业组织等主体发挥作用。其次，中国积极参与全球数字治理规则制定。中国强调走合作互利共赢的全球数字发展道路，通过全球数字治理机制的改革，推动多边机制的完善和有效互动。2020年9月，外交部发布《中国关于联合国成立75周年立场文件》，呼吁把网络空间用于促进经济社会发展、国际和平与稳定和人类福祉等。最后，主动设置网络空间治理机制。中国自2014年起举办世界互联网大会，搭建了全球互联网共享共治的平台。2022年7月，世界互联网大会国际组织在北京成立，标志着该大会从国际盛会发展为正式的国际组织，成为又一个参与网络空间治理的重要主体。

A community of shared interests strives to break through zero-sum game thinking. Using the construction of the “Digital Silk Road”[16]16 The Digital Silk Road is a component of the Belt and Road Initiative, focusing on digital connectivity and e-commerce cooperation between China and participating countries. as a vehicle, it forms flagship projects in areas such as e-commerce and smart cities, establishes technology transfer centers and digital talent training bases, and assists developing countries in growing their digital economies. Governance capacity and talent cultivation are important components of global cyberspace governance, but their international distribution is uneven. Capacity building generally revolves around areas such as cybersecurity policies and strategies, cyber social culture and society, cybersecurity education, training and skills, legal and oversight frameworks, and standards, organizations, and technologies. This includes not only improving national-level strategic design and laws and regulations but also increasing the investment of enterprises and technical communities in technical standards and enhancing public security awareness and knowledge. With technological development, looking at the entire development path from industrialization to informatization to intelligentization, the concentration of technology and talent is increasing, and the situation facing developing countries is becoming more unfavorable. Especially with the development of technologies such as artificial intelligence in recent years, the “digital divide” between countries shows a trend of further deepening. Cybersecurity issues are common challenges faced globally. Risks and vulnerabilities in the cybersecurity domain of developing countries often have a cascading impact on developed countries through the interconnectedness of the digital space. Helping developing countries enhance their capacity to respond to cybersecurity risks and narrowing the gap in cyberspace governance capabilities between the North and the South is particularly important. As a developing country, China has certain advantages in network governance capacity and talent cultivation. It should carry out cooperation projects in cybersecurity capacity building and talent training within the framework of the United Nations and other international organizations, effectively assisting the vast number of developing countries in improving their cyberspace governance capabilities.

利益共同体致力于突破零和博弈思维，以“数字丝绸之路”建设为载体，在电子商务、智慧城市等领域形成旗舰项目，建立技术转移中心与数字人才培养基地，助力发展中国家数字经济增长。治理能力和人才培养是网络空间全球治理的重要组成部分，但是存在国际分布不均衡的情况。能力建设总体上围绕着网络安全政策和战略、网络社会文化和社会、网络安全教育、培训和技能，法律和监督框架，以及标准、组织和技术等方面开展，既包括健全国家层面的战略设计、法律法规，也包括加大企业和技术社群在技术标准领域的投入和提升公众的安全意识和知识。随着技术的发展，从工业化、信息化到智能化的整个发展路径来看，技术和人才的集中程度越来越高，发展中国家面临的形势越不利，特别是随着近年来人工智能等技术的发展，国家之间的“数字鸿沟”有进一步加深的趋势。网络安全问题是全球共同面临的问题，发展中国家在网络安全领域的风险与漏洞，往往会通过数字空间的关联性对发达国家产生连锁影响。帮助发展中国家提升应对网络安全风险的能力、缩小南北网络空间治理能力差距，显得尤为重要。中国作为发展中国家，在网络治理能力和人才培养方面具有一定的优势，应在联合国及其他国际组织框架下，开展网络安全能力建设、人才培训项目合作，切实帮助广大发展中国家提升网络空间治理能力。

Conclusion

结论

In the current era, cyberspace is developing at an unprecedented pace, and the trend of global interconnection is becoming increasingly pronounced. This situation brings both rare opportunities and unprecedented severe challenges to the international community. As a new domain of human activity, cyberspace has made the connections between countries increasingly close, and the dissemination and sharing of information have reached an unprecedented level, greatly promoting global economic development, cultural exchange, and social progress. At the same time, the cybersecurity dilemma is becoming increasingly prominent, manifesting not only as direct threats such as cyberattacks, data breaches, and cybercrime but also involving deeper issues such as national sovereignty, security, and development interests. In the context of globalization, any local problem in cyberspace can rapidly spread globally, posing a serious threat to the peace and stability of the international community. To effectively address the cybersecurity dilemma and build a global cyberspace order consistent with the concept of a community with a shared future in cyberspace, the only way is to advance global governance involving the participation and collaboration of multiple actors. This path transcends the traditional governance model of sovereign states and is more suited to the special needs of cyberspace. Under this concept, all countries in the international community, the private sector, technical communities, and non-governmental organizations should assume corresponding responsibilities and form a joint force.

当今时代，网络空间以前所未有的速度蓬勃发展，全球互联的趋势愈发显著，这一态势为国际社会带来千载难逢的机遇，也带来前所未有的严峻挑战。网络空间作为人类活动的新领域，各国之间联系日益紧密，信息传播与共享达到了前所未有的程度，大大推动了全球经济的发展、文化的交流与社会的进步。与此同时，网络安全困境也日益凸显，不仅表现为网络攻击、数据泄露、网络犯罪等直接威胁，更涉及国家主权、安全、发展利益等深层次问题。在全球化背景下，网络空间的任何一个局部问题都可能迅速蔓延至全球，对国际社会的和平与稳定构成严重威胁。为有效应对网络安全困境，构建符合网络空间命运共同体理念的全球网络空间秩序，唯有推进由多方主体共同参与、协作的全球治理。这一路径超越了传统的主权国家治理模式，更适应网络空间的特殊需求。在这一理念下，国际社会中的各国、私营部门、技术社群与非政府组织都应承担起相应的责任，形成合力。

Looking ahead, global cyberspace governance will mainly exhibit three trends. First, the further integration of state-led and multi-stakeholder models. Countries are gradually accepting the multi-stakeholder model, recognizing the important role of the private sector, technical communities, and others in cyberspace governance, while emphasizing the coordinating role of governments, forming a global governance model of “government guidance, multi-party participation.” Second, the trend of integrating security and development issues is becoming more pronounced. Cyberspace governance no longer focuses solely on cybersecurity issues; development issues such as the development of the digital economy, data privacy protection, and bridging the “digital divide” are gradually becoming important content of governance, promoting a positive interaction between security and development. Third, the trend of specialization and diversification of governance mechanisms is strengthening. As the complexity of cyberspace issues increases, governance mechanisms will become more specialized and diversified. For example, governance mechanisms specifically targeting emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and blockchain are gradually emerging to adapt to the ever-changing cyberspace situation.

展望未来，全球网络空间治理将主要呈现出三个趋势。一是国家主导与多利益攸关方模式进一步融合。各国逐渐接受多利益攸关方模式，认识到私营部门、技术社群等在网络空间治理中的重要作用，同时强调政府的协调作用，形成一种“政府引导、多方参与”的全球治理模式。二是安全与发展议题融合趋势更加明显。网络空间治理不再仅关注网络安全问题，数字经济发展、数据隐私保护、“数字鸿沟”弥合等发展议题逐渐成为治理的重要内容，推动形成安全与发展的良性互动。三是治理机制的专业化与多样化趋势增强。随着网络空间议题的复杂性增加，治理机制将更加专业化与多样化，如专门针对人工智能、量子计算、区块链等新兴技术的治理机制逐渐兴起，以适应不断变化的网络空间形势。

Facing the common challenges of cyberspace, no country can stand alone. Global cooperation and co-governance are the only viable path. Only through the joint efforts of the international community, guided by the concept of global governance, and by comprehensively advancing international legal rules, crisis management mechanisms, technical standards cooperation, and capacity building, can the cybersecurity dilemma be effectively resolved, the effective construction of a global cyberspace order be promoted, and the peace, stability, and sustainable development of global cyberspace be achieved. This is not only the common responsibility and mission of all countries but also an inevitable requirement for the development of human society.

面对网络空间的共同挑战，任何国家都无法独善其身，全球合作与共治才是唯一可行的道路。只有通过国际社会的共同努力，以全球治理理念为指引，全面推进国际法规则、危机管控机制、技术标准合作与能力建设，才能有效破解网络空间安全困境，推动全球网络空间秩序的有效构建，实现全球网络空间的和平、稳定与可持续发展。这不仅是各国共同的责任和使命，也是人类社会发展的必然要求。

(The author is a professor at the School of Political Science and International Relations, Tongji University)

（作者系同济大学政治与国际关系学院教授）

Online editor: Ma Jingren

网络编辑：马京仁