Skip to content

Xinhua: Naked Officials” Forbidden to Hold Chief Positions within the Party and Government

In order to monitor “top leaders,” on November 25, 2009, the Shenzhen City CCP Committee and Municipal Government promulgated “The Provisional Regulations on Supervision of the CCP and Government Chiefs,” which forbids “Naked Officials,” those whose spouses and children have moved out of China, from holding chief positions within the Party and the government or acting as members of important departments’ leadership teams.

[Ed: The problem of “naked officials” is known to have existed in China for many years. “Naked officials” abuse their power to get money illegally and then transfer it to their family members overseas. If they are investigated, they can easily manage to escape from China, since they are just by themselves.]

Source: Xinhua, November 25, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/25/content_12539184.htm

Xinhua: USCC Interferes in China’s Internal Affairs

Qin Gang, Foreign Ministry spokesman of P.R. China, said on November 23, 2009, that China would like to advise the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) not to interfere in China’s internal affairs and damage Sino-US relations again. Qin made the speech when answering a reporter’s question on the Commission’s 2009 annual report, [1] according to Xinhua on November 23, 2009.

Qin Gang said, “This report ignores the facts, contains a lot of prejudice, and displays ulterior motives. We advise this so-called Commission not always to view China with tinted glasses, and not to interfere in China’s internal affairs and undermine China-US relations.”

Source: Xinhua, November 23, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2009-11/23/content_12525881.htm

[1] The 2009 Annual Report to Congress of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2009/09_annual_report.php

Why Obama Came Back Empty Handed from China

The hottest event of this week is President Obama’s visit to Beijing, because people had great expectations for the visit by the President of the United States.

Whether it’s inside China or overseas, the Chinese were expecting Obama to do something about human rights. Since Hu Jintao took the reigns in China, the human rights situation has been deteriorating. Many people have been arrested and thrown into prison to be abused; those who haven’t gone to prison, have endured much greater pressure and can barely breathe. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has disciplined the media, blocked the Internet, and applied stricter and stricter suppression over freedom of speech. The Chinese care more than ever whether the U.S. President can help to relieve some pressure for the Chinese, because in the past, the U.S. President’s pressure somehow had an effect on the Chinese government. What the CCP is most afraid of is the human rights diplomacy of the U.S.

What the Americans care most about is the exchange rate of the Renminbi. It’s the key for reducing the trade deficit. Ten years ago, many Americans already knew that the unfair trade system would expand the trade deficit and cause job loss. Some politicians who were bought by big business managed to push through to give China the Permanent Most Favored Nation (MFN) status. At that time, the Americans had a good life and its trade deficit was less than $57 billion, so the majority of Americans accepted it. After all you have to respect the democratic system and respect the law.

Now things are different. The U.S. economy has deteriorated, the unemployment rate hiked up, and the market has slowed down. The trade deficit against China jumped to $268 billion. Many Americans know that this is the result of China’s manipulation of the exchange rate and the unfair trade system. Just as Senator Charles Schumer from New York pointed out: The global financial crisis was caused by China’s exchange rate manipulation. Nothing will be meaningful if this fundamental issue is not resolved.

But Obama brought nothing back from China. The title of today’s Times newspaper is “President Obama returns home from visit to China almost empty handed.” [3] It was quite beyond people’s expectations. The White House advisors had already foreseen that it was unlikely for them to get much on the core issues, so they left some room on the discussion topics. In addition to the main topics of human rights and trade, they added a bunch of smaller topics, including environmental protection, Afghanistan, Iran’s nuclear facility, and so on. They just wanted the CCP to pose a gesture, not necessarily some substantial results.

But even for that, Obama still got nothing. The CCP didn’t even release a few political prisoners for show. Hu Jintao gave Obama not even a bit of face, even skipping the “human rights show,” and letting Obama come for an empty trip. Compared to the previous few not-so-successful Presidents, Obama is the most unsuccessful one.

This does not even mention the media who favor the Republicans. Even the firm Democrat’s supporter, the Washington Post published a commentary criticizing that Obama did nothing to reduce the trade deficit. The article traced all the way back to the time when President Clinton signed the Permanent Trade Act for China and described in detail that the increase in the trade deficit over the past ten years is the result of the those elites selling the United State’s interests. In the past, people would have thought this was a Republican newspaper blasting against the Democrats.

Why was Obama, with a gifted eloquent tongue, so popular in Europe, but lost so terribly in China? There are a lot of reasons, but only two main ones: The first reason is that they [Obama and his advisors] don’t know China and don’t know Chinese. They thought they were dealing with a democratic country. Democratic countries use gentlemen diplomacy. You give up something for good will; I will give you something in return. In a popular term, that’s called “mutual compromise, mutual benefit” cooperative diplomacy.

Just hearing the U.S. President calling the CCP “partner” tells you that they don’t understand the CCP at all. Even those Western diplomats who master pretty good Chinese don’t know that “partner” is a completely wrong concept here. The CCP’s logic is a “struggle philosophy.” It’s “when the enemy retreats, we pursue.” If you take a step back, he thinks you are afraid of him. If he didn’t step forward, he would be laughed at or even attacked by his fellow party members. Applying the compromise and cooperative spirit to the CCP is completely poles apart. Therefore, Obama’s gesture before his visit had already set the visit up to be a complete failure.

The second important reason is the U.S. government is constrained by business. The largest beneficiaries of the trade deficit and the job losses in the U.S. are the big businesses in the U.S. and China. From many years ago, they would voluntarily go all out to defend the interests of the Chinese Communists. On the unfair trade system and exchange rate manipulation, they share the same interests with the CCP. Ten years ago, their ability to control the U.S. Congress and the government exceeded all the voters. Under the premise of not cheating the pubic, they force-passed the legislation, opposed by the majority of the voters, to give the CCP one-sided trade freedom. Now their profit is about five times more than what they got at that time. It’s even harder for the public to fight against them. President Obama can hardly go against their will either. That’s one of the fundamental reasons why the U.S. President lowered himself in front of the CCP.

Therefore, the Sino-U.S. relationship is no longer an economic issue or a China’s human rights issue. It is testing the democratic system in the U.S. Hitler and Stalin were not able to destroy the Western democratic system. But now the communist party in China is trying to fulfill the will of Lenin, to make “U.S. imperialism” the last phase of capitalist history. And it has seemed quite successful so far. That’s why so much attention has been paid to the President’s visit. What people are paying attention to is not just the exchange rate and unemployment. What people are paying attention to is whether the Western democratic system represented by the U.S. will lose to an autocratic communist system.

Endnote:
[1] Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wei_jingsheng
[2] The Epoch Times, November 20, 2009
http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/9/11/20/n2728974.htm
[3] The Times, November 19, 2009
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6922488.ece

270 Million Have No Access to Safe Drinking Water

A Ministry of Water Resources official released that there are about 270 million farmers with no access to safe drinking water. Besides pollution, excessive fluoride arsenic, manganese, brackishness and other issues are found in drinking water in some of China’s rural areas. “According to the tests conducted by the Ministry of Health last year and this year, roughly only 48% of the water projects that have been completed meet government standards. When people look at the water, it appears very clear but the bacteria exceeds the standard,” said the official.

Source: China Economy Net, November 23, 2009
http://www.ce.cn/xwzx/gnsz/gdxw/200911/23/t20091123_20480090.shtml

Party to Expand Its Presence in CPA Firms in 2010

The State’s China Institute of Certified Public Accountants announced its goal for 2010 at a Party training workshop: to establish Party branches in every accounting firm in China. There are over 7,500 accounting firms in China with close to 90,000 practicing certified public accountants and close to 300,000 employees. However, only 14% of the accounting firms have Party branches and 11% of the employees are Party members. On October 18, 2009, a Party Commission was established for China’s CPA industry. Deputy Ministers of Finance have urged diligence and online courses in establishing a Party presence in the CPA firms.

Source: Huanqiu, November 23, 2009
http://china.huanqiu.com/roll/2009-11/640412.html
See also:
http://www.cicpa.org.cn/news/200911/t20091125_20032.htm
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/25/content_12538678.htm
http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2009-11/26/content_12544990.htm

Huanqiu: To Improve Chinese Military Development

Chinese military power would be trapped in a shallow basin if its development could not adjust to the quantum leap of new weapons and equipment as in other countries, says state media Huanqiu Magazine. For example, increasing pressure comes from neighbors such as Russia (about 1,500 billion rubles in arms purchases in 2009) and India (150 billion US dollars to modernize military forces over the next 5 years). “The U.S.’ frequent moves in the Western Pacific region have posed a serious threat to China’s military security. This threat comes from its force in the air as well as from the sea, and even from its power from sea to land.”

Source: Xinhua, November 4, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/globe/2009-11/04/content_12385845.htm

Xinhua: Chinese “Culture Deficits” Do not Match China’s World Position

Wang Chen, Chief of the Information Office of the State Council, recently suggested that China has a very large “culture deficit” in its international exchange and distribution of culture. Chinese culture’s international power of influence is significantly behind China’s current world position and level of economic development. He delivered a speech at the Sixth Members Conference of the Translators Association of China. Wang believes translators have the “glorious” mission to deliver on the Party’s call for the enhancement of China’s “soft power” and the improvement of China’s international influence.

Source: Xinhua, November 15, 2009
http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/15/content_12458166.htm 

CCP Sent Representative to Congress of United Russia Party

The Chinese Communist Party Central Committee sent the Deputy Director of the International Liaison Department, Chen Fengxiang, to attend the 11th Congress of the United Russia Party held on November 21 in Saint Petersburg. Chen also delivered a speech in the forum entitled “Party Responsibilities During A Period of Crisis.”

Source: People’s Daily, November 21, 2009
http://cpc.people.com.cn/GB/64107/64112/10423109.html