Report – Page 27 – Chinascope

Sixty Years of Political Construction and Development in the New China

The central theme of the conference was systematically summarizing the experience of 60 years of political development in the new China and comprehensively envisioning the direction of China’s political future. The participants agreed that the achievements of China’s political construction and political development have been enormous since the founding of the new China 60 years ago. Although there have been significant setbacks and mistakes in the exploration, the road of political construction and political development that has been adapted to China’s national conditions is basically clear. Some experts have summed up the basic experience of 60 years of political development and political construction in the new China as six unities: The dialectical unity of adherence to the basic principles of Marxism and innovation; adherence to the unity of socialism with Chinese characteristics for the state system and the government system; adherence to the unity of the Party’s basic unwavering line and the flexibility of policy; the unity of the party’s leadership, and the rule of law, with the people being the masters of the nation; adherence to the unity of working for the people, trust in the people and reliance on the people; and adherence to the unity of strengthening and improving the Party’s leadership, maintaining the Party’s advanced nature, and strengthening the Party’s ability to govern. Other experts have summarized the successful experience of China’s political development after the founding of the new China, particularly after the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, as the path of progressive political development with Chinese characteristics. … China’s future political development must stick to the path of socialist political development with Chinese characteristics.

The development of socialist democracy was the main content of the new China’s political construction and political development, which was also the important topic of this conference. Since the founding of the new China, the Chinese Communists have been constantly exploring the development of socialist democratic politics and have gone through a tortuous process. This entered a period of steady progress after the Party’s Sixteen National Congress. Some experts believe that, from the founding of the new China until 1989, democratic developments were the continuation of all democratic movements following the May Fourth Movement. These were mobilization-style democracy, the objective being to change the existing political order in the manner of mass movement by means of empowering the masses with master status. After 1989, with the development of the market economy and with civil society taking shape, China’s political life gradually began to show "normal politics" and "democratic actions." That is, inner-party democracy and grassroots democracy have been gradually promoting the democratic process in China. Experts have pointed out that movement democracy and action democracy cannot be completely separated. The orderly development of participatory democracy is critical to China’s future democratic development.

The adherence to, and improvement of, the CPC-led multi-party cooperation and political consultation system is an important part of, as well as a means to, the development of socialist democracy with Chinese characteristics. In this connection, the participants had a lively and in-depth discussion. The participants believe that new China has achieved rapid economic development over the past sixty years. Politically it has also achieved relatively stable development. One of the secrets is the multi-party cooperation system under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. China’s non-symmetrical political party system maintains the stable ruling status of the ruling party as well as ensuring a certain degree of influence by other political parties. The multi-party cooperation system has created a new system and space for activities of the political parties and has established a new relationship between the political parties.

…

Another topic discussed at the conference was that the political system reform and government management reform is the form of socialist political development with Chinese characteristics. … On the historical course and direction of the new China’s government, some experts have suggested that in 60 years of the new China the government has gone through three forms of government: totalitarian governance, regulation-based governance, and joint governance. The future direction of government is the development of a form of service-oriented governance. …

Research into the ruling party’s development was also an important topic of this conference. The participants agreed that the establishment of the Chinese Communist Party’s ruling status was not accidental. It was the product of the development of the political parties in modern China. It was the result of the historical development path’s selection over sixty years of the new China. Only by strengthening self-development and promptly resolving issues of the restriction of the Party’s power and corruption can the Chinese Communist Party ensure its ruling status. Some experts pointed out that, in order for the Chinese Communist Party to ensure its ruling position, it must also improve the effectiveness of inner-Party supervision and meet the needs of the middle class to participate in politics.

Endnote:
[1] Study Times, November 9, 2009
http://www.studytimes.com.cn/WebPage/ny1.aspx?act=1&id=3039&nid=11065&bid=3&page=1

Reports | | March 3, 2010 | Report

An Innovative Seminar was Held to Promote Grass-roots Party Organizations

Zhou Yizhi, chief editor of the Masses magazine [2]

The value of “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” in Nanjing can be summed up in many ways. However, from the perspective of the practice of democratic political development, there are a number of prominent aspects.

First, it is an important attempt to develop inner-party democracy. The accumulated experiences can be applied in two ways: the first is that “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” originated from grass-roots organizations and can be extended to higher-level cadre selection and appointments; the second is that “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” in the grass-roots party organizations started from key leadership positions in the grass-roots organizations and can be extended in the direction of Representatives of the party congress.

Second, this provides good political safeguards for grass-roots social-democratic autonomy and community development. Leaders of grass-roots party organizations from “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” not only have a solid support base within the party, but also have broad social acceptance.

Third, cadres in the party will gradually be trained to become the ruling party politicians. The process of “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” introduces competition in political affairs. This could pave the road for training our own politicians in the party, who grew up from the grass-roots society, to adapt to new situations in political life.

Fourth, this could be a demo for grass-roots social-democratic autonomy. Inner-party democracy will lead to the people’s democracy. The “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” of grass-roots level key leaders is a model for democratic autonomy in grass-roots societies.

Some thoughts from different aspects regarding Nanjing’s Direct Election

First, we need to scientifically handle the relationship between the appointment system and the electoral system and define the boundaries of democratic elections. In Nanjing, the benefit of grass-roots direct elections is the choice of which positions should be filled through election. At the same time, the rules for the election procedures should be clearly defined and the real situation needs to be considered.

Second, the substance of the party’s leadership and the party’s management of cadres should be constantly updated. With the emerging circumstances of social autonomy, the meaning of the party’s management of party cadres should include establishing qualifications and conditions in the process of the election, making reasonable rules, and monitoring the implementation of the election process, including the daily education and supervision of cadres.

Third the electoral process should be improved. The election is a process. If there is only the one step of voting, without a corresponding overall design, a lot of “hidden rules” will very easily interfere.

Fourth, is the choice in the initial nomination. During the process of the cadre election, at the 17the party’s National Congress, in its Fourth Plenary Session, the party organization proposed two methods to be used during the process of the cadre elections: recommendation by the party organization and a joint recommendation by party members. In Nanjing’s direct election, there was a third method: self recommendation. The coexistence of three methods can broaden the visual field in the selection of cadres.

Gao Xinmin, a professor at the Party School of the Chinese Communist Party [3]

Under China’s historical conditions, the inner-party election directly faces several issues.

First is the background of socialist democratic politics. Even though the grass-roots inner-party direct elections are theoretically only the party’s internal elections … objectively speaking, they have facilitated people’s acceptance of the community’s party organization. They contribute to rather than undermine the party’s leadership.

Second is the formation of a self renewal mechanism within the party. … The grass-roots direct election system is an important step in the self-renewal mechanism and can improve vitality from the grass-roots.

Third is to make up for the institutional weaknesses. … Under the current unchanged system, the election is an effective way to restrict power using legal rights.

Fourth, is the party members’ fundamental rights. In practice, there are not enough institutional channels to assure party members’ basic rights.

Fifth is to supply a new experience in the development of inner-party democracy. Election is the core issue of democracy. However, due to lots of interests and conflicts, an election is difficult to implement.

Xie Chuntao, Deputy Director of the Department of Party History, the Party School of the Chinese Communist Party [4]

Nanjing’s success has at least eight benefits.

First, it is able to select relatively better cadres. Second, it is able to arouse the main party member’s awareness. Third, it is to be able to strengthen supervision over cadres who are in leadership positions. Fourth, it is able to rally the masses from all aspects. In the community, the CCP organization’s duty is to serve the masses and select cadres accepted by most party members through democratic elections. In this way, it will inevitably improve the work of the community party organizations, and unite the people in the communities around the party. Fifth, it is helpful to maintain the party’s unity and integrity. Sixth, it is able to train young cadres. Seventh it promotes the people’s democratic process. The party collects many social elite, among whom there is an election. With democratic elections, those people are more qualified and have fewer potential problems. It will help to promote the people’s democracy and provide a good model. Eighth, it improves the image of the Chinese Communist Party. Democracy has great moral force. During the period of democratic revolution, the Chinese Communist Party that ruled in part of the country implemented a truly democratic election. Today, step by step, improving the party and the country’s democratic process will certainly improve the image of the Chinese Communist Party.

Professor Liu Changjiang of the Party History Department of the Jiangsu Provincial Party School [5]

The major problem that the grass-roots party organizations are currently facing is how to unite party members and play the role of party members. The experiment of having a local community CCP secretary chosen by way of direct elections helps party members to be a major part of the CCP’s action. It can strengthen the awareness of members’ rights as well as responsibilities. It can also strengthen the grass-roots organization’s cohesion and party members having full access to their political role. Due to the complexity of problems encountered today regarding the party cadres, there are even more problems encountered with the rules of the appointment system, which once played an important role. The problem is that if the appointment system is continued, more serious problems will occur. They include the fact that cadres can only be promoted instead of being demoted, and that the system cannot catch up with changes occurring in people nowadays. … For Nanjing, the most striking part of the experiment is the electoral process. Election is the first link of democracy. A democracy without election is incomplete. … In the community, we can fully combine election democracy with everyday democracy, and explore it in theory. In this way, the Nanjing experiment may not only have nationwide significance but global significance as well.

Li Chengyan, Party secretary, the School of Management, Peking University [6]

"Open Nominations" and "Direct Elections" are two facets of one body of the innovative experiments in grassroots democracy. For both sides, whether it is "Open Nominations" or "Direct Elections," it is a good reflection of the requirement of inner-party democracy development which is featured by effective participation and equal voting rights. The novel form of "Open Nominations" and the decisive meaning of the Open Nominations conference strengthen the party members’ control over the nomination agenda. The whole process is done in an open and transparent environment, which ensures the members are fully informed as voters.

This grass-roots democracy implemented the key policy of the CCP’s 17th Congress. It greatly consolidated the party’s grass-roots organizations and infused fresh blood and power at the fundamental level of the CCP organizations. It effectively connected the party and the masses. The setting with party member’s right at the core has awakened the consciousness of the broad masses of party members and cadres in the main body. This grass-roots democracy and direct elections of candidates has strengthened the sense of responsibility. This grass-roots direct democracy setting can effectively improve the grass-roots party organization in decision-making. The kind of democracy in urban settings further extends the model of self-governance of villagers in rural areas, cultivating a unified foundation of civilization for both urban and rural residents. It prepares an important prerequisite and condition for the future advancement of inner-party democracy in the people’s democratic development

Zhuo Zeyuan, Dean of the Graduate School at the Party School of the Chinese Communist Party [7]

“Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is the direction for inner-party democracy. Advancing inner-party democracy is a realistic need for our party to adapt to social development, lead social democratic progress, and develop internal democracy. With the accomplishment of the direct election of the Villagers Committee in all rural areas and of the Residents Committee in urban communities in most of the regions, it is a realistic issue of great urgency to speed up developing inner-party democracy. More importantly, our party, as the ruling party, also bears the responsibility for spurring social democracy by means of inner-party democracy, the key to which is the democratic election of cadres. “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is the fundamental path to reform the cadre system. With the progress of socialist democratic politics, the existing merit-based system has lost its basis, and the candidate selection system has also shown its limitations. As both systems cannot meet the requirements for the development of socialist democratic politics, popular elections thus become inevitable as history evolves in the modern age. “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is the fundamental path for our party to reform the cadre system, keeping pace with the times. “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is an effective way to improve the governance capability. Candidates are chosen through recommendations; votes of confidence are cast by non party members and electoral votes by ordinary party members. The democratic selection will undoubtedly become the effective method for the best to stand out. This will produce cadres who arise amidst competition and selection, with more capability to govern than those generated by any other selection method. “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is a realistic measure to win public support. As it is a method for the public, as the main body, to choose cadres and decide the results, leaders and cadres out of “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” can undoubtedly gain more trust and support from the public. Finally, “Open Nominations & Direct Elections” is a special way to develop political civilization. Through open nominations and direct elections in strict accordance with procedures, the back-door political manipulations from the past will surely be greatly reduced or even fundamentally eliminated. Even if there are illegalities, because of the openness of “Open Nominations & Direct Elections,” they can easily be found and amended, allowing our political civilization to elevate to a higher level.

Zhu Lingjun, former Vice President of the Party School of the Chinese Communist Party [8]

Based on the current status of the party’s leadership system, it’s necessary to look at inner-party democracy from a higher position. There are two actual pillars for the inner-party leadership system: one is the authorization mechanism, the other is the reporting mechanism. The drawbacks of the authorization mechanism is that power comes from above, resulting in an instability in power and a lack of approval from the public. As the superior’s preferences are changing, close contact with the public becomes close contact with the superior. The second pillar is the inner-party reporting system. Due to a lack of stability in power, the first drawback of the reporting system is that as the responsibilities are handed over to every level up, no one is taking final responsibility for any matter. The second drawback is that, in the reporting process, the information is filtered, intercepted, and distorted. From the perspective of the characteristics of the new stage of social transition, it is necessary to use inner-party democracy to drive and lead the People’s Democracy.

Reports | | February 24, 2010 | Report

Analysis and Prediction on China’s Social Situations in 2010

The Social Blue Book points out that, based on the economic recovery, job market recovery, consumption growth, the stability of commodity prices and other key indicators of economic and social development, China will be the first out of the shadow of the international financial crisis and entering a new growth period. From the perspective of the industrialization, urbanization, and consumer spending trend, China is entering a new growth phase of the post international financial crisis. The so-called new growth phase, on one hand means that China is entering a new growth cycle with an above 8% economic growth rate; on the other hand it means that the new driving force of the upcoming growth cycle will encounter significant changes compared to the past. It will be more dependent on industrial structural upgrades, economic and social restructuring, and the domestic consumption growth.

The 2010 social blue book, The 2010 China Social Situation Analysis and Forecast, pointed out that in 2010, China will enter the new growth phase of the post-international financial crisis; industrialization and urbanization will enter a new accelerating interim growth stage; changes in social structure will break the existing urban-rural structure in the new growth stage; the general public will enter the mass consumption of the new growth stage; higher education will be available for the mass public; there will also be nationwide coverage of social security, and primarily economic reform that later transitions to a comprehensive reform. The level of purchasing power of the urban and rural population improved significantly improved 2009. In 2009, the overall level of satisfaction of urban and rural residents was "relatively satisfied" with the overall satisfaction of rural residents being higher than urban residents in regard to their living. In 2009, the employment situation was basically stable, while the pay rate of new college graduates was significantly lower. In 2009, the overall public safety and order were stable with criminal cases still staying at a high level. In 2009, the tension in labor relations in some of the enterprises and social security became the main focus of migrant workers’ rights issues. The Internet became a source of independent news media, and mobile phones became the most powerful carrier of public opinion. [1]

The People’s Net [the website for People’s Daily] reported the following on the same day, “On December 21, the Academy of Social Sciences published the 2010 Social Blue Book. It points out that the rate of mass incidents remains high this year. This is because some areas that are in the process of accelerating local development and restructuring have accumulated many historic conflicts and problems. These problems have not been solved in time, which has caused deep resentment among the people.” [2]

The report quoted Li Peilin, director of the Institute of Sociology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in his speech, “Now, the more prominent issue is the occurrence of mass incidents. This year’s rate of mass incidents remains high.”[2]

“In particular, what’s worth noting are the repetitions of the same type of incidents, such as the Hubei ShiShou incident, which was almost a repeat of the WongAn incident that occurred in 2008. In other words, the WongAn incident was about a secondary school female student drowning to death. The Hubei incident was about a young chef (Tu Yuangao), who jumped off a building and died. Just like what happened in WongAn, while people were talking about the death, the government announced that it was an unnatural death. However, the general public, through the Internet, began to question whether the incident was murder, suicide, or homicide. Later, the government concluded, after an autopsy, that he had committed suicide. His family did not believe it, and didn’t allow the corpse to be taken away for up to 30 hours. The autopsy conducted by the local agency wasn’t convincing. It went to the provincial level, and eventually led to a mass incident involving thousands of people, resulting in the burning of cars and buildings, and a serious clash between the police and the people. Of course, this time, the extent of violence wasn’t as serious as it was in WongAn, but its process and the logic behind it was the same as in the WongAn incident.” [2]

“We categorize such conflicts as non-class and non-direct interest group conflicts because the participating people are from all aspects of society, and the participating parties have no direct conflict of interest related to the event itself. This shows that some areas, because of financial weakness, especially in the past 30 years of reform and opening up, and in the process of accelerating development and restructuring, have accumulated a lot of historical conflicts and problems, such as enterprise reform, housing demolition, land acquisition, and fund collection, etc. In handling of these things, much is owed to the masses. These problems are not solved promptly, and they result in deep resentment. Therefore, when the unexpected incidents occur, they tend to develop into the so-called non-class, non-direct interest group conflicts.” [2]

As to the reasons why there is such a high frequency of this type of incident, People’s Net made this analysis: “According to incomplete statistics, in 1993, our country had 8,700 mass incidents, by 2005, it increased to 87,000 cases, and in 2006, more than 90,000. The number of mass incidents in 2008 and their intensity surpassed any from the past.” [3]

"All incidents usually involved casualties. This consequently intensified the confrontation between government officials and the public. This is clearly not something that people want to see. Meanwhile, there is no doubt, China is in its golden age of development, but it is also in a period of high conflicts. It is easy to breed mass events, so in dealing with mass incidents, there should not be any fear, much less politicization. Of course, they cannot be neglected either.

What is the reason for the outbreak of mass incidents? Some scholars believe that it is due to deep resentment from (the public toward the government). That does make sense. So, why is there resentment? What is the discontent? To put it plainly, people’s interests and rights have been violated, such as in enterprise restructuring, housing demolition, land acquisition, fund collection, etc. Some government agencies have owed much to the public. Indebtedness can raise the public’s grievances. What is worth mentioning in particular is that grievances if not abreacted for too long a time, will explode in the end.

Unfortunately, when grievances arise, certain government departments do not take them seriously and act in a timely manner, not to mention handling them proactively. … Worse still, some people have been wronged and unfairly treated, and their appeals only met with obstruction. Some officials even demonize petitioners, and petitioners are labeled as “trouble-making people.” As reported, the petitioners are therefore often carefully “watched.” When they show up at government office premises, various approaches are used to suppress them. Violence, pressure, and threats are most commonly used, because of the government’s fear of losing face and its image being damaged. In such situations, all it takes is a triggering event to cause a mass incident.

Days ago (on December 1, 2009), the Qiushi magazine published a long article by the Public Security Minister Meng Jianzhu, titled “Strengthening the Development of the Five Abilities and Fully Improving the Proficiency for Maintaining Stability.” The article said, “At present, China’s economic and social development have shown a series of characteristics in the new phase. In the area of social stability, it has shown a basic trend of prominent contradictions among the people, a high incidence of criminal offenses, and complicated struggles against the enemy. The Internet has become an important means for the anti-China forces to infiltrate, sabotage, and amplify the energy for destruction. This brings new challenges to the public security organs to maintain national security and social stability. The relevance, complexity, and sensitivity of various social contradictions have significantly increased, which brings new tests to the public security organs in their handling of complicated situations. The public security organ’s new tasks of social control include all kinds of crimes and a significant increase in social security issues. People’s awareness of their legal rights has significantly increased. The extent of media and public monitoring has increased to an unprecedented level. All these factors put forward new requirements for the public security organs’ law enforcement activities. Given the new situations and new tasks, public security still has many outstanding issues and weaknesses that need urgent solutions. From the present to a certain period into the future, we must unswervingly carry out development of the Three Basic Skills. Meanwhile, we must further public security’s information technology development, law enforcement standardization development, and the development of harmonious community relations (the Three Constructions). This will enable us to focus on efforts to strengthen the Five Abilities, to raise to full-scale the ability and level for maintaining national security and social stability, and to constantly enhance the people’s sense of security and satisfaction.

Working with the masses is a fundamental job of the public security authorities; the ability to work with the masses is the most basic and central capability of the public security authorities. Under new historic conditions, we must unswervingly emphasize the work with the masses as a basic task, and improve the capability to work with the masses as a basic skill, so as to solidify the grass roots support base for public security work.

Grass roots police, especially the community police in local stations, should take “three understandings and four abilities” as basic skills: understanding public psychology, understanding the language used by the public, and understanding communication skills; the ability to solve conflicts, the ability to mediate disputes, the ability to actively provide service, and the ability to mobilize. … We need to further improve the approaches of evaluating the performance of grass roots police. … We must maximally alleviate the burdens of grass roots personnel, and make sure that that grass-roots public security authorities will focus their energy and manpower primarily on work with the masses and infrastructure work.

Under the current complex law enforcement environment, public security’s law enforcement activities must focus on the overall requirement of “maximally increasing the harmonious factors, maximally reducing the disharmonious factors,” and putting the domestic and international situations, the Internet, and real world factors into perspective.

Put together all systemic resources, and the efforts to break the "compartmentalization" barriers, and strive to build a resource sharing public security information platform of vertical and horizontal integration as soon as possible. Strengthen basic source information gathering and recording. Make it not only a grass roots important responsibility and daily job of the police, but also a link toward basic tasks such as population management and preventive control. Thus the information can be grasped anytime and anywhere, and gathered and recorded anytime and anywhere. Tightly grasp the detailed information and be able to control and manage it. Informationalize the fundamental jobs, regularize the information work, and provide strong support for a unified information platform and information sharing. Speed up the in-depth application of the information, further strengthen the comprehensive analysis of intelligence, constantly improve the abilities of predicting, warning, and prevention, and firmly hold the upper-hand in the public security work.

The key to building an information network is real time application. We must fully rely on the information network, vigorously implement new anti-crime mechanisms such as web-based synchronized investigation and evidence collection, investigating cases and on-line pursuit of criminals, make efforts to reduce the cost of operations, enhance effectiveness, and improve attacking skills. We should actively adapt to a dynamic environment of social management, give full play to the advantages of the information network, improve the integrated operation mechanism of strike-prevention-management-control, strive to spot key areas in prevention and control, discover vulnerabilities in strikes and management, and continuously improve the comprehensive management and control capacity of the dynamic society. We must comprehensively strengthen the buildup of “Six networks” including the street-level prevention and control network, the community prevention and control network, the work place prevention and control network, the video surveillance network, the regional police cooperation network, and the "virtual society" prevention and control network. We must also actively build social security networks combining points, lines and planes, combine prevention through humans, equipment, and technology, combine striking, prevention, management, and control, and combine online and real world controls, so as to achieve an all-position, all-time, seamless, and three-dimensional coverage of the dynamic society.

Actively prevent and properly handle major social unrest. … Social unrest is usually related to conflicts of interest. Therefore the key to preventing social unrest is to resolve conflicts and disputes. Many years of practice have shown that the cost is minimal if the conflicts are handled the first time (they come up) and at the initial stage. We must always adhere to focusing on prevention and mediation as the first choice. … Focus the work more on the grass roots and the daily matters, gain accurate knowledge of social conditions and public opinion, timely grasp the social dynamics, and further resolve conflicts and disputes. On issues that matter to the people’s personal interests and signs of instability that might trigger major social unrest, promptly report them to the Party committee and the government. Relying on the Party committee and the government, try all means to solve the problems, alleviate the conflicts, resolve the disputes, maximally kill the conflicts and disputes at the lowest level, solve the problems locally, and eliminate hidden dangers in the bud, so as to prevent the occurrence of massive unrest at the root.

When handling mass unrest, we must be early in discovering the problem, swift in resolving it, and proper in handling it. We should prevent the incident from spreading and expanding, so as to reduce its impact and harm to society to the minimum. On the occurrence of a major social unrest, we should insist on early detection, early reporting, and early control to ensure that the situation does not expand, does not escalate, and does not intensify. Timely report them to the Party committees and governments for proper handling. When dealing with the incident, do more propaganda, explanation, and persuasion, in an effort to alleviate their emotions and guide the masses to express their interest through rational and legal channels to resolve conflicts of interest and to safeguard their own interests.

Comrades at all levels of the public security authorities ought to continuously learn from the experiences of handling major social unrest, strengthen the study of the features of major mass unrest, and improve the capability of on-site command and handling the incident by law. We need to build an emergent command mechanism with unified command, swift response, orderly coordination, and efficient operation. Clearly specify the responsibilities of all departments and all police forces and improve the effectiveness of command to form an integrated force that will handle the major emergent incidents. We should vigorously strengthen the special forces and equipment for handling emergent situations, constantly improve the plans, intensify the exercises, and improve emergent response capabilities.

With the rise of the Internet and other new media, the environment of social discussion has undergone a major and profound change. It’s becoming an important task to strengthen the capabilities of the public security authorities to actively research and make judgments, to respond to Internet public opinion, and to improve the capabilities of communication with the public. We must actively use the platform of the Internet. … A higher priority should be put on correctly guiding Internet public opinion, and striving to find new ways to strengthen and improve public security’s guidance of public opinion in the information age.

Tackling a major incident has two components: on-site handling and guiding public opinion. We must pay high attention to the work on public opinion and promptly release authoritative information at the same time as on-site handling of the incident.

We must establish and improve the speedy response and coordination mechanism for major incidents. Once a major emergent incident occurs, immediately launch the emergency response mechanism with each relevant authority taking its own responsibility. We must establish and improve the consultation and decision-making mechanism and adhere to early detection, early reporting, and early guidance, so as to timely clarify the truth and eliminate in the bud the unstable signs that could trigger a major crisis. … We must further improve the public security authority’s spokesperson system to make sure that once a major incident takes place, we can objectively release the authoritative information the first time, publicize the truth, guide public opinion, and gain the initiative.

We should fully utilize news media as the bridge between the public security authorities and the public, strengthen communications with the media, and proactively share the work of public security and the media. … Maximally gain understanding and support from the media for the public security work. … We should improve the contents and format of the propaganda work of public security, … and constantly strengthen the influence and appeal of the work of public security, so as to build a good public opinion atmosphere for public security work.

Endnotes:
[1] Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, December 21, 2009
http://www.cass.net.cn/file/20091221252540.html
[2] People’s Daily, December 21, 2009
http://opinion.people.com.cn/GB/10623670.html
[3] People’s Daily, December 22, 2009
http://opinion.people.com.cn/GB/10624587.html
[4] People’s Daily, December 1, 2009
http://theory.people.com.cn/GB/10483616.html

Reports | | February 16, 2010 | Report

Establishing and Building up Party Organizations within State-Owned and Private Enterprises

"The notice called for a full understanding of the importance of further promotion of the establishment of party subsidiary organizations in non-publicly-owned economic organizations. The non-publicly-owned economic organizations are a crucial component of the party’s grass-roots organizational work. In recent years, the work of party buildup in non-publicly-owned economic organizations has been vigorously advanced, but generally speaking there is still weakness, such as limited coverage of the party organizations and widely existent ‘difficulties in launching activities and playing effective roles.’” [1]

"(The noticed required that) in non-publicly-owned economic organizations with three or more party members, a grass roots party organization is to established; those with less than three party members can either partner with organizations in the same region or industry to set up a joint party organization or rely on industry and business federations, self-employment associations, private enterprise associations, trade associations, and industrial leaders to institute a party branch. Those that qualify for the conditions to have party organizations should do it actively and timely. For those non-publicly-owned economic organizations that for the time being do not meet the conditions to establish a party branch on their own, a higher level party organization can dispatch a political instructor to create the conditions for the establishment of a party branch in the future." [1]

"Additionally, the notice stressed to pick the right person to be in charge of the party organization in non-publicly-owned economic organizations, especially the secretaries. It emphasized to appoint to the leading positions those who have a strong party character, understand business operations, are capable of management, and are good at working with people. For the economic organizations that do not have a suitable candidate, after consultation with the company, the higher party branches may recommend or appoint someone for the job. … A timely adjustment is needed where those persons in charge of party branches are not competent to hold their position." [1]

"The notice also called for playing effective roles in the grass roots party organizations in non-publicly-owned economic organizations. … (It required) improving the education, management, supervision, and services for the party members in the non-publicly-owned economic organizations. (The notice asked to) do a good job in actively and steadily recruiting party members in non-publicly-owned economic organizations, to pay close attention to enrolling party members among people who work on the frontline of production as well as among the outstanding youth, to discover, train, and recommend talented people, and to strengthen the education and training of those who are active in joining the party to ensure the quality of new party members. … (It expected to) further improve the leadership and guidance of the party organizations in non-publicly-owned economic organizations, and effectively resolve issues such as the lack of operating funds and lack of activity venues." [1]

Prior to this, on July 2, 2009, Xinhua.net published another article by Zhong Youping, a member of the party branch of the State Administration of Industry & Commerce (SAIC). Zhong Youping “asked the party branches at all levels below SAIC as well as party branches of all the associations of private firms, to adapt to local conditions and times, and actively advance the party buildup in private firms." "Zhong Youping requested that the party branches of all the industrial and commercial authorities and private firm associations focus especially on larger enterprises, and take effective approaches to expand the coverage of party organizations. The enterprises that do not yet meet the conditions to establish a party branch on their own may adopt formats such as ‘joint formation with other enterprises,’ ‘joint formation with local communities,’ and ‘relying on trade associations, under the guidance of the organization department." "Zhong Youping emphasized that the party branches of the industrial and commercial authorities should establish party organizations, conditional on consent from the organization department of the local party committees and relying on private enterprise associations at each level. They should timely enroll the mobile party members from private enterprises in grass roots party organizations, so as to reduce the ‘blind spots’ and ‘blank spots’ of party coverage.” [2]

Last year, there were special instructions from the higher authorities at the CCCCP, calling for strengthening the ideological and political work of people from the non-publicly-owned enterprises. Owners of some private enterprises seemed to show positive responses to “political trainings to enhance ideological and political enlightenment” by saying “This makes the corporate direction more clear; we will just follow the party.” [3] Some said that this policy can “develop and strengthen a team in private enterprises that will firmly support the party’s leadership and unswervingly take the road of socialism with Chinese characteristics.” [3]. On November 8, 2009, Global Times under People’s Daily reported that, driven by Weng Jieming, Chongqing City’s Municipal CCP Committee member and chief of Chongqing’s United Front Department, the Chairman of Chongqing’s Creative Business Association, Zhou Jin, on behalf of Chongqing’s Association of Industry and Commerce, signed the ‘Cooperative Agreement for an Advanced Training Course for Representatives of Non-Public Enterprises in Chongqing, with the Central Party School, sending a group of 59 representatives from private firms to the Central Party School for a week long training.” “In the organizer’s view, this ‘Advanced Training Course for Representatives of Private Enterprises’ was to be very significant for the enterprises to be in sync with the government on ideology.” The report quoted the class leader of the training, the chairman of Chongqing Construction Materials Business Association, and CEO of the Ao’yun Group, Sun Renyuan, who said, “This was not only a power charge, but an opportunity for us to upgrade our political consciousness and accurately steer the direction of private enterprise development.” The report said at the end, “In fact, as early as 2001, there was a ‘fever’ for owners of private enterprises across the country to go and study at the Central Party School. The ‘External Training Center’ under the Central Party School, responsible for giving short trainings and ad hoc classes, was also established that year. According to their data, since then, nearly ten thousand private enterprises owners have attended these training courses." [3]

Compared to building party organizations in the private enterprises, the CCP’s policy in state-owned enterprises is to ensure that these businesses are always under the party’s leadership. [4] As for how to maintain the core position of the party in the state-owned enterprises, on August 27, 2009, People’s Daily published a commentator’s article, stressing “firmly establishing the party branch as the political core in the governing structure of state-owned enterprises is a valuable experience learned from 30 years of reform and practice, as well as an important principle that must be strictly followed while strengthening and improving party development work in state-owned enterprises. It reflects the distinctive character and requirements of the modern Chinese state-owned enterprise system." [5]

"The basic channel for the party branches to play a core political role is to actively participate in the decision making process on the enterprises’ major issues. Party branches in enterprises should focus on major issues, the big picture, and a clear direction. For major decisions and important personnel appointments and removals that matter for the overall reform and development of the enterprise, as well as critical issues that involve personal interests of the employees, the party branches should give serious study and discussion, and put forward opinions and suggestions. In order to participate in the decision-making process on major issues, it is necessary to strengthen the buildup of the system, make the issues transparent, standardize the procedures, and improve the mechanisms. On one hand, this will assure the board’s unified decision making power on major issues. On the other hand, the opinions of the party branches are respected and reflected in the decisions, (representing) a real combination of the party organization’s participation with the board’s decision making on major issues." [5]

"The key for the party branches to play a core political role is to perform a leading role in the selection and appointment of personnel. The leading role is reflected in the party branches’ determination of standards of hiring, and also in recommending candidates, improving the evaluation system, strengthening supervision and management, training reserve personnel, and so on. Adhere to the principles of the party’s managing cadres, combined with the board’s selection of managerial talent and managers deploying personnel; also adhere to the principles of the party recommending hires, combined with market oriented hiring of managerial personnel. Vigorously advance the reform of the human resource system to make enterprise personnel selection and appointments institutionalized and standardized with proper procedures, so as to both adapt to the requirement of the corporate governance structure and ensure the party’s leading role in the selection and appointment of hires inside the enterprise.” [5]

“The fundamental requirement for the party branches to play a core political role is to assure and supervise the implementation of the nation’s principles and policies inside the enterprise. The party organizations in the enterprises should not only pay attention to supervision of human resources, finance, and materials, and of key personnel in the enterprises, but also strengthen the supervision of how well the enterprises are carrying out the Concept of Scientific Development and national policies. The party should push the enterprises to play their leading role in national economic growth and carry out their political and social responsibilities.” [5]

"Truly carrying out the party branches’ core political role in the corporate structure of state-owned enterprises cannot be done without the support of necessary policies and mechanisms. … It is necessary to build an operational mechanism to ensure that the party organizations will give full play to their central political role. … The party has superiority on political ideology, leadership, and experience working with people. Only if adjustment is first made on the operation mechanism, can these advantages of the party (enhance) the core competitiveness of the state-owned enterprises. In turn, the party branches’ core political position will be consolidated, the party’s development work will become a crucial part of the values of the enterprise, and the party branches will truly become an integral part of the modern state-owned enterprise system with Chinese characteristics." [5]

The StudyTimes.com.cn published an article on October 12, 2009, detailing the measures to maintain the core political position of the party branches. “To ensure that the enterprises are always under their party’s leadership, we must create an organizational establishment, and strongly push for the model that ‘every subsidiary and division of an enterprise has a corresponding party branch.’ Within administrative agencies, institutes, state-owned enterprises, non-publicly-owned enterprises, China-Hong Kong joint ventures, and other ownership entities, we can establish stand-alone, joint, or affiliate party branches. This is to guarantee that wherever a business identity develops, the party organization and organizational work will also go. … Have middle-level leaders and cadres wearing party, administration, and business hats to cover all divisions and subsidiaries of the enterprise, making sure that the party’s leadership is everywhere. … At the same time, pay great attention to choosing good party branch secretaries with strong party character and who are good at ideological and political work, so that the party cadres take care of all of the internal divisions and subsidiaries who will be focusing on party buildup.” “Insist on advancing corporate cultural development through party buildup, and community cultural development through corporate cultural development. Actively deploy media outlets that carry the party buildup, including party journals, party newspapers, propaganda bulletin boards, and websites. Establish party member service centers, party member responsibility zones, party member pioneer posts, and conduct the activities of ‘showing your party nature.’” [4]

Endnotes:
[1] Xinhua, November 16, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/16/content_12470825.htm
[2] Xinhua, July 2, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-07/02/content_11640304.htm
[3] Global Times, November 18, 2009
http://china.huanqiu.com/roll/2009-11/636187.html
[4] Study Times, October 12, 2009
http://www.studytimes.com.cn/WebPage/ny1.aspx?act=0&id=2980&bid=11
[5] Chinese Academy of Social Science, August 27, 2009
http://www.cass.net.cn/file/20090827239716.html

Reports | | February 14, 2010 | Report

The Strategic Choice for China’s Economy during Global Economic Transformation

I. Focus on the global economic transformation behind the financial crisis

From the perspective of the long-term business cycle, the current world financial crisis is, in essence, a crisis of the world business cycle. The world’s economic history shows that a global economic crisis has often been the drive and opportunity for major scientific and technological innovation and new industries. … Now that the period when the IT industry was the engine for economic growth has ended, there is a lack of new industry to be the economic growth engine. Thus the huge amount of capital accumulated during the high-tech period flew to the real estate and financial industries. Financial investors and real estate developers jointly created a deformed engine for U.S. economic growth: a virtual economy. From this perspective, the global financial crisis is essentially a business cycle crisis. As a result, our key strategy dealing with the financial crisis should be not simply to reconstruct the financial order, but to remake an industry in the real economy.

The looming new economy has the following three characteristics.

First, a new energy revolution is solving the problems of human civilization that could not be solved within the framework of the industrial economy. Energy and environment are global difficult problems that constrain sustainable growth of the industrial economy. … The new energy revolution, with renewable energy at its core, marks the birth of a new wealth manufacturing model and production method for human beings.

Second, new energy will enable a series of new industries and new technologies. … A leading industry should have three major characteristics: it affects the overall economy, its technology is universally adopted, and it constitutes the basic industry for economic development. The emerging new energy revolution has all of the above three characteristics.

Third, the incentive mechanism for the new energy revolution has matured. … Among the economic stimulus plans in response to the financial crisis, energy and environment have suddenly become the investment targets of developed countries. This is definitely not a consequence of the developed countries all of a sudden having raised their moral standard for protecting the environment. Rather it is an indication of the formation of an incentive mechanism for new energy and environmental industries. The reason why the financial crisis became an opportunity for the new energy revolution is that the economic crisis greatly damaged traditional industry and its incentive mechanism, bringing the advantages of a growing new industry to light, and ushering in opportunities for marginal industries, which can now enter the decision making horizon for government and business investment.

II. Obama’s new policy aims to promote economic transformation and seize the new economic heights

First, the purpose for Obama’s new policy of developing new energy sources as its core strategy is to seize the new economic heights. The way the U.S. is responding to the financial crisis is to treat the financial crisis as a crisis of a hollow real economy, and to use the development of new energy as a way of reviving the U.S. economy and occupying the strategic high ground of the new economy.

Second, Obama’s new policy focuses on the long-term goals of economic development and structural adjustment, rather than immediate economic growth. Since Obama took office, his three-step plans are all about how to advance structural reform and strengthen economic competitiveness. The first step was the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009," passed by Congress, with a 787 billion investment, which established developing new energy as the core of the revival of U.S. economic long-term goals. The second step was to stress test companies in crisis, so as to strengthen the U.S. economy’s microstructure function. The third step was, after six months of deliberation, the announcement of Obama’s Remarks on the 21st Century Financial Regulatory Reform, on June 17, 2009, at the White House. This started the financial system reform from the angle of system innovation, to create a positive financial environment for the new economy.

Third, Obama’s new policy raised the development of the ecological economy that combines high-tech and eco-focused concepts as a strategic priority to rebuild the U.S. image and to enhance its competitiveness. … The U.S., a country with innovative and adventurous spirit, can often make strategic decisions and choices during periods of major change. This is worthy of our research and study.

III. The lesson learned from the failure of the Japanese economic transformation during the 1980s

As early as the 1980s, having achieved huge success in its strategy of catching up with developed countries, Japan also experienced a period of world economic transformation similar to what China is facing today. In the 1980s, when the world economy went through a transformation from the electric economy to the information economy, Japan and the U.S. adopted two different strategies, resulting in two completely different paths of development after the 1990s. The failure of the Japanese economic transformation during the 1980s raised several issues that are worth consideration.

First, Japan did not realize the limitations of the model of "growth by following," but instead mistakenly viewed it as a growth model that creates miracles. The high speed economic growth in Japan after World War II is a typical model of "growth by following." Its advantage came from two aspects: first, after the introduction of Western technology, Japan gained technological advantages through second-round innovation, that is, innovation after its introduction from the West. Second, the cost advantage during the initial economic growth period helped it receive the industries transferred from Europe and the U.S. With these two advantages, Japan achieved high economic growth, catching up with other developed countries, and "squeezing" into the development space of the U. S. and Europe.

The advantage of the model of "growth by following" is to catch up with others while learning, instead of leading the trend through original innovation. … But Japan has not recognized the limitations of the model of "growth by following." In fact, Europe and the U. S. have also been confused by an illusion about such a temporary high growth model. … During the late 1980s, there was a widely recognized view of a “Japan threat” in the U.S., triggering competition between Europe, the U. S., and Japan. Today when we look back, this is clearly a misunderstanding: Japan cannot become a threat to Europe or the U.S. using the model of "growth by following."

Second, when facing global economic transformation, Japan did not respond strategically, but rather continued along the traditional thinking. … Under pressure from the U. S., Japan mistakenly chose the expansion of domestic demand as its strategic plan for new economic growth. They lost sensitivity to the global economic transformation with the satisfaction of economic achievement. To ensure continuous growth, Japan’s strategic focus remained on the existing traditional industries, channeling the huge capital surplus accumulated during decades of economic growth into domestic consumption. A large amount of capital entered into real estate and the stock market, leading to the bursting of the real estate bubble, and the financial crisis, which dragged the Japanese economy into a downturn for more than a decade. At the same time, the U. S. reallocated its social resources to the new high-tech economy as a strategic priority, resulting in the U. S. being the biggest winner in the information economy in the 1990s.

Third, Japan mistakenly attributed its economic recession to the failure of its monetary policy. … Throughout the 1990s when the Japanese economy was in a predicament, Japan did not reflect upon its growth model, but blamed the financial crisis, following the Keynesian theory and monetary theory. Japan failed to fundamentally reform its unique institutions such as the government-led economy, the monopoly of large business, and lifetime employment, which inhibited innovation. Japan’s economy has thus been lingering in a low growth path because of adopting the model of “growth by following.”

IV. Breaking through traditional thinking: some thoughts on promoting China’s strategic transformation

China has three advantages that support its transformation: First, we have begun to realize the limitations of importing growth models. Although we have not yet recognized such a limitation at a model level, people have begun to realize it from the perspective of transition in growth modes. Second, we are very sensitive to the new energy revolution and ongoing global economic transformation. Third, China’s cost advantage will continue to play a role in the new economy. At the same time, we are also facing three major obstacles: First, obstacles from vested interest groups. The 21st century has seen the Chinese economy enter a phase of heavy industry. Two vested interest groups were formed in the process of wealth accumulation, namely monopolistic business groups and local governments at various levels. As the monopolistic business groups are the source of tax income for the local governments, the two groups relied upon each other, forming an obstacle to strategic transformation decisions. Second, the obstacle of success-led habitual thinking. The success of China’s reform has achieved world acknowledgement. In the face of this success, we may be repeating the scenario Japan experienced during 1980s. We may gain strong self-esteem amid the views of the “China threat theory,” making the mistakes Japan made during 1980s, and forgetting the limitations of importing growth models. With the habitual thinking of simply applying our past experiences to the future, China’s economic transformation would be an empty word. Third, the obstacle of lack of motivation for transformation. Major economic transitions often come from opportunities created by major economic crises, as a crisis provides motivation for change. China is one of the least impacted countries in the current financial crisis, and is generally considered the first country to walk out of the crisis. This is obviously a good thing, but it has also formed an obstacle for China to meet the challenges and opportunities of global economic transformation. We may lose motivation to transform in our satisfaction with good growth momentum.

To this end, I hereby propose some thoughts on promoting China’s strategic transformation.

First, we must strengthen our awareness of the limitations of importing growth models. We should reflect upon the limitations of China’s reform model, and the successes and lessons from past transformation during the new China’s 60 year history from the perspective of responding to the world and China’s economic transformation. Without the transformation of China’s economy and society from a politics centered policy to an economy centered policy, starting in 1978, we would not have achieved the economic success we have today. Similarly, if we fail to achieve the transition of the growth model, we will not have a better tomorrow. We should strengthen the sense of crisis among all party members.

Second, policies should change direction from assuring growth to facilitating transition. Macroeconomic data from the first half of the year shows that China’s economic growth began to stabilize and recover. This indicates that the growth oriented policies in response to the economic crisis have achieved their goal. In such a situation, China’s strategy should change from assuring growth that helps recovery from crisis, into promoting transition that recreates the growth engine.

Third, under the guidance of the Concept of Ecological Civilization, we should deepen the reform of government functions, and break through the obstacle of the government’s vested interest groups. The key is to promote reform of government functions, management methods, and management objectives. According to the requirements of the Concept of Ecological Civilization raised at the 17th CCP National Congress, if we want to promote the eco-economy, green GDP, and a low-carbon life style as the goal of transition, the key is to promote transitions in government management and management objectives.

Fourth, I suggest to strengthen strategic planning and theoretical research into the eco-economy under the guidance of the Concept of Ecological Civilization, so as to provide theoretical support for China to enter an era of eco-economy. From the heights of transformation of the economic structure, against the background of transitions in the world economy, we should explore the laws of ecological civilization and eco-economy, new growth models, and new civilization models suitable for China and the world’s harmonious growth. This is a new challenge and opportunity after the establishment of a market economy with Chinese characteristics.

Endnote:
[1] Study Times, November 2, 2009
http://www.studytimes.com.cn/WebPage/ny1.aspx?act=1&id=3019&nid=11017&bid=4&page=1

Reports | | February 11, 2010 | Report

China’s Official Scholars on the Sino-US Relationship before President Obama’s Visit to China

Question: Compared to the previous presidents, Obama is the first U.S. President to visit China during his first year after taking office. In addition, the exchanges between the high level officials of the two countries have been very frequent. Do you think this implies that the U.S. has undergone a strategic shift in its policy toward China, or is this an expedient measure that Obama took because of the economic crisis?

Answer:

Peng Guangqian, Specialist in Strategy Research, Chinese Academy of Military Sciences: After Obama took office, he made some adjustments in his China policy; however, we cannot say whether a strategic shift has occurred or it is just an expedient measure. We still need time to observe. What may cause strategic conflicts between the two countries is not the fact that China’s power is getting closer to that of the U.S., but U.S.’s mentality of hegemony. Only when the U.S. changes its way of thinking can conflicts between the two countries be avoided. [1]

Qin Yanqing, Vice President of China Foreign Affairs University: From the deep level, Obama holds the idea of (establishing) a multilateral relationship to cooperate with other big countries and he has indeed made adjustments to the U.S. foreign policy. At the same time, in order to get out of the (financial) crisis, the US also needs China. However, we cannot completely separate a strategic shift from an expedient measure. The U.S. cares more and more about Asia. The first reason is that China is developing rapidly. The second reason is that Asia is the most active region in development. Third, from the perspective of the economy of the U.S. and its overall strategy, East Asia is an important region. In addition, countries in this region also want to strengthen their relationships with China and the U.S. [2]

Shen Dingli, Vice Dean of the Institute of International Studies, Fudan University: In my opinion, the adjustment of U.S. policy toward China is an expedient measure. Fundamentally, the U.S. still perceives socialist China as a strategic competitor. Therefore, currently, the U.S. is merely making gradual tactical adjustments in its China policy. For example, the U.S. is still selling arms to Taiwan. We should not have any illusion about the U.S. The behavior of Obama in mentioning Communism during his inaugural speech is a first among all the U.S. presidents. That indicates that the U.S. has a strong ideological conflict with China. Our ideas are different from the U.S.’s. There are both common ground and conflicts in them. [3]

Yang Zhidan, Specialist at the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, Chinese Social Science Institute: I don’t think we can say it is a strategic shift, or an expedient measure. The U.S. has a systematic plan for its strategy for China and the whole East Asia. That usually will not undergo a dramatic change due to a change in the administration. From this perspective, the policy toward China of Obama’s administration to a large extent is inherited from the latter stage of the Bush administration. As the financial crisis sweeps across the world, Obama’s administration also faces an additional series of challenges, such as Iran’s nuclear issue and North Korea’s nuclear issue. On the other hand, China is becoming increasingly powerful. These facts force the U.S. to pay more attention to China. The U.S. on one hand has a protective mentality toward China, and on the other hand, it also hopes China will shoulder more international responsibility. [4]

Tao Wenzhao, Specialist at the Institute of U.S. Studies, Chinese Social Science Institute: I think it’s neither. Obama has inherited a lot from the Bush administration, including its China policy. The 2008 Presidential election was the first time that the Democrats and Republicans did not have major disagreement on their policy toward China. What’s most important in the Sino-US relationship and benefits the interests of both countries is stability. Don’t let those unstable factors impact the normal development of the relationship between the two countries. We cannot expect that a single visit can elevate the Sino-US relationship to a new level. However, as a matter of fact, with the development of the Sino-US relationship in recent years, the common interests between the two countries are continuously expanding. [5]

Sun Zhe, Director of the Center for US-China Relations, Tsinghua University: We cannot say it is a strategic shift or an expedient measure. As a matter of fact, Obama to a great extent has continued the China policy of Bush’s administration. Furthermore, facing the global financial crisis, Obama’s administration has no choice but to cooperate more with China. [6]

Jin Canrong, Vice Dean of the School of International Studies, Renmin University of China: Both exist. On one hand, the financial crisis forces Obama to seek more cooperation with China; on the other hand, everyone sees the importance of China in international society. It is reasonable for Obama to make strategic adjustments in the policy toward China. [7]

Yuan Peng, Dean of the Institute of American Studies, China Institute of Contemporary International Relations: It is hard to say whether the shift in the policy toward China is based on tactical or strategic grounds. It should be both. From a strategic point of view, the U.S. currently has issues both inside the country and outside, and China is the only one that can truly help the U.S. from all perspectives. At the same time, in the drafting of U.S. foreign policy, the “need” from China is gradually increasing. If we study the policy shift at a deep level, the rise of China has become an irreversible fact. The U.S. has to face it, and cannot avoid it at all. The fact proves that the suppressive measures toward China adopted by the U.S. were not successful. Therefore, the U.S. indeed needs a shift in strategy. In addition, China is indeed sincerely promoting constructive cooperation with the U.S. That has also made the U.S. change its policy toward China. [8]

Ni Feng, Specialist at the Institute of U.S. Studies, Chinese Social Science Institute: As a matter of fact, the strategic shift of the U.S. policy toward China started during Bush’s administration. In 2005, the U.S. had a big internal debate on the policy toward China, arguing about “where China is heading.” At that time, Zoellick, (eleventh president of the World Bank) proposed the concept of “responsible stakeholder,” which was a positioning of the policy toward China. The U.S. thinks that China has become strong and should not get a free ride any more. In the eyes of the U.S., the issue of China has become the issue of a rising China. After Obama took office, he inherited Bush’s viewpoint toward China and Bush’s China policy from the latter stage of his administration. If there is any change, it is that Obama has higher expectations of China and hopes China will shoulder more international responsibilities. Right after Obama took office, he not only encountered the most serious financial crisis, but Iran and North Korea’s nuclear problems also forced the U.S. to depend more on China. [9]

Question: From the situation in Asia, what is the implication of the U.S. regarding China as more and more important? How does this influence the situation in Asia? Will other Asian countries such as India, Japan, and Korea adjust their diplomatic policies according to the change in the Sino-U.S. relationship? If so, what kind of adjustment may they make?

Answer:

Su Hao, expert on East Asia studies, China Institute of Diplomacy: With the development of China, it is an indisputable fact that the U.S. regards China as important, and China’s status has elevated. The development of the Sino-U.S. relationship has important implications for peace and development in the Asia-Pacific region. The U.S. has been following the idea of establishing an Asian-Pacific order and ally system under U.S. leadership. However, recently, the US obviously felt that China has extended its influence on affairs in the region and China has its own priorities. For example, China promotes regional cooperation in East Asia, which is different from the “Asia-Pacific” concept promoted by the U.S. We can say that the regional cooperation in East Asia has become an irreversible trend. Currently, what China, the U.S. and other countries in this region should consider is in what way to include the U.S. in it. The adjustment of the Sino-U.S. relationship is not only an issue between these two countries; indisputably, it will impact the whole Asia-Pacific region. Facing this adjustment, the reaction of different countries in Asia and the Asia-Pacific region is different. Specifically, after the South Korea President Lee Myung-bak took office, he initially focused on developing the relationship with the U.S. for a period of time. However, with the increasing influence of China, recently, South Korea made a rational choice to put more emphasis on development inside Asia. At the same time, Japan also found that the attitude of leaning toward the U.S. in diplomatic relations is not suitable to Japan. Therefore, after Yukio Hatoyama took office, he raised the concept of the “East Asia Community,” and is looking for new balance between China and the U.S. As to India, although from the perspective of Geo-politics, India was excluded from the Asia-Pacific framework, India is proactively participating in East Asia affairs. At the same time, between China and the U.S., India has recently focused more on developing its relationship with the US. Furthermore, Australia has raised the concept of the “Asia Pacific Community” too, and has been looking for a balance between the U.S. and China. [10]
Yang Zhidan: From the perspective of other East Asian countries, if the Sino-U.S. relationship develops stably, they will feel more comfortable. Those countries will not be happy to see friction between China and the U.S. coming to the point where they have to make a choice. On the other hand though, other Asian countries also have a defensive mentality toward China because under the situation that their own power is not strong enough to influence China, they definitely hope to use the U.S. to keep China in check. [4]

Tao Wenzhao: The fact that the U.S. considers China more and more important implies that the imbalance in the Sino-U.S. relationship has changed. In earlier times, people thought that China needed help from the U.S. more than otherwise. Now, nobody says that any more. China’s development and increased strength have made the U.S. care more about China. This year, a major shift in the international situation is that the status of China “has been raised.” It is not that China proactively did or fought for something; it is that China did better than other countries during the global financial crisis, which prominently shows the importance of China in international society. This puts the Sino-U.S. relationship on a more balanced foundation and places the communication, dialogues, and cooperation between the two countries in a normal state. The change in the Sino-U.S. relationship will definitely have an impact on surrounding countries. The influence resulting from the rise of a huge country with a population of 1.3 billion might be something even we ourselves cannot imagine at present; therefore, it is natural that the surrounding countries have concerns. We should understand this kind of mentality, as long as it is not a malicious attack on us. [5]

Sun Zhe: That the U.S. cares more and more about China makes some Asian countries feel uncomfortable as it is hard to adjust to it. Based on the current situation, different countries have had different reactions. The Japanese government showed that they care more about Asia; the Australians raised the concept of “the Asia Pacific Community” including the U.S.; Singapore directly called for more attention from the U.S. to keep China’s influence in check. The shift of the Sino-US relationship has influenced other Asian countries to make a policy adjustment. [6]

Jin Canrong: The U.S. will for sure pay more attention to countries around China when it cares more about China. With the increase in China’s power, when the U.S. deals with China, it will consider all factors that are related to China. [7]

Ni Feng: Currently, the Sino-US relationship has become the most important bilateral relationship in East Asia. The direction of the Sino-US relationship determines the direction of the future East Asia situation. Under this situation, the U.S. will definitely pay more attention (to China) to keep the evolution of the situation in East Asia under its control. This kind of change in the Sino-US relationship will definitely affect other Asian countries. On the one hand, they will regard China as more important and care more about their relationship with China; on the other hand, when Asian countries such as Japan and Korea cannot hide their sense of loss, they will have a sense of self protection against China. [9]

Question: Do you think that Obama will make the decision to stop selling arms to Taiwan?

Answer:

Qin Yaqing: The U.S. will not stop selling arms to Taiwan for three reasons. First, the overall and long-term strategic promise of the U.S. (to Taiwan) has not changed. Second, besides the political reason, selling arms also brings an economic benefit. Third, the US wants to maintain a balance in the “scalene triangle” consisting of China, the U.S., and Taiwan. Therefore, the US will not stop selling arms to Taiwan. [2]

Yang Zhidan: No. From the perspective of the U.S., currently, the military balance on the two sides across the Taiwan Strait has been broken and Mainland China has bigger and bigger advantages. In this kind of situation, it is hard to imagine that Obama would make such a decision to terminate arms sales to Taiwan. In addition, the U.S. will not easily give up the strategy of using Taiwan to constrain China. [4]

Tao Wenzhao: Obama will not make too many promises regarding selling arms because the U.S. has the Taiwan Relations Act. The Taiwan Relations Act did not specify when the U.S. president should sell arms to Taiwan and what kind of arms to sell. Therefore, we should seriously communicate to Obama that we request that the U.S. respect China’s stand, consider the core interests of China, and not create barriers for the development of Sino-U.S. relations as a result of the issue of selling arms to Taiwan. [5]

Sun Zhe: The essence of the issue is not whether Obama will terminate the arms sales to Taiwan, but when he will make the decision to sell the arms. The U.S. parties that are close to Taiwan and those related arms enterprises of course hope Obama can make the decision to sell arms to Taiwan as soon as possible. Although currently the China-Taiwan relationship is at peace, from the perspective of the U.S., the fact that the military forces across the strait are out of balance and that the Mainland’s missiles are pointing at Taiwan can both be used as excuses for selling arms to Taiwan. [6]

Jin Canrong: Selling arms to Taiwan has been a long-term policy of the U.S. for many years. Due to this long-term policy, the possibility of terminating the sale of arms to Taiwan within a short period of time is slim. The U.S. is a country of pragmatism. Maybe with the further growth of the power of China or a change in the international situation, when it is no longer meaningful for the U.S. to sell arms to Taiwan, the U.S. can then make the decision to terminate the sale of arms to Taiwan. [7]

Ni Feng: It is very difficult for Obama to make such a decision in his term. The U.S. sells arms to Taiwan according to the Taiwan Relations Act. The Act will not change with the change in the administration. Furthermore, the imbalance of the military forces across the Strait has been the excuse for the U.S. to insist on selling arms. This will not change during Obama’s term. However, Obama may make some adjustment in the arms sales according to the situation, such as not allowing the sale for a certain year or delaying the sale. [9]

Question: In your opinion, with the power of the two countries becoming closer, will there be more strategic conflicts rather than strategic cooperation between the two countries? Do you think that the two countries can create an efficient model to limit conflicts?

Answers:

Qin Yaqing: The fact that the two countries are becoming more equally powerful will not result in inevitable conflicts. The two countries can establish a mechanism to avoid the emergence of conflict. Different from the time of the confrontation between the U.S. and Soviet Union, the threats that China and the U.S. face are no longer each other, but some threats to both countries. The U.S. and China should not escalate the conflicts; instead, they should limit the conflicts to a certain model and resolve them using the model. Since Obama took office, the Sino-U.S. relationship has been improving. Communication between high levels has also started. Those are all very good approaches. [7]

Shen Dingli: Both are possible. Currently, China is at the stage of resting and developing its power. No conflict will break out between the two countries. However, China will become more and more powerful in the future. If the U.S. knows clearly the current situation and understands the reality, it should not provoke any conflict on the issue of Taiwan, which is the issue that China cares most about. Then the possibility of military conflict between the two countries can be eliminated. However, if the U.S. still provokes China in the situation where the country becomes weaker and goes downward, then there may be conflicts between the two countries. I can put it in such a way: the region for cooperation between the two countries is large, but their relationship is still complex. [3]

Yang Zhidan: China needs a long period of time to catch up with the U.S. For a big country, the elevation of its power is the holistic elevation in all areas including politics, the economy, the military, and so on. It cannot be realized within a short period of time. Even though the power of the two countries is really becoming closer, we need to look at specific fields to judge whether there will be conflicts or cooperation. From the perspective of the strategic culture of China, China’s diplomatic policy is weak in term of being aggressive outwards and China definitely does not want to choose conflict. However, from a long term perspective, in the agenda on regional affairs and even in the global order, it is inevitable that the two countries will have conflict. The western countries, with the U.S. as the leader, always hope to drag China into the system they lead, and hope that China’s behavior will conform to their desires and interests; however, as a big rising non-western country, during the process of being assimilated into the system, China will definitely have an impact on changing the system, since it is impossible that the interests of China will completely conform to those of the west. [4]

Sun Zhe: With the powers between China and the U.S. becoming more comparable, both strategic cooperation and tactical conflicts can increase. In many fields that were ignored previously, such as environmental protection, attacking pirates, financial system reform, etc., the cooperation between the two countries will increase. On the other hand, with the economic relationship between the two countries becoming tighter, the overall relationship between the two countries will become more complex and the probability of having conflicts will also increase. It is not terrifying to have conflict; the terrifying thing is that there is no channel to resolve conflicts. Therefore, both countries should take advantage of the current dialogue channel and strengthen communication. [6]

Jin Canrong: That is determined by the joint effort of both countries and their current behavior. We can neither say that definitely there will be more strategic conflicts, nor can we conclude for sure there will be more strategic cooperation. However, from the current state of the policies, there is more cooperation than conflict. China is the first rising big non-western country. Based on the current international situation, the historical cycle of a rising power challenging another’s hegemony can be avoided. From an international perspective, the current trend of globalization has made mutual dependence among the countries develop to an unprecedented extent. The current international system is also more effective than that in any period of time in history. Those are all positive factors to effectively limit the conflicts between China and the U.S. in the future. From the perspective of the two countries, neither of the two countries are the same as the traditional hegemony counties of the 19th century. The U.S. hegemony is a hegemony of the system and depends more on soft power, which lowers the probability of using hard power such as military force on other countries. China walks on a path of development in peace and is different from the countries challenging the hegemony such as Germany and Japan in the past. China has sufficient resources, an internal market, and the ability to rise totally on its own. [7]

Ni Feng: No matter whether the issue is strategic conflict or strategic cooperation, both are related to the issue of strategic trust. The relationship between the two countries is extremely complex. In a certain sense, the relationship by nature is an issue of how to manage conflict. The interests and conflicts between the two countries are mingled and tangled together. Therefore, the two sides should sit down to converse. Currently, the two countries have already established quite a few dialogue mechanisms. However, at present, it is still too early to talk about how to establish a model to limit the conflicts between the two countries. [9]

Reports | | February 9, 2010 | Report

How to Maintain the Party’s Centralized Unification

The "Decision" emphasizes the importance of actively and positively developing inner-party democracy. At the same time, it puts forward new requirements and major initiatives on how to maintain the party’s centralized unification. It emphasizes that all comrades of the party must always put the party and the people in the highest position in their minds and maintain a high degree of unity with the party’s Central Committee mentally, politically, and physically. This has great significance under the new circumstances to better adhere to the democratic centralism system, which is the fundamental organizational and leadership system, and to strengthen and improve the party’s leadership.

To maintain the party’s centralized unification, the following must be done practically:

First, to fully understand the importance of protecting the party’s centralized unification. The party’s centralized unification represents the fundamental interests of all ethnic groups in the nation. … For a ruling political party that has more than 75 million members, 3.7 million grass-roots organizations, and that is leading the great cause of building socialism with Chinese characteristics, it is essential to maintain the party’s centralized unification. Only by protecting the Party’s centralized unification and continuously enhancing the party’s creativity, cohesion, and combat capability, can it ensure national unity, racial peace, and social harmony, and ensure the smooth execution of the process of Reform and Opening up and modernization.

Second, to maintain a high degree of unity on party ideology. Thoughts lead actions, and thus unity on ideology is the premise of the party’s centralized unification. One must persist in using Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory and the "Three Represents" to equip and educate the party and use the scientific development concept to equip the minds of the party members and cadres, so that all party comrades will be on a common ideological ground when thinking, making decisions, or taking action. One must frequently educate the party members on the party’s principles and policies, to strive to make sure party members and cadres at all levels deeply understand and grasp the spiritual essence of the party’s principles and policies, and to become the loyal enforcers and active advocates of the party’s principles and policies. In this way, a reliable ideology will guarantee the party’s centralized unification.

Third, to resolutely maintain the central authority. The Central Committee is the core of the party’s centralized unification. Maintaining the party’s centralized unification means to resolutely maintain the central authority and to effectively ensure the central committee’s decrees. One must insist that individual members subordinate to the party’s organization, the minority subordinates to the majority, the lower-level organizations subordinate to the upper-level organization, and party organizations and all party members subordinate to the party’s national congress and the Central Committee. Among all, the most important thing is that the whole party subordinate to the central authorities. The entire party must be in unity with the Central Committee on guiding ideology, goals, major policies and important work arrangements. No matter which area, which department, or what party organization, no matter what kind of leadership positions the party members and cadres hold, all must conscientiously uphold the party’s basic theory, basic policy, basic program, and basic experience, and resolutely subordinate to the unified leadership of the Central Committee. It is necessary to establish an inspection and evaluation system on a regular time basis on the implementation of significant policies from the Central Committee, monitor special projects, and improve the discipline mechanism, improve the leading cadres’ execution ability and firmly ensure that the principles and policies of the central authority can be carried out.

Fourth, to strictly adhere to the party’s discipline rules, especially the political discipline rules. Having good discipline is the guarantee for maintaining the party’s centralized unification. Our party is a Marxist political party relying on revolutionary ideas and is organized by iron discipline. Only by having strict discipline, can we move forward at the same pace. Political discipline is the most important discipline in the party. The whole party must strictly obey this discipline, consciously enforce it, and fight resolutely against any breach of the party’s political discipline. When a party member has different opinions about the party’s resolutions and policies, the party member first needs to resolutely carry out these resolutions and policies, and, at the same time, bring the issue to the upper organization, and even to the Central Committee. But no one is allowed to make the issue public and to spread any opinion that is contrary to what the central authority holds. One must firmly oppose being two-faced, showing things in one way, and doing things in another way. It is not allowed to fabricate and spread political rumors and words to smear the image of the party and the nation. One must resolutely rectify the phenomenon that orders or prohibitions are not carried out. Any violation of the party’s political discipline must be dealt with severely.

Endnote:
[1] Xinhua, December 30, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/30/content_12563503.htm

Reports | | February 7, 2010 | Report

Dai Xu on China’s Military Strategy

The U.S. Suppresses China [2]

The U.S. has surrounded our country on two sides, which are two segments of one line. One segment is the circle over the sea. The sea circle starts at Japan.”

Continuing from the Japanese islands, the next important point in the circle is Taiwan… We cannot take the problem of Taiwan Island lightly. As long as it does not come back (to China), it will remain a problem for us.”

After Taiwan, the ending point of the sea circle is the South China Sea. I would say that (about the territory dispute of the South China Sea), either (other countries) take all and we completely lose, or we take everything and they have nothing. There is no win-win situation. The situation in that place is different from other situations. The issue of territory cannot be negotiated…”

“To the west of the South China Sea is India… (India has blocked China) from the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea. Thus, from the Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean, the two gates are basically closed. The U.S. is the gate closer.”

“During the Cold War era, there was only one sea circle. It was called a “Crescent Surrounding” at that time. It was like the crescent moon, a very small circle. However, it is different now. That is to say, the circle in the ocean stops at India. The circle on the land starts with India. Therefore, the circle on the land extends from the circle in the sea. From India, it goes to the west, then to the north, and then to the east.”

“After India, it is Pakistan (on the land circle). Recently, the situation in Pakistan has been very severe. Not only is the Pakistan military battling with the Taliban; the U.S.’ military action in Pakistan has basically surpassed those in Afghanistan. They are battling in the Southwest of Pakistan, where it is close to the Indian Ocean… There is a sea port on the Indian Ocean called Gwadar Port, which was built by our Chinese.”

That is why on May 9, 2009, an American wrote an article saying, “Why do we have to battle in this place? It is to try our best to force China, who built the Gwadar Port and needs the natural gas from Iran, to withdraw from that place…” Therefore, I think that the U.S. is actually fighting against China behind the scenes, while fighting with the Taliban on the surface. Thus, in that place, many of our enterprises have been driven out. We have withdrawn all the construction projects there. We can do nothing at present. Therefore, the U.S. military action in that area (having achieved its goal) has basically stopped. That is actually a U.S. action against the mainland.”

From the mainland to the ocean, the U.S. has also laid down an Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) network… The network was laid by the U.S. around China from the Korean Peninsula all the way to India. The U.S.’ ABM system circle in the ocean is connected by the Aegis Shield Warship with ABM capabilities. From the ocean to the mainland, it forms a C-shaped circle… This ABM system is to stop missiles from China, and not allow missiles to be launched from China’s territory.”

Another point is the U.S. strategy towards China, which is comprehensive. The U.S. occupation of China includes economic deprivation, surrounding China, militarily suppression, political pressure, attacking China from both inside and outside, continuous interference, and a trade blockade. The overall goal of the U.S. for China is as follows. The U.S. has created Japan after the model of a eunuch. Now it wants to shape China after Japan, which is rich but not strong. If China insists on independence and protecting its national pride, the U.S. will employ all kinds of means to suppress China, including instigating wars between China and its neighboring countries, direct military interference, and even eventually dividing China.

After the war between China and the U.S. in 1951, the CIA of the U.S. issued an injunction. At first, it was not called an injunction. It was about how to use state-level action to divide and destroy China from all sorts of aspects, levels, and angles. They wrote 10 approaches… 1. Try the best to seduce and degenerate the younger generation using material enticement. Encourage them to oppose their education. Create interests and opportunities for them to be lustful (This is very clear to our friends in Shenzhen). Make them not to feel ashamed of their vanity. 2. Try the best to make them long for the lifestyle of the Americans. 3. Make them focus on sports, pornography, indulgent games, crime movies, religion and superstition. In addition, create something boring and silly every now and then for their people to discuss openly, and then plant the seeds of separation in the backs of their minds. 4. Find opportunities, particularly in the ethnic minority groups, to separate the country, separate the ethnic groups, separate their feelings, and instigate old and new resentment and hatred among themselves. That is a strategy that cannot be ignored. 5. Create derogatory images of their leaders. 6. Promote democracy, that is, make them trust the U.S. 7. Try the best to encourage their government to spend money, and encourage them to borrow money from the U.S. Thus, we would have the full confidence to destroy their credit… 8. Ruin their industries using our economic and technical advantages. As long as their industries can be paralyzed without even realizing it, we can encourage turmoil in society. Therefore, on the surface, we should help them very compassionately. Thus, their government will appear soft and a soft government may have greater turmoil. 9. The next step is to destroy its value system. 10. Last, secretly ship different kinds of weapons to arm some of (China’s) enemies and people who might become their enemies. That is the big circle surrounding us that I mentioned above. The U.S. not only provides weapons to all the countries in the circle, but it also forms alliances with them, may it be a factual, open or invisible alliance.”

“Therefore the Rand Corporation offered a suggestion to the U.S. government in 1999 that the U.S. strategy toward China should be carried out in three steps. First, westernize and divide China by making China have western ideology. That is to make China rich but not strong and not confrontational toward others. Second, if the first step does not have an obvious effect, then comprehensively suppress China and form a strategic joint surrounding of China… If neither of the first two steps works, then have a war with China. Of course, the best format for the war is that the U.S. does not directly participate in the war. The U.S. can support the regions in China that seek independence or the neighboring countries that have major conflicts with China or instigate riots inside China.. That explains why there was the March 14 incident last year (2008 in Tibet) and why there was the July 5 incident this year (2009 in Xinjiang). There will be other incidents down the road.”

“In addition to surrounding China geologically, the U.S. has other conspiracies including economic manipulation and U.S. Dollar traps, etc. …”

At the same time, the U.S. has been working inside China to organize and support all anti-China forces. As a matter of fact, we all know those anti-China forces. Actually, the U.S. is the general sponsor for all the forces that are hostile to China. However, the problem is that those forces are now cooperating with each other. They used to work separately. The situation is different now. Therefore, Dalai contacted Rebiya Kadeer when he created the March 14 incident, and Rebiya contacted Dalai after she caused the Xinjiang incident. They stood together again… Dalai is connected to Democracy activist Wei Jingsheng and the Democratic Progressive Party. At the same time (the U.S.) has set up a great number of spies inside China (in many major economic offices and academic organizations). Many of our academic organizations have researchers working for them or serving as visiting professors and conducting academic exchanges. Those professors take advantage of their own reputations to spread notions that serve the U.S.

The last one is that the U.S. has led the world to create mob-like trade attacks on China. After Obama declared a sanction against China in September, 55 countries sued us within just a few days and started anti-dumping actions. This was said by an American. He said, “Right now, the countries in the world are forming alliances to initiate mob-like counter attacks against China, using the regulations of the WTO.”

China Faces Wars

My point is that (in the next 10 years China) has the possibility of facing wars, and not just a single war…

Eventually, China may face a war. Why? There are several reasons. First, the U.S. is a country with a comprehensive military industry. A third of the U.S. enterprises engage in producing military products…Who would want military products if there were no wars? Therefore, the U.S. has wars everywhere and creates wars everywhere. The U.S. propels its industrial development and technology advancement through having wars.

The second reason that we cannot avoid war is that war always follows fortune. That is the law of the world economy. Thus, we have seen three major shifts of fortune in the 20th century. The first one is before the 1950s. Europe became the center of fortune for the world. Therefore, two world wars broke out in that place. The second shift happened during 1970-80. The oil in the Mideast became the West’s lifeline. Hence, from then on, the Mideast had 5 major wars in 20 years. By now, fortune has had its third shift, to the Asia-Pacific region, and to China, the center of the fortune of the world. How can China escape the disaster of war?

The third reason that we cannot escape from war is that economic crises generally lead to war. WWI was caused by the economic crisis in England. WWII was associated with the economic crisis in the U.S. in 1929… A crisis happened again in 2009 and the Rand Corporation has claimed that instead of spending $700 billion to rescue the economy, it would have been better to spend that money on a war. Therefore, for the U.S., the issue is not whether to have a war, but where to have the war and who to fight. In my opinion, currently, China is facing the danger of being divided (after a war)…

The Military Strategy for China

“Why can’t the GDP be a measure for being a superpower? Why historically was China defeated, even though at that time it had such a high GDP? That is because the composition of our GDP is problematic… Now, China has the second largest GDP in the world, but what components are in the second largest GDP? The GDP in Japan and the U.S. consist of traditional and modern industries including manufacturing, electronics, ship building, aviation and aeronautics, automotive, and so on. However, ours are real estate, toys, liquor, and cigarettes. Eight hundred million pairs of pants to exchange for an airplane. It was proven over 100 years ago that GDP is not a good measure. Using this thing, we can only deceive ourselves and our people but not others. Being fat does not mean being strong; weight does not equal strength.” [3]

“I suggest that our military forces should have the eagle striking strategy, to fight the battle outside… I said that we should have the war 2,500 miles away (from our mainland). I resolutely insist that our first military ability should be to provide 2,000 – 2,500 miles of defensive depth. Because we do not have allies, aircraft carriers, or strategic pivots, what should we do? The task falls on our air force. We should start the war far beyond 2,500 miles. If anyone has the thought of hurting us, we should kill him first…” [2]

“I have not got to the point of the vertical direction. On this direction, we should close out the open window on our country (as China is weak in defending its air and space). In the future, the war will start from above. Therefore, I said that we should develop upward to the sky perpendicularly and develop to the direction of the ocean horizontally. We definitely cannot let the threat come from these two directions. That is why I resolutely insist that our military reform should clearly focus on these directions, stepping towards the ocean and the sky. We should not waste our resources on the land and continue to that direction. The reason is that our coastal areas are the places where fortune concentrates, the heart of the country, and we cannot afford to let them be threatened by any countries.” [2]

“(As for the South China Sea), at present, the countries around us have over 1,100 oil wells but we do not have even a single one. Why? Personally, I think it is because we take awareness of marine territory too lightly. It is the territory of our country. Whether to explore the resources in this area should not just be based on direct economic benefits. It should be considered from the perspective of the safety of the territory of our nation’s land and sea. It has strategic implications.” [4]

“Even though it may have a high cost, and even if it costs more than buying oil, we still should explore the natural resources there. Also, even if the cost is high, it is temporary. In the long run, once it reaches a large scale, the cost may no longer be high… Therefore, in this place, if we have oil wells, we can use them to develop fishing industry, tourism, etc. All those aspects can form a large economic circle. In addition, those places are close to Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao. Once we use them as a large resource base, the whole ecological environment will change.” [4]

“Therefore, the foremost and the most critical thing is to take actual action. By now, those small neighboring countries have constructed airports in places they have occupied. However, we can only send small ships, but not large ships, because we do not have the base. We should construct a large base there. The base should be able to support large helicopters. With future development and expansion, it should support small or mid-sized airplanes. Also, the navy should construct some deep-water ports so that large warships and large commodity and fishing ships can port. Thus, it can provide all kinds of services to the oil companies and large fishing companies.” [4]

Endnotes:
[1] Dai Xu’s Personal Blog
http://blog.people.com.cn/blog/s/48177
[2] “U.S. Strategy, China Crisis” (Dai Xu’s Speech at Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province)
http://club.backchina.com/main/viewthread.php?tid=813084&extra=
[3] Speech at the Global Times, “The Strategic Challenges for China in the Next Ten Years”
http://blog.people.com.cn/blog/c9/s48177,w1252941371916731
[4] 22 Degree Observation, “How Should China Respond to the Escalation in South China Sea?”
http://blog.people.com.cn/blog/c9/s48177,w1251214874128521

Reports | | February 4, 2010 | Report

Report - 27. page