Democracy in the US in clear and present danger

https://youtu.be/-oAudzgilHU

Next Wednesday, Joseph Biden will be anointed President, guarded by 20,000 National Guard troops in battle gear against not foreign enemies, but domestic threats

 A week is a long time in politics. Last Wednesday, armed supporters of President Trump stormed the sanctity of the Capitol, the temple of American democracy.

This Wednesday, President Trump became the first president in American history to be impeached twice.

Next Wednesday, Joseph Biden will be anointed President, guarded by 20,000 National Guard troops in battle gear against not foreign enemies, but domestic threats.

This was supposed to happen only in Hollywood movie scripts.

 Consider these bizarre facts: the pandemic is claiming more than 4,000 deaths daily in the United States; digital media like Twitter, YouTube and Facebook have banned tweets and comments by their own President; all US stock market indices are still rising, and bitcoin has surged by 27.9% in 13 days.

The article of impeachment stated in more stark terms than any foreign commentator would dare to express: “President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of government.

“He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law.

“Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honour, trust, or profit under the United States.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (pic below)summed it up as “he is a clear and present danger to the nation.”

Arguably, Trump has committed the sin of poisoning the well of democracy, not just in America, but for the rest of the world.

Although Western democrats extol its virtues back to the Greek Age, modern liberal democracy is very recent.

As late as 1978, only one third of the world lived in democracies; by 2015, more than half do. But since then, populism, Brexit and Trumpism have caused many to lament that democracy is receding.

Today, the gold standard of liberal democracy in America is being tested, if not questioned.

Work in progress

The problem is that liberal democracy based on social equality, rule of law, tolerance of diversity, is a work in progress.

Given very different cultures, history, religion and institutional set-ups, democracy is practiced differently, requiring huge efforts by all citizens.

Democracy that has no performance-accountability when what is promised is not delivered.

That became evident when the 2008 global financial crisis accentuated rising social inequality and insecurity to large segments of the population.

Democratic politics fragmented and did not seem to be able to deliver on promises.

Austrian economist and political philosopher Joseph Schumpeter became famous for his observation that the driver of capitalism was entrepreneurship, which led to creative destruction. He was equally original and sharp in his realist analysis of democracy.

In his classic Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, four conditions must be satisfied for democracy to work: the quality of politicians in terms of ability and moral character; social consensus that democracy does not solve everything; a well-trained and effective bureaucracy; and finally, “effective competition for leadership requires a large measure of tolerance for difference of opinion.”

Schumpeter understood that democracy has difficulty in making decisions when society is deeply divided.

Vote-seeking

Vote-seeking behaviour means that policies are always for the short-term, so politicians under serve the long-term interests of the nation.

For example, democratic and rich countries like Australia cannot even agree on dealing with climate change, because vested interests in the mining industry consistently block change through lobbying. If democracies cannot deliver long-term structural reforms that are painful and unpopular, then in the long-run, citizens will seek alternatives, such as autocracies or anocracies (democracy with autocratic characteristics).

Trump put American democracy in clear and present danger by violating all four Schumpeter conditions.

First, nearly half the voting population ignored his moral issues, because they believed him calling the mainstream news as “fake”.

Second, he violated many of the unspoken rules, codes and conventions that buttressed democratic checks and balances, aided by lawyers and attorney generals whom he also threw under the bus.

Third, he questioned the loyalty and efficacy of the vaunted American bureaucracy, which then failed to protect the Capitol from violent protests.

Lastly, he openly sought division, rather than work bi-partisanly to heal social divisions.

Asians have much to learn from Schumpeter, who foresaw that democracy is about majority rule, but works in practice through an elite that deals in votes rather than in money. Since capitalism by definition values money more than labour, money under financial capitalism has a nasty habit of corrupting politics.

How to control money politics from corroding diverse rights and public goods is a perennial issue in all systems of governance.

If there is one lesson that should resonate in Asia, it is that violence cannot be an answer to the democratic process.

Inciting violence

Trump realised too late that inciting violence in his supporters to protect his version of electoral victory ended up with him denouncing violence in the name of law and order.

Retribution occurs to those who incite violence abroad, because violence can bounce back at home.

Next week, the Trump Reality Show will thankfully end, and life will return to some form of normality, so we can address the threats of pandemic and job losses without being diverted by another tweet.

For Trump, impeachment will only withdraw his right to hold further public office. He was made by media, and he will be haunted by media for the rest of his life. But he will go on to earn millions from book sales and paid appearances.

The clear and present danger to democracy is a distorted system where heads I win, tails you lose.

We need to change this system, but we don’t know how to do this democratically. Perhaps Joe Biden has the answer.

By Andrew Sheng, a Distinguished Fellow of Fung Global Institute, a global think tank based in Hong Kong. The views expressed here are his own.

 Source link

 

 How security threats and Covid have changed Joe Biden's inauguration ceremony

 

Biden inauguration: How security threats and Covid have changed ceremony

Troops descend on US capital to ensure the new president can be sworn in amid threats of violence.

bbc.com

 

Trump leaves behind a bad China policy legacy

The Trump administration's China policy possesses the greatest threat to future China-US relations. It has ruined the achievements in bilateral relations the two countries had made since the establishment of diplomatic ties over four decades ago.

 

Trump's presidency expected to end with pardon spree as Biden era beckons

 

Donald Trump's end-of-term disgrace stems as always from big lies...

 

Donald Trump impeachment: A chaotic presidency doomed to end in disgrace...

Blaming China For US Poverty And The Broken American Dream

https://youtu.be/e-E8Ex1bgmQ

 

Related posts:

 

Trump-Washington disorder drags world down, lost humanity's fight for survival against climate change

 

Prepared for Trump’s final madness, hysteria on China policy 

 

Trump, with surge to over 4 million coronavirus cases, is blaming Black And Brown People for Covid-19, has 100 days to save his US presidency

Trump Is ‘Blaming Black And Brown People For Covid-19 Surge

 

 What Do You Want from Us? Message to Donald Trump, western media attacking China’s COVID-19 record

 

 

 

 

 

  

Trump Blames ‘Fauci And These Idiots’ For His Own Coronavirus Ineptitude

 

After laughs at Trump, globalism or patriotism? 

 

 US-China trade war escalates, tariff list aims to hinder China’s high-tech development: expert

 

Huawei CFO arrest violates human rights as US takes aim at Huawei, the real trade war with China

 

Trapped in US-China trade war when 2 elephantine economices fight ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who is messing with Hong Kong?

 

 

Hong Kong's youngters barking up at the wrong tree: preaching the West's cheats, divide-and-conquer, farce hearing !

 

US's ‘Support Hong Kong Violence Act’ condemmed

 

Hong Kong youth deceived by West: ‘I go to Yale, you go to jail’ mocks agitator followers

Inside America's Meddling Machine: NED, the US-Funded Org Interfering in Elections Across the Globe 

Hong Kong Riots, engineered by CIA, nothing but true!

 

HK security laws legislation ‘justified’

 EVERY NATION ON EARTH, UNLESS A FAILED STATE HAS LAWS PTOTECTING NATIONAL SECURITY

The cost and funding of the Hong Kong violence in CIA innumerable US regime-change, a price on freedom

 

US playing a messy game of provocations in SCS; China build up defense to thwart the provocation

 

US divides China by playing risky Taiwan card with arms sales that will lead to serious consequences and puts Taiwan at risk 

 

US profited from its weapons of deaths sales to Taiwan can be curbed? Yes and undoubtedly

Democracy in the US in clear and present danger

https://youtu.be/-oAudzgilHU

Next Wednesday, Joseph Biden will be anointed President, guarded by 20,000 National Guard troops in battle gear against not foreign enemies, but domestic threats

 A week is a long time in politics. Last Wednesday, armed supporters of President Trump stormed the sanctity of the Capitol, the temple of American democracy.

This Wednesday, President Trump became the first president in American history to be impeached twice.

Next Wednesday, Joseph Biden will be anointed President, guarded by 20,000 National Guard troops in battle gear against not foreign enemies, but domestic threats.

This was supposed to happen only in Hollywood movie scripts.

 Consider these bizarre facts: the pandemic is claiming more than 4,000 deaths daily in the United States; digital media like Twitter, YouTube and Facebook have banned tweets and comments by their own President; all US stock market indices are still rising, and bitcoin has surged by 27.9% in 13 days.

The article of impeachment stated in more stark terms than any foreign commentator would dare to express: “President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of government.

“He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law.

“Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honour, trust, or profit under the United States.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (pic below)summed it up as “he is a clear and present danger to the nation.”

Arguably, Trump has committed the sin of poisoning the well of democracy, not just in America, but for the rest of the world.

Although Western democrats extol its virtues back to the Greek Age, modern liberal democracy is very recent.

As late as 1978, only one third of the world lived in democracies; by 2015, more than half do. But since then, populism, Brexit and Trumpism have caused many to lament that democracy is receding.

Today, the gold standard of liberal democracy in America is being tested, if not questioned.

Work in progress

The problem is that liberal democracy based on social equality, rule of law, tolerance of diversity, is a work in progress.

Given very different cultures, history, religion and institutional set-ups, democracy is practiced differently, requiring huge efforts by all citizens.

Democracy that has no performance-accountability when what is promised is not delivered.

That became evident when the 2008 global financial crisis accentuated rising social inequality and insecurity to large segments of the population.

Democratic politics fragmented and did not seem to be able to deliver on promises.

Austrian economist and political philosopher Joseph Schumpeter became famous for his observation that the driver of capitalism was entrepreneurship, which led to creative destruction. He was equally original and sharp in his realist analysis of democracy.

In his classic Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, four conditions must be satisfied for democracy to work: the quality of politicians in terms of ability and moral character; social consensus that democracy does not solve everything; a well-trained and effective bureaucracy; and finally, “effective competition for leadership requires a large measure of tolerance for difference of opinion.”

Schumpeter understood that democracy has difficulty in making decisions when society is deeply divided.

Vote-seeking

Vote-seeking behaviour means that policies are always for the short-term, so politicians under serve the long-term interests of the nation.

For example, democratic and rich countries like Australia cannot even agree on dealing with climate change, because vested interests in the mining industry consistently block change through lobbying. If democracies cannot deliver long-term structural reforms that are painful and unpopular, then in the long-run, citizens will seek alternatives, such as autocracies or anocracies (democracy with autocratic characteristics).

Trump put American democracy in clear and present danger by violating all four Schumpeter conditions.

First, nearly half the voting population ignored his moral issues, because they believed him calling the mainstream news as “fake”.

Second, he violated many of the unspoken rules, codes and conventions that buttressed democratic checks and balances, aided by lawyers and attorney generals whom he also threw under the bus.

Third, he questioned the loyalty and efficacy of the vaunted American bureaucracy, which then failed to protect the Capitol from violent protests.

Lastly, he openly sought division, rather than work bi-partisanly to heal social divisions.

Asians have much to learn from Schumpeter, who foresaw that democracy is about majority rule, but works in practice through an elite that deals in votes rather than in money. Since capitalism by definition values money more than labour, money under financial capitalism has a nasty habit of corrupting politics.

How to control money politics from corroding diverse rights and public goods is a perennial issue in all systems of governance.

If there is one lesson that should resonate in Asia, it is that violence cannot be an answer to the democratic process.

Inciting violence

Trump realised too late that inciting violence in his supporters to protect his version of electoral victory ended up with him denouncing violence in the name of law and order.

Retribution occurs to those who incite violence abroad, because violence can bounce back at home.

Next week, the Trump Reality Show will thankfully end, and life will return to some form of normality, so we can address the threats of pandemic and job losses without being diverted by another tweet.

For Trump, impeachment will only withdraw his right to hold further public office. He was made by media, and he will be haunted by media for the rest of his life. But he will go on to earn millions from book sales and paid appearances.

The clear and present danger to democracy is a distorted system where heads I win, tails you lose.

We need to change this system, but we don’t know how to do this democratically. Perhaps Joe Biden has the answer.

By Andrew Sheng, a Distinguished Fellow of Fung Global Institute, a global think tank based in Hong Kong. The views expressed here are his own.

 Source link

 

 How security threats and Covid have changed Joe Biden's inauguration ceremony

 

Biden inauguration: How security threats and Covid have changed ceremony

Troops descend on US capital to ensure the new president can be sworn in amid threats of violence.

bbc.com

 

Trump leaves behind a bad China policy legacy

The Trump administration's China policy possesses the greatest threat to future China-US relations. It has ruined the achievements in bilateral relations the two countries had made since the establishment of diplomatic ties over four decades ago.

 

Trump's presidency expected to end with pardon spree as Biden era beckons

 

Donald Trump's end-of-term disgrace stems as always from big lies...

 

Donald Trump impeachment: A chaotic presidency doomed to end in disgrace...

Blaming China For US Poverty And The Broken American Dream

https://youtu.be/e-E8Ex1bgmQ

 

Related posts:

 

Trump-Washington disorder drags world down, lost humanity's fight for survival against climate change

 

Prepared for Trump’s final madness, hysteria on China policy 

 

Trump, with surge to over 4 million coronavirus cases, is blaming Black And Brown People for Covid-19, has 100 days to save his US presidency

Trump Is ‘Blaming Black And Brown People For Covid-19 Surge

 

 What Do You Want from Us? Message to Donald Trump, western media attacking China’s COVID-19 record

 

 

 

 

 

  

Trump Blames ‘Fauci And These Idiots’ For His Own Coronavirus Ineptitude

 

After laughs at Trump, globalism or patriotism? 

 

 US-China trade war escalates, tariff list aims to hinder China’s high-tech development: expert

 

Huawei CFO arrest violates human rights as US takes aim at Huawei, the real trade war with China

 

Trapped in US-China trade war when 2 elephantine economices fight ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who is messing with Hong Kong?

 

 

Hong Kong's youngters barking up at the wrong tree: preaching the West's cheats, divide-and-conquer, farce hearing !

 

US's ‘Support Hong Kong Violence Act’ condemmed

 

Hong Kong youth deceived by West: ‘I go to Yale, you go to jail’ mocks agitator followers

Inside America's Meddling Machine: NED, the US-Funded Org Interfering in Elections Across the Globe 

Hong Kong Riots, engineered by CIA, nothing but true!

 

HK security laws legislation ‘justified’

 EVERY NATION ON EARTH, UNLESS A FAILED STATE HAS LAWS PTOTECTING NATIONAL SECURITY

The cost and funding of the Hong Kong violence in CIA innumerable US regime-change, a price on freedom

 

US playing a messy game of provocations in SCS; China build up defense to thwart the provocation

 

US divides China by playing risky Taiwan card with arms sales that will lead to serious consequences and puts Taiwan at risk 

 

US profited from its weapons of deaths sales to Taiwan can be curbed? Yes and undoubtedly

Towards closer ties between China and US

Win-win By Luo Jie

President Xi Jinping’s first state visit to the United States may mean vastly improved China-US relations, with key agreements signed ahead to mark the occasion.



IF timing is a significant factor in shaping important events, what has it done to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s first state visit to the United States?

That the visit came at the same time as the first-ever papal address to the US Congress meant that media attention was effectively halved. Xi and Pope Francis had to share the media blitz; prime-time and front-page priorities were split.

But while the Pope’s visit was imbued with spirituality, Xi’s was rich in material significance and consequence. The Xi-Obama huddle was a meeting between leaders of the world’s two largest economies with much to discuss on economic and security matters.

More significantly, the Chinese leader, who is still in the early years of his decade in office, has come to visit his US counterpart in the twilight of the latter’s tenure. Yet China’s state media have no qualms about calling the visit “historic”.

President Barack Obama leaves office in January 2017. Although that is still more than a year away, it takes time for two distant yet interrelated, lumbering giants – China and the United States – to size each other up to work effectively together.

Not that Xi and Obama are total strangers. They have met repeatedly since 2009, some of those times only incidentally “on the sidelines” of a larger conference.

Still, much is assumed about the decisive nature of personal rapport between leaders. What impact does it have on bilateral relations between nations?

Western societies generally prefer formal agreements such as treaties to benchmark external relations.

For Asian countries such as China, unilateral pledges work as well and their voluntary observance deserves plaudits.

But Asian cultures also value personal connections, such that know-who is at least as important as know-how. Thus, Xi’s careful cultivation of Obama is nearing its end.

That cultivation has included the development of relations between the two First Ladies, and Xi’s affinity with Lincoln High School and Tacoma from early personal associations.

These are human touches, not simply frivolous details. For millions of Americans, they help to flesh out the character of the leader of an otherwise faceless, alien monolith that is China.

The importance of a personable character and thus of personal ties is also more important in the United States than is generally supposed. How can the personal imprint of any particular president on policy be denied?

It is unlikely for US policy on China to be identical with George W. Bush, Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in the White House. Election impresario and political mud wrestler Donald Trump will want it to be different again in his White House.

The US election season has begun, and among the seasonal domestic bloodsports is China bashing. How will the next president honour any deals Obama now makes with China?

The soothing argument is that however much a maverick a presidential candidate may be, the heft of political realities and high office will weigh on the incoming president to ensure a pragmatic moderation.

The problem is that nothing can guarantee that outcome.

Consistency in China’s external policymaking is less of a problem. A one-party state ensures that regardless of the personal style or preference of the leader of the day, the collective outlook is constant.

Barring unforeseen circumstances and contingencies, the ends and means in China’s long-term plans are reasonably clear. Individual leaders bring only a certain accent or tenor to dealmaking, with certain emphases such as eliminating corruption.

Xi has also called for a major reset in relations with the United States since at least 2013. No country can reasonably reject that call so there has been progress, even if it has been slow.

Xi’s first state visit is particularly significant in tackling three main themes head-on: essential new major-power bilateral relations, economic cooperation whose need is obvious enough, and military cooperation, which is as important as it may seem unlikely.

In mid-2013, just months into his new presidency, Xi flew to Califor­nia for a working meeting with Obama to jointly design a new style of US-China relations. They agreed on the importance of that task and on its follow-through.

This month’s summit is the next big step on that road. In the intervening two years, officials on both sides had been working on consolidating that agreement.

The economic aspects of the reset in relations are the most evident. So are their limitations.

The US Foreign Investment and National Security Act (2007) constrains China’s investments in certain key sectors deemed to impinge on key US infrastructure or other national security interests. Foreign enterprises are known to face difficulties in acquiring stakes in US “strategic industries” – oil or high technology assets.

China followed the US example this year with a draft of its own Foreign Investment Law (2015). During the Seattle trip, Xi pledged to facilitate US investments in China, but it was not clear if any aspect of the FIL would be compromised.

Meanwhile, reports of mergers and acquisitions between China and the United States continue to show promise.

The value of M&A deals in the first half of this year exceeded US$300bil (RM1.3 trillion), an increase of more than 60% over the same period last year, which had already set the record for the first half year.

Perhaps most significantly, China and the United States signed annexes to two agreements on major military operations, as well as air and sea encounters.

With China’s growing naval reach and US naval “rebalancing”, sea lanes in the Western Pacific are becoming more traversed as routes tend to overlap. The agreements signed just days before are intended to improve operational coordination and avoid misunderstanding and false alarms.

The first annex covers a telephone hotline between both countries’ defence ministries and mutual notification of an impending crisis. The second relates to airborne encounters, improved communication and better coordination in emergencies.

These are still early days in such China-US cooperation, but a promising start has been made in addressing the most pressing concerns. More cooperation and coordination can be expected.

More broadly, China-US cooperation has yielded results in environmental management and the Iran nuclear deal. More progress may be envisaged over North Korea, anti-terrorism measures and even improved US-Russia relations.

In already focusing on security provisions for the Western Pacific, with all its implications for the South China Sea and the East China Sea, Beijing and Washington have taken the bull by the horns.

This is surely the better and bolder way. The alternative is a somewhat indecisive and half-hearted attempt to face the issues, in part by deferring them to a later time that may never come.

Now that a bold start has been made, the follow-up has to be at least as gutsy. The momentum, once created, has to be maintained and built on to reach satisfactory policy conclusions.

Chinese commentaries have largely pronounced Xi’s state visit as momentous, in terms of China’s intent in soliciting a positive US response to redefining their bilateral relations. That will also require China’s continued commitment to the cause.

Xi’s objectives should also be Obama’s, as evidenced in their discussions for two years now, particularly since these objectives equally serve US and Chinese interests. To help realise them, the United States needs to contribute its share of commitment.


By Bunn Nagara Behind the Headlines

Bunn Nagara is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.

Xi visit helps US avoid anxiety over China

President Xi Jinping arrived in Washington DC on Thursday. His stay there was the climax of his week-long state visit to the US.

The diplomatic exchanges in recent years seem to have reached a consensus, in which the heads of state prefer to hold a more private and longer meeting, where the subjects of their talks can range from domestic as well as diplomatic matters. Such a scheme helps to build personal trust and enable them to better understand each country's policies.

On Thursday night, Xi and Obama's talk lasted for three hours. On Friday morning the two met again in limited company. When the meeting expanded to more people, the duration was shorter. As such intensive exchanges continue, China and the US are in better place to avoid strategic miscalculation.

As for the achievement of this visit, people are focusing their attention on how much the talks over cyber security can yield and whether a code of behavior to govern the two air forces' encounter will be officially signed. Although the bilateral investment treaty may not be signed this time, an exchange of negative lists for foreign investment will help both sides get closer toward the eventual agreement.

The strategic impact of Xi's visit will take effect in the near future, which will be assessed by how much the tension will ease around thorny issues between the two countries.

Talk about a "Thucydides trap," in which a rising power clashes with an existing power, permeates academic and media circles, especially in the US.

However, both Xi and Obama said they do not believe in the Thucydides trap, which means the two countries will not walk toward the strategic confrontation.

The US had three enemies in history, Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union. China is different from any of the three. It is larger than Germany and Japan, and it was more efficient than the Soviet Union. The most important thing is that China is one of the largest US trade partners. The US has more interests in China than in any of its allies.

China is still growing at a high speed, though the momentum has slowed. But the growth still outpaces other major economies. The anxiety from the US is inevitable.

Xi's latest visit has helped ease the anxiety from the US. The Chinese and US people may also do something to help their countries avoid the Thucydides trap - give their governments more flexibility so that both can make compromises on thorny matters. - Global Times

Related posts:

China-US new type of major power relations: positive narratives needed to help turn negative tide

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT New type of great power relations Xi Jinping's upcoming visit to the US comes amid the two sides'...

China's Long March-6 new carrier rocket succeeds in carrying 20 satellites to space

A new model of China's carrier rocket Long March-6 carrying 20 micro-satellites blasts off from the launch pad at 7:01 a.m. from the...

Related:

Xi's DC visit hailed as success

The first official state visit to the United States by Chinese President Xi Jinping has been applauded as a great success, despite skepticism expressed by some before the trip.

The US needs to reciprocate China's goodwill

Chinese President Xi Jinping's first state visit to the US sent two impressive messages. First, he r[Read it]

New International Relationship Must Feature Win-Win Cooperation

File Photo: Chinese peacekeepers sets out to participate in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. [Read it]

Commentary: China Will Never Close Its Open Door to the Outside World

File photo of cargo ship leaving Yangshan Port in Shanghai, largest city in China. Chinese Preside[Read it]

Spotlight: Xi's remarks on China-U.S. local-level cooperation resonate with U.S. officials, experts

Chinese President Xi Jinping (4th L, rear) speaks during the Third China-U.S. Governors Forum in Sea[Read it]

The four things that will improve China-US relations

Chinese President Xi Jinping puts forward a four-point proposal on the development of a new model of[Read it]

President Xi’s six trips to US enhance Sino-US relations

Chinese President Xi Jinping paid his first visit to the United States in 1985. At the time, he was [Read it]

China Dream a nightmare for others?

New Communist Party chief Xi Jinping’s ‘China Dream’ speech raises concern among foreign countries, especially those locked in territorial disputes with China, such as Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines.

THE “China Dream” is a phrase that has appeared in plays and books, but it recently got an airing at the topmost echelon of power when new Communist Party chief Xi Jinping used it to rally the nation.

Making his second speech since taking over as China’s top leader last month, Xi outlined what he deemed the greatest dream for China: realising the revival of the Chinese nation.

He said: “Everyone is talking about a China Dream. I believe the revival of the Chinese nation is the greatest dream of the nation since modern times. We are at the closest point to the Chinese nation’s resurgence than any time in modern history... and I am sure we will accomplish our goal.”

Xi’s choice of words has sparked a new craze over the phrase China Dream, with netizens rendering their own definitions of “zhongguo meng”, such as a corruption-free country.

Many believe the new leader was trying to mobilise domestic support for his agenda of continuing reform and opening up, by inspiring people towards a China Dream – the title of a 1987 play about a Chinese couple dreaming of success in the United States.

“It also serves to galvanise the people’s support and rally the public around the new administration’s economic and political agenda,” said Professor Wang Dong, an international studies expert at Peking University.

But a closer analysis of Xi’s speech makes one wonder if there is cause for concern for foreign countries, especially those locked in territorial disputes with China, such as Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines.

First, he chose to make the speech at the National Museum, where he and six other members of the apex Politburo Standing Committee had viewed the iconic China’s Road To Renaissance exhibition late last month.

Visitors tend to spend at least two hours at the exhibition, which begins with narratives of China as a weak country that suffered humiliating defeats and the loss of sovereign territories to foreign powers around the early 1900s.

It then traces the country’s efforts to rise from the ashes, which gained speed after the reforms and opening up under late leader Deng Xiaoping in 1980s.

Given the symbolic setting, the natural fear is that part of Xi’s China Dream may include taking a tougher stance towards foreign countries that China perceives to be threatening again to grab its territories.

There were hints in his speech when he said: “Looking back at our past, we can see that if we are lagging behind, we will suffer beatings. Only when we advance, then can we be strong.”

Also, the phrase “China Dream” evokes memories of a 2010 book by a People’s Liberation Army officer, which advocated a speedy strengthening of China’s military might or risk being sidelined by the US.

In his Chinese-language book, The China Dream, Senior Colonel Liu Mingfu wrote that “as long as China seeks to rise to become world No. 1... then even if China is more capitalist than the US, the US will still be determined to contain it”.

“If China in the 21st century cannot become world No. 1, cannot become the top power, then inevitably, it will become a straggler that is cast aside,” added Col Liu, who is a professor at the National Defence University.

If Xi was indirectly backing Col Liu’s beliefs, it could hint at more aggressive moves by Beijing in dealing with foreign countries in future.

For some, it may have already happened. On the day Xi sketched his idea of the greatest dream for China, news broke that police in southern Hainan province would get new powers to intercept foreign ships in the contested South China Sea.

Though it is unclear whether the new rules taking effect next month would be limited to only Hainan island’s territorial waters within 12 nautical miles, the move has given some of its neighbours sleepless nights.

It has also unnerved non-claimant countries such as Singapore, which places great value on regional peace and freedom of navigation.

To be fair, China is not the only claimant state stirring up the waters in the maritime hub lately. Others have taken similar actions.

Also, to be sure, some believe that Xi’s China Dream pertains mostly to improving the people’s lives through better jobs and better rule of law.

In that sense, it does not differ much in essence from the American Dream, which promises equal and fair opportunities for all, in pursuit of a better life. Or the Singapore dream, which epitomises the prospects of a successful life gained through hard work.

But niggling concerns remain, given that China’s new commander-in-chief could fan or yield to more nationalistic sentiments by taking a more hawkish foreign policy stance, particularly if domestic political problems persist.

Said Professor Taylor Fravel, a China expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “Xi’s speech suggests that he may be more willing to invoke nationalism, but at this point it is too soon to tell how this will affect China’s foreign policies.”

After decades of promising a peaceful rise, it would be a shame if Beijing starts to grow its might at an unhealthy pace or flex it aggressively, which could worsen already frayed ties with its neighbours and destabilise the region.

While China and its people are entitled to pursuing their dream after decades of setbacks, it is also in the country’s interest to continue to act like a responsible global power by showing sensitivity to others in the region.

A dream for China should not become a nightmare for the rest of the world.

By Kor Kian Beng, China Correspondent  The Straits Times/Asia News Network