October
28, 2005
China’s
White Paper Upholds Its “Democratic Dictatorship”
China’s latest White Paper,
issued on Oct 19/05, strongly defends its political
system that it calls “people’s democratic
dictatorship”. The voluminous Paper, according
to news reports from Beijing, concedes that there
might be room for improvement but maintains vehemently
that its system suits the genius of the Chinese
people. China, it says, has a socialist political
democracy that adheres to basic Marxist ideas tempered
with Chinese characteristics.
The Chinese have allowed so far democratically elected
councils at the village level only and the Paper
gives no timetable for elevating the system to the
level of towns and cities. That may take years -
perhaps several decades.
The Paper was issued only weeks after the Deputy
US Secretary of State, Zoellick, faulted the Chinese
leadership for maintaining a single-party rule without
any democratic framework. And, it was issued the
very day that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld visited
the elite Communist Party University in Beijing
and urged the Chinese leadership to be more open,
forthcoming and responsive.
Pentagon had earlier accused China of vastly under-reporting
its defense expenditure. China reports $30 billion
as its defense expenditure while Pentagon estimates
it to be three times that figure. Rumsfeld remarked
that the heavy Chinese expenditure was a source
of worry for China’s neighbors. The Chinese
Defense Minister strongly maintains that its figure
is absolutely correct. Incidentally, the US defense
budget is over $400 billion.
On the issue of human rights, China asserts that
its constitution already enshrines these and that
raising a nation of 1.3 billion from poverty is
the ultimate human right.
The issues mentioned above are perhaps of a peripheral
nature, the real issue lies in economic relations
between the US and China. The volume of trade is
touching $200 billion annually, bulk of it as surplus
in favor of China, giving rise to serious trade
tensions. Visit any supermarket in the US and you
will find many of the stores overflowing with inexpensive
goods manufactured in China. Over $25 billion worth
of goods are imported by WalMart alone.
The Chinese have, over the past couple of decades,
emerged as the manufacturing floor of the world.
Quality of Chinese manufactures is quite competitive,
despite being inexpensive. The Chinese as a nation
have always been quite dexterous. Being a centrally
controlled economy, wages have been strictly maintained
despite increases in demand of their products. Then,
the Chinese currency, Yuan, has been pegged to the
Dollar at an undervalued rate. Globalization of
world economy, led by the United States, allows
the Chinese producers to enter the US market and
set up firm footholds. The US corporations too find
it much beneficial to get their manufacturing done
in China at a fraction of the cost in the US. The
surpluses have been invested by the Chinese in US
government bonds and treasury bills, giving them
an indirect leverage over fiscal policy.
The Chinese have recorded over 9 per cent growth
for two decades – an unprecedented performance
- particularly when one takes into account the fact
that the country accounts for 22 per cent of world
population. To move such a huge segment from the
19th to the 21st century in nothing short of a miracle.
But, it is not free of serious problems. There is
a mounting income gap between the people on the
booming east coast and the rural China wallowing
in dire poverty, leading to growing social unrest,
a severe strain on environment being felt by the
general populace, the dependence of growth on exports,
and the rising expectations of the people not being
met even half way igniting thousands of agitations
in vast areas of the country.
As for the US, China became the favorite site for
investments after the booming economies of Asian
tigers went into a tailspin in 1997. The policy
of “strategic partnership”, of engaging
China instead of confronting it, was evolved during
the Clinton era. President Bush replaced it by a
perception of China as a “strategic competitor”.
This conceptual shift appears to be at the root
of the conflict between policy and the dictates
of pragmatism and the pulls of the vested financial
and trade interests of corporate America.
As for China, it appears sticking to the policy
of strategic partnership, as confrontation would
more than likely nullify the exemplary gains made
by it over the past quarter of a century. Its GNP
has risen to over a trillion dollars, the seventh
largest in the world, life expectancy has grown
from 37 to 71, death rate has been reduced from
30 to 6 per thousand, illiteracy ended in 2,000.
Yet, China is still a very poor country and it will
take many more years before it is pushed into the
slot vacated by the Soviet Union.
China’s greatest asset is its people. They
are highly intelligent and as hardworking. Visit
any university campus in the US, you will find Chinese
students in the forefront followed by the South
Asians.
China is essentially an introvert, narcissist society.
It has therefore no record of external colonies.
Its excessive pride in its cultural superiority
was instrumental, many historians agree, in the
construction of the Great Wall to keep the inferior
foreigners away from the superior “middle
kingdom” and crossing swords with foreign
barbarians was regarded as below its national dignity.
It lost the Opium War in 1840 primarily because
it lacked the naval power to push back the invading
British armada.
It has come out of its cocoon; so has India from
its long somnolence. The 21st century belongs to
these two Asian giants. Policies will have to be
framed taking this essential fact into consideration.
Playing one against the other won’t do There
is no alternative to cooperation with both of them
for any US policy to succeed.
