China Desk

by Petrichor Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:17 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/14/world/asia/the-new-members-of-chinas-ruling-body.html?ref=asia

http://howjsay.com/index.php?word=xi+jinping&submit=Submit

http://www.economist.com/blogs/analects/2012/11/china-reveals-its-new-leaders

"Another problem is that the leadership reflects the strong hand of Mr. Hu’s predecessor, Jiang Zemin. Although Mr. Jiang, 86, retired a decade ago, he has close ties with at least four of the seven members. That means he was able to override Mr. Hu and place his people in top slots even though he has no formal position in the party.

“The bad news from looking at the political system is that it really seems to have thrown a wrench in our understanding of institutionalization,” said Joseph Fewsmith, a professor at Boston University who specializes in Chinese politics. “This whole institutional idea that people retire and then don’t play much of a role seems to have been pretty well demolished.”" NYT

by Idéfix Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:28 pm

atcg wrote:“This whole institutional idea that people retire and then don’t play much of a role seems to have been pretty well demolished.”

That idea runs counter to human nature. It is human nature to try and retain power, influence and leverage. After Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government actively created this illusion of institutions -- that every generation of senior leadership retires after 10 years, and then goes off into vanaprastham. This was their answer to the western skepticism of Chinese institutions -- that their leaders are not autocrats who are crazy about hanging on to power, but rather technocrats who serve society and then leave when it the appointed time comes. The reality is quite different. Mao and Deng hung on to power as long as they could. Jiang ruled for more than ten years, and he continued to exert influence behind the scenes through his appointees. Before he formally handed over to Hu, there was a year-long propaganda effort to turn Jiang into a Mao-like visionary leader whose principles would outlast his term. Now Hu and Jiang will both try to control things from behind the scenes.

by Petrichor Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:02 pm

Ah...didn't realize the subtle NYT angle to paint the Chinese with a particular brush.

>>After Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government actively created this illusion of institutions -- that every generation of senior leadership retires after 10 years, and then goes off into vanaprastham<<

With the typical Chinese deference to the old guard, I am skeptical that they made any overt promises in this regard. Pretty much they don't care much for what the Western press or even Governments think of "their own unique 5000-year old" culture. I don't see the Chinese ever making concessions to global opinion one way or another.

by Idéfix Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:12 pm

The Chinese are much more assertive today than they were in 1992. In the aftermath of Tiananmen Square, the Chinese economy was much more vulnerable to western pressure, and the US was a lot less dependent on the Chinese. China wasn't part of the WTO yet; every year it needed the US president to grant it the most-favored-nation trade status. If it failed to obtain MFN status, its economic growth would stall. In that world, China needed to combat the image that Tiananmen Square created in the US. And they succeeded in their propaganda efforts.

Today, the US depends on China just as much as, if not more than, China depends on the US. China's economy is more than an order of magnitude larger than it was in 1992. So the Chinese can afford to not care for global opinion one way or the other.

by Petrichor Thu Nov 15, 2012 7:03 pm

It is a matter of public record that Bush Sr. was fawning over his Chinese counterparts and official US policy never criticized China for the way they handled the protesters. US, primarily saw it as an opportunity to take advantage of the subdued working classes in China for its capitalist aims.

Yes, tourism suffered and it affected the aam aadmi in China in terms of livelihood.

by Sponsored content

China Desk

China Desk

Re: China Desk

Re: China Desk

Re: China Desk

Re: China Desk

Re: China Desk