With both President Hu Jintao — who is also the Party General Secretary — and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, set to retire on completion of their two five-year terms, the Party is finalising major changes. As a part of this process, current Vice-President Xi Jinping — likely to take both the top state and party positions — was put through the paces by being sent on a much-heralded official visit to the United States.
Just when it appeared that the transition was proceeding smoothly, the country was shocked to learn that Bo Xilai, the powerful party boss of Chongqing had been stripped of his post and, along with his wife, detained on a host of serious charges. His wife was also accused of complicity in the murder of a British businessman — a family friend and possible business associate. Children of distinguished Long Marchers, the couple was viewed as highly influential, while Bo’s forceful personality and campaign against corruption had made him a likely candidate for a seat on the Party’s all-powerful nine-member standing committee.
While still recovering from the reverberations of the Bo affair, China was hit by another crisis —this one from a little-known, blind political activist — Chen Guangcheng. His success in gaining refuge in the US Embassy threatened to inject a human rights issue in relations with the US, only days before Secretary Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner were to arrive in Beijing for the bilateral Strategic and Economic Dialogue.
At one point it was feared that China’s anger at “unacceptable interference by the US” may lead to the Summit being scuttled, but both sides chose to cool the rhetoric, with President Hu Jintao acknowledging that while “it is impossible for China and the US to see eye-to-eye on every issue, both sides must know how to respect each other”. The two sides discussed a host of issues, including North Korea and Iran, as well as economic matters, such as the renmenbi’s exchange rate. Clinton also made a reference to human rights issues, including the Chen case, but chose to tread cautiously lest she damage prospects of Beijing’s cooperation on issues of greater importance to the US. After all, human rights issues, especially when they concern China, have long been a happy hunting ground for US politicians, and Clinton herself had not failed to exploit it in the past. That it came to haunt her during her recent trip to China can only be viewed as poetic justice.
The compromise which envisages Chen leaving for the US on a student visa, along with his wife and children, demonstrates the Communist Party’s ability to overcome major obstacles and impediments — especially over the past 30 years — by adhering to Deng Xiaoping’s wise admonition to “cross the river by feeling the stones”. Nevertheless, the two episodes, though different in nature and content, had the potential of derailing the carefully choreographed leadership transition, while giving rise to a host of questions about the Communist Party’s domestic and foreign policies. While Bo’s downfall revealed major schisms and personality clashes within the inner sanctums of the Party, the Chen affair confirmed the Party’s continuing inability to handle protests by determined political dissidents.
The US would, however, do well not to seek to destabilise China, as cooperative relations between them are essential for global political and economic stability. But China too will have to appreciate that no US Administration can ignore human rights violations, unless they happen in Israel. In fact, both will need to demonstrate patience and skillful diplomacy to ensure that transient issues do not damage their vital relationship.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 9th, 2012.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Being a totalitarian regime the Chinese do not have the skills to handle dissent(political or otherwise) like a mature democracy would. If due to global economic scenario Chinese GDP growth were to slip below 5% the people would protest in the streets. Chinese are a disciplined and obedient people but sooner or later the people may want what every country promises its people - freedom of speech and expression, freedom to form unions and Political parties, freedom of Press, freedom to select their own leaders, an independent Judiciary etc. What looks very stable now may look very unstable in a mere 5 years.
Pakistanis are still stuck decades back. If anything, the human rights issue for US now is just for them to arm twist China and nothing more. I dno
t see how that shifts their relation in any way. If anything, very little comes out of china now in terms of hr rights violation news. Any wonder why. it
s not that the 1.4 billion chinese have political freedoms and they are not being violated. but in fact because many nations have decided that it really doesn`t matter.Our warped political analysis is creating problems for pak within the country anyways.
Why would US destabilise China? US companies have made major investments in China. China has a huge surplus of human labour (actually human capital) which is engaged in producing all kinds of material goods for the US, at a fraction of the cost that it would take to make them in the US. So why would the US destabilise a country that is so useful to them? China & the US have the most interdependent economic relations in the world.
American slavery has been replaced by the Chinese worship. Alas, sad but true
"......China was hit by another crisis —this one from a little-known, blind political activist......" If a nobody activist gets the chinese leadership's chaddis in twist, then I have to admit, we pakistanis are more confident about ourselves and our society than the chinese! How can we rely one a 'true' friend like china, where their government can throw tantrum for a small thing like these. God forbid, our 'strategic' assets hurts chinese knowingly or unknowingly, they may come down much harder on us than the USA. Besides, for all her tall claims of 'true friendship' china has only given us lip service and nothing else.!
The US has nothing to gain from seeing China destabilized and it is painful to note such analysis from PAK foreign policy establishments. The latest political asylum crisis is a classical scenario of how an external event can thwart years of working relationship.
While the author may take a personal joy by believing that the asylum crisis is a poetic justice for Sec. Clinton, perhaps he should take a note of the diplomatic skills of Clinton in managing the crisis to her advantage by getting Chen out of China. After all that is why he went to the US embassy in the first place and Sec. Clinton made it happen at the end. So, it is indeed a poetic justice but not in the way the author thinks of it.
Human rights may be an abstract principle in PAK, but that is what make up America. As much as the author would like to persuade the readers to think that the US is not concerned about palestinian human rights, millions of Palestinians who currently live in the US may not agree with him.
The US is not concerned with China's political transition but is concerned when the women are forced to under go abortion because the state says so. It should be a concern for every one.
Chinese leadership did well economically with the help of US not on their own. Their economic success, however, do not give them the rights to abuse the basic human dignity or give them the mighty hand on expansionist agenda on south China sea as in Tibet.
There will be ripples along these matters between US and China for years to come and anyone who agrees with China policy on these issues are closet fascist. Ask the Philippines who are currently in stand off with China on south China sea and the Vietnamese and the Thailand people, the Cambodians in case any doubt.
The successful resolution of Chen's political asylum crisis is an indication of future US-China relationship and it is in the right direction of political cooperation, not destabilization as the author would like the readers to believe. The love of China should not cloud one's own intellectual thinking. I am sure millions of Chinese who fight their state machinery on human rights issue will disagree with the author's view, as well.
"US Administration can ignore human rights violations, unless they happen in Israel." Aren't you a little old to be crying during your articles?
. But China too will have to appreciate that no US Administration can ignore human rights violations, unless they happen in Israel.
did you miss india, here?