Covid Conspiracies & Narrative - Xi's Red Footprints - Tibet White Paper - EU Deal on Ice - Xi's $3 bn Pledge - Employment Pressure - Blinken-Lavrov Talks - Competing on Values
I. Conspiracies, Narrative & the LAC
The daily COVID-19 case numbers in India dipped below the 300,000 mark this week, but the narrative contest around it continues to get ugly. In many quarters of the Indian press, there is renewed talk about the biowarfare and lab-leak theories. Of course, this has been going on for a couple of weeks. The reporting focussed on this after a piece in The Australian on May 10, which talked about a secret document as providing evidence for these theories. Of course, that document seems to be a publicly available book from 2015. Treating this as a smoking gun requires a serious leap of faith, and there has been ample reportage to rebut The Australian’s original story and the 2015 book as evidence. The report from The Australian, however, was widely covered across Indian media outlets, and a number of them have since doubled down. For instance. India Today and Times Now spoke to Chinese virologist Dr Le-Meng Yan. The Economic Times ran with an opinion piece titled, “Is India’s second Covid wave China’s biological war against India?” Newslaundry has a good piece that details the coverage around this across mainstream English and Hindi media. The other narrative strand in the Indian media with regard to China and the pandemic is one about profiteering. I covered the India Today report last week, and here’s WION’s coverage regarding this. There’s also been much more on social media and in the right-wing news ecosystem in India about this.
Responding to such coverage, the Chinese embassy’s spokesperson, Wang Xiaojian, took to Twitter, charging elements in the Indian media of trying to “stir up lies & stale fake news fabricated by western media.” He also spoke about the media “spreading lies” and engaging in “malicious attacks,” thereby engaging in “stigmatisation & political manipulation of the epidemic.” In saying this, it is useful to note that Chinese media, even the official Xinhua and others like Caixin, continue to use the term “Indian variant” for the B.1.617 variant of COVID-19. Anyway, Chinese media have also been pushing back with regard to the reporting in India. Here’s Global Times questioning the Indian media’s “professionalism, cognition and sense of social responsibility,” arguing that discussing the lab-leak theory “has been largely discarded by the world.” Of course, that is not true. Let’s be clear here for a minute, the WHO report called the lab-leak theory “extremely unlikely” but that does not mean it is “largely discarded.” In saying this, let me also add that conspiracy coverage like the kind some Indian outlets have engaged in will only further hurt the hunt for the truth about the virus’ origins. CGTN (here’s more) and Global Times have both been pushing back against the “price-gouging” narrative too. The latter published a two-part “in-depth investigation,” which says:
“China has become a backbone of support as India battles the devastating COVID-19. With large production capacity and tight export regulation, the Chinese government has been encouraging its companies to meet India's needs. The Global Times found many of India's medical equipment supplies, including some donations from other countries, are procured in China. However, controversies have surfaced over the past weeks, with Indian media accusing Chinese manufacturers of indulging in price gouging and compromising export quality. Manufacturers of different medical supplies and logistics companies interviewed by Global Times refuted the rumors of purposely raising prices and compromising quality, and they called for tighter regulations from the Indian government to regulate its wild black market and chaotic distribution of the much-needed equipment.”
The second part of the series talks about data from VariFlight, which shows that “from April 1 to May 17, there were 427 international cargo flights to India, and flights from China accounted for nearly 60 percent - of which flights from the Chinese mainland comprised 31 percent, followed by 28 percent from Hong Kong - and 17 percent from the US.” The piece defends Sichuan Airlines to say that “data shows that Sichuan Airlines, which was reported by Indian media to have suspended cargo flights, has accounted for 23 percent in terms of flight volume, ranking first in cargo transport from April 15 to May 16.” This is a bit of sleight of hand. The suspension came much after April 15, and Global Times itself had reported it. This was not some Indian media concoction. The piece then talks about capacity and logistics issues in India as challenges. On freight pricing, the piece quotes a Chinese logistics firm manager explaining that “the prices went up mostly because it is one-way shipping but with the cost of two-way travel...The vessels delivering to India return with empty containers to China.”
Roughly, the narrative from China is that the price-hike issue is a result of demand and supply factors and the nature of the Indian market and regulation. The quality issue is primarily the result of the rushed nature of procurement that is being done, with the blame resting with Indian middlemen. Here’s Beijing Review’s Liu Yunyun speaking to CGTN talking about lack of government regulation in India and profiteering by Indian firms. Also, here’s Cai Qiaowu, Executive Vice President Shenzhen Association of Medical Devices, saying that “India recognizes CE certification from the European Union, and those Chinese companies that have business with India all passed third-party testing to obtain the qualifications. In addition, China’s Ministry of Commerce conducts strict testing on medical supplies. Chinese customs also carries out inspection at clearance, so no doubt the quality is highly assured.”
Elsewhere in Chinese media, the situation in India still remains a key part of the coverage. There are reports about daily caseloads, the Indian government’s notice on the use of the term “Indian variant” and the government’s notice to Twitter on deleting critical content. For instance, there’s this Guancha story, with the headline: “The Indian government asks Twitter to delete tweets criticising its ineffectiveness in fighting the epidemic, while the epidemic is out of control.”
One noteworthy article in all of this is this opinion piece in Global Times’ Chinese edition.
This is a good reflection meta-level narrative from Beijing amid all this. It talks about India’s handling of the pandemic and the Fukushima wastewater issue in Japan to criticise the idea that democracies are inherently better governed or value human rights or are transparent. It reads like the gun’s being rested on Tokyo and New Delhi’s shoulders to shoot at Washington, while also arguing for the superiority of the Party-state system.
The author says that:
“What Japan and India have done has not reflected the governance advantages of the ‘democratic model,’ but has become a negative example of governance failure…” Specific to India, the piece says that “Modi’s government put partisan self-interest above national health, and frequently held massive election campaigns, which undoubtedly provided a ‘convenient channel’ for the spread of the epidemic.” It refers to reports of Delhi high court judges being provided luxury quarantine accommodation, juxtaposing it with the healthcare challenges that ordinary people have faced to argue that the Indian government was following the US model of “giving priority to the rich.” The piece also highlights the controversies surrounding the Central Vista project. It then says “Japan and India, two ‘democratic countries,’ blinded their own conscience and concealed the truth from the public,” before going on the attack against the US.
“The US boasts that democratic values are a strong bond between America and its allies, but the ship of friendship can capsize at any time. Since the outbreak of the pandemic, the US has instigated India as part of its ‘Indo-Pacific strategy’ to export vaccines, ignoring the fact that India was already in deep water. When India was caught in the ‘COVID--19 tsunami’ and wailed for help, the US first looked on indifferently and refused to relax restrictions on the export of vaccine raw materials. However, when China took a stand to support India, the US’ attitude turned around and it lifted the ban on exporting anti-epidemic materials and vaccine raw materials to India in a limited way, especially giving the AstraZeneca vaccine, which has been abandoned by many countries and questioned by many people, to the Indians, revealing its hypocrisy. On the other hand, the US help to Japan to deal with nuclear sewage is also lip service but not the reality. 美国夸耀民主价值观是美国与盟友的强大纽带,但友谊的小船却说翻就翻。全球疫情暴发以来,美国唆使印度配合美国“印太战略”输出疫苗,全然不顾印度已在水深火热之中。而当印度深陷“新冠海啸”哀号呼救时,美国先是冷眼旁观,拒不放松疫苗原材料出口限制。然而,当中国表态支援印度后,美国态度原地掉头,有限解禁对印出口抗疫物资和疫苗原料,特别是把多国弃用、倍受质疑的阿斯利康疫苗送给印度人,虚伪面目原形毕露。另一边,美国对日本处理核污水的帮助也是口惠而实不至。
Moving away from COVID controversies, let’s look at some other stories that are noteworthy. First, Indian Army Chief General M M Naravane said in an interview this week that “the situation along the LAC (Line of Actual Control) post the disengagement of February has been very cordial. Both sides are observing that disengagement in letter and spirit. There has been no transgression of any kind...Because of that build-up in the trust maybe we will be able to make forward movement in the other areas where issues are still to be resolved. This is a continuous process, which will take time but will happen.” There is, however, no clarity yet about the next round of Corps Commander-level talks.
Next, Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar spoke at an event hosted by the Financial Times and the Indian Express. He said that ties between India and China were at a “crossroads,” with the future trajectory depending on whether Beijing will adhere to pacts aimed at ensuring peace on the border. He also pushed back against Cold War talk, arguing that the Quad was filling a gap that the four bilateral relations cannot do. “There is global good there. There are global commons which needs looking after. And I think the Quad helps to fill that gap,” he said. Third, the Times of India reports that the PLA is carrying out its annual drills in areas located around 100 km. to 250 km from the LAC. Closer to the LAC, around 25 km to 150 km, it has converted its “troop shelters, ammunition depots, helipads and surface-to-air missile positions established last year into permanent structures…”
Fourth, Ananth Krishnan reports for The Hindu that “China has completed construction of a strategically significant highway through the world’s deepest canyon in Tibet along the Brahmaputra river, enabling greater access to remote areas along the disputed border with Arunachal Pradesh in India. The highway, official media in China reported this week, took seven years to complete and passes through the Grand Canyon of the Yarlung Zangbo river, as the Brahmaputra is called in Tibet. This is the “second significant passageway” to Medog county that borders Arunachal, the official Xinhua news agency reported, directly connecting the Pad township in Nyingchi to Baibung in Medog county. The highway will reduce the distance between Nyingchi city and Medog from 346 km to 180 km and will cut the travel time by eight hours.”
Finally, India’s Commerce Ministry has initiated an anti-dumping investigation against the import of solar cells from China, Thailand and Vietnam. The investigation was triggered by an application by the Indian Solar Manufacturers’ Association. Solar cells are the basic ingredient used in the manufacturing of solar modules and Chinese products are 15-20% cheaper than their Indian counterparts. Chinese media reports on this tell us that the local industry there isn’t thrilled about this investigation. But it’s worth noting that as per this GT report, “India accounted for around 7.5 percent of China's total PV module exports in 2019 but dropped to 3.9 percent in 2020 amid the epidemic, according to the China Photovoltaic Industry Association. However, India's constant targeting of Chinese PV companies may also have another unsaid purpose - which is to force Chinese PV companies to invest in India.”
Also Read:
India’s coronavirus crisis threatens plans for post-pandemic supply chain shift from China
China says it will support India, South Africa proposal for global IPR waiver for Covid-19 vaccines
PLA modernises Xinjiang's military units in 'reaction' to India-China LAC row
II. New Tibet White Paper
Today marks the 71st anniversary of the inking of the 17-point agreement between Beijing and Lhasa. Earlier this week, the State Council today released a new White Paper on Tibet. It talks about history, overall development, security issues, threats from the West and provides guidelines for the “new era.”
My thoughts: This is an interesting document. Of course, the paper offers the Party’s version of history and therefore it is problematic in that sense. But from today’s perspective, there are some useful bits to note. It broadly argues for policy continuity in terms of tightening of socio-political control in Tibet, tough approach with regard to religion and the selection of the next Dalai Lama, continued emphasis on border management and development, and pursuit of infrastructure and developmental initiatives. There is an emphasis on Western imperialism of the past, with the paper drawing a line between that and the role of the US today as attempts to destabilise China. There is an emphasis on economic development in Tibet, which is a source of confidence for the Party. The header for the ethnic and religious affairs section talks about “remarkable results” being achieved, with “the sense of national identity” being “heightened.” This is also likely an indicator of quiet confidence in the Party. The window for any compromise with the Dalai Lama or any section of the CTA is clearly tightly shut. Yet, there is a deep sense of anxiety with regard to social stability and ethnic minority cadre that persists. This is evident in the 10-point guideline for the new era at the end.
Here’s a breakdown of the key points that the paper makes:
It begins by saying that “Tibet has been an integral part of Chinese territory since ancient times, and one of the main Tibetan-inhabited areas in China. In the aftermath of the Opium Wars in the middle of the 19th century, the UK-led imperialist powers began to cultivate the idea of ‘Tibet independence’, intentionally undermining China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
The first section then talks about history, which I am not delving into, but let’s just say that there is tremendous revisionism. For instance, “On September 2, 1949, Xinhua News Agency, with authorization from the CPC, published an editorial under the headline, Foreign Aggressors Are Resolutely Not Allowed to Annex China's Territory – Tibet...All sectors of society of Tibet quickly responded and expressed support for the editorial and the hope that the PLA would enter Tibet as soon as possible.”
The next section talks about “peaceful liberation;” it covers the “17-Article Agreement” and a period till the mid-1950s. It talks about the agreements with India and Nepal too.
The next section talks about “historical changes.” It essentially talks about the Dalai Lama and those close to him being part of the elite, dominating the “serf,” and argues that the central government held off on “reforms” in Tibet as promised until there was an armed rebellion. These three paragraphs tell us what the government wants to convey. Again, this is basically a jaundiced view of history to favour the Party’s narrative.
“In old Tibet, polarization of the rich and the poor hindered development. The three major stakeholders and their agents, who made up less than five percent of the population, owned almost all of the land, pastures, forests, mountains, rivers and flood plains, and most of the livestock. Before the democratic reform in 1959, there were 197 hereditary aristocratic families, and the few top families each possessed dozens of manors and thousands of hectares of land. The family of the 14th Dalai Lama owned 27 manors, 30 pastures, and over 6,000 serfs. The Dalai Lama alone owned 160,000 taels (one tael = 30 grams) of gold, 95 million taels of silver, over 20,000 pieces of jewelry and jade ware, and more than 10,000 pieces of silk clothing and rare furs. Meanwhile the serfs and slaves, who accounted for 95 percent of the population, had no means of production or freedom of their own. They were subjected to the three-fold exploitation of corvée labor, taxes, and high-interest loans, and struggled for mere existence.”
“In consideration of Tibetan history and the region's special situation, the Central People's Government adopted a circumspect attitude of patient persuasion, waiting for the ruling elite to carry out reform, and giving them adequate time to do so. In 1956, still awaiting a change in the attitude of the ruling upper class, the Central People's Government made a decision that no reform should be carried out in Tibet for six years. During his visit to India in January 1957, Premier of the State Council Zhou Enlai handed a letter from Chairman Mao Zedong to the 14th Dalai Lama and 10th Panchen Lama, and the accompanying senior local Tibetan government officials. The letter informed them of the central government's decision that reform would be deferred for six years; whether reform should be carried out after six years would still be decided by Tibet in accordance with its own situation and the prevailing conditions. The Central People's Government showed the utmost patience and made every concession.”
“To preserve serfdom, the reactionaries from Tibet's upper class planned a series of activities to split Tibet from China, in blatant violation of the 17-Article Agreement. These led to a full-scale insurrection on March 10, 1959. The Central People's Government, together with the Tibetan people, took decisive measures to suppress the rebellion, and subsequently implemented a democratic reform in Tibet that brought feudal serfdom to an end.”
The next three sections talk about development, poverty alleviation, and culture. This is followed by a section on religious work. But in the section on development and poverty alleviation, we have this on border regions development.
“Tibet has a 4,000-km long external border line. The inhabitants of the contiguous areas experience harsh living and working conditions and a high incidence of poverty. Governments at all levels have been making constant efforts to develop border areas and improve people's lives. Under the guidance of the Party Central Committee, financial input has been increasing year by year for border development in Tibet. Particularly since 2012, border villages, townships and counties in Tibet have been granted more preferential state policies on infrastructure construction, covering water, electricity, roads, and housing. In 2017, the Plan of Tibet Autonomous Region on the Construction of Villages of Moderate Prosperity in Border Areas (2017-2020) was released, designed to ensure better access to housing, water, electricity, roads, communications and the internet, to improve education, technology, culture, healthcare and social security in border villages, and to boost industries in border areas. By the end of 2020, first-tier and second-tier border villages had access to highways, all border townships and towns were connected to the main power grid, and all border villages had access to postal services, mobile communications, and safe drinking water. Through all these efforts in the border areas in Tibet, infrastructure has seen remarkable improvements, all industries are flourishing, and the people enjoy better living and working conditions.”
The culture section says that Chinese and Tibetan languages “are used in large meetings and major activities organized by local governments, enterprises and public institutions. In judicial proceedings, the Tibetan language is used to hear cases and make legal documents in accordance with the needs of Tibetan litigants, so as to guarantee the right of Tibetan citizens to use the language for litigation.”
Here we get state-approved data on monasteries, institutions and processes for approval of the Dalai Lama and living buddhas. But do note that Section 1 of the paper tells us this to set the stage:
“In 1793, after dispelling Gurkha invaders, the Qing government restored order in Tibet and promulgated the Imperially Approved Ordinance for Better Governance of Tibet (the 29-Article Ordinance), improving several of the systems by which the central government administered Tibet. The ordinance stipulated that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and other grand Living Buddhas had to follow the procedure of “drawing lots from the golden urn”, and the selected candidate would be subject to approval by the central government of China.”
Then this current section tells us that:
“The reincarnation of Living Buddhas has been carried out in an orderly manner in accordance with laws, regulations, religious rituals and historical conventions. In 1995, with the approval of the State Council, the search for and identification of the reincarnation of the 10th Panchen Lama and the enthronement of the 11th Panchen Lama were completed by drawing lots from a golden urn. In 2010, the Sixth Living Buddha Dezhub was identified and enthroned through the drawing of lots from a golden urn and with the approval of the government of the Tibet Autonomous Region. By 2020, 92 reincarnated Living Buddhas had been identified and approved through traditional religious rituals and historical conventions. Traditional religious activities are carried out regularly in accordance with the law – activities such as studying scriptures and debate, initiation as a monk or nun, abhisheka (an empowerment ceremony), and self-cultivation. Examination on scriptures and subsequent promotion in academic degrees are also held in monasteries on a regular basis.”
Section 9 is then about national security and stability. It says that:
“Over the years, Western anti-China forces have used Tibet as a pretext to disrupt China and interfere with its development, and the 14th Dalai Lama and his supporters have continued to try to promote “Tibetan independence” by provoking incidents to jeopardize peace and stability in Tibet.” The section then briefly discusses the CIA’s actions in the 1950s, and then says that “since the 1980s, Western forces have played an active role in all the outbreaks of unrest that have taken place in Tibet.” It talks about the Tibetan Policy Act of 2002, the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018, and the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020.
Also note this bit:
“In 1959, after the failure of their armed rebellion, the reactionaries of Tibet's ruling class fled to India. They subsequently began to campaign for “Tibetan independence” by force. Later, with the support of the US, they reorganized the ‘Four Rivers and Six Ranges; rebel organization, and set up a military base in Mustang, a county in Nepal, to engage in long-term attacks across the China-Nepal borders. In 1962, with support from external powers, they built a para-commando force composed of mainly Tibetan exiles to harass Chinese border troops and civilians along the China-India border. From the late 1970s, under pressure from significant shifts in the international landscape, the 14th Dalai Lama and his supporters began to alter their tactics. On the one hand, they continued to provoke incidents of violence to keep up pressure on the central government. For example, in 1987, 1988 and 1989 they planned and instigated multiple violent incidents. In 2008, they planned and executed violent riots in Lhasa on March 14 and launched a number of international incidents designed to sabotage the preparations for the Beijing Olympic Games. Since 2011, the 14th Dalai Lama and his supporters have incited Tibetan lamas and lay followers inside China to engage in acts of self-immolation, and released a Self-Immolation Guide on the internet, giving rise to a surge of self-immolation incidents in some parts of China. On the other hand, they proclaimed a commitment to ‘non-violence’ and the ‘middle way’...The ‘middle way; does not tally with China's history, national reality, state Constitution, laws and basic systems. Neither does it conform to Tibet's history, reality and ethnic relations. Moreover, it runs counter to the fundamental interests of all the people of China, including the Tibetans.”
And this:
“Since the 14th Dalai Lama fled abroad in 1959, the central government has exercised great restraint and done its best to provide solutions, for example preserving his position as a vice-chairman of the NPC Standing Committee until 1964. After reform and opening up, the central government offered the 14th Dalai Lama an opportunity to accept the policy that “all patriots belong to one big family, whether they embrace patriotism earlier or later,” and invited him to send representatives to return home for a visit. The central government received 13 visits by private representatives of the 14th Dalai Lama between 1979 and 2002, and granted approval to ten visits from 2002 to 2010. But to the disappointment of the central government, the Dalai Lama has refused to relinquish his political demands.”
The final section has guidelines for the new era under Xi. What’s noteworthy about these to me is that at least three of the 10 items refer to ensuring ethnic and Party unity.
Also Read:
China building villages all along Tibet border, disputed with India, Bhutan
Tibet owes its development to peaceful liberation - China Daily
'Running out of time': Tibetan president-elect warns of cultural genocide
III. Red Footprints, Health Summit, & Gangs & Evil Forces
The People’s Daily this week launched a new column series that tracks the “red footprints of General Secretary Xi Jinping.” The idea is that this is a reminder to cadres about the “original aspiration” and an emphasis on red genes that need to be carried forward along the new journey that China has embarked on. Through the week the pieces covered key visits by Xi. They talked about his term as Zhejiang Party Secretary, his visits to Jiangxi, Gutian and the site of the Zunyi Conference. The emphasis through the pieces is on ideology, the historical hardships that were faced to make achievements, the development of these revolutionary base areas and the developmental priorities of Xi Jinping. You can check out by breakdowns of the daily articles in my People’s Daily Tracker.
My short assessment of this series is that at one level, it tells us about Xi’s strengthened position as the core of the Party, and the cult around his personality. There, at times, appear to be clear lines being drawn to connect Xi and Mao. The pieces underscore the return of ideology to mainstream prominence in today’s China. They emphasise that ideology is critical to Party, national character and matters to governance. The series also informs us about Xi’s effort to recast the Party’s history, using the past to suit his political and governance priorities. Finally, one can also view the articles from the point of view of a leader’s anxieties with regard to individuals, events and outcomes at lower levels of government. The difficult question, of course, is whether Xi’s succeeding in achieving these goals that he is pursuing.
For me, one of the most striking bits from the articles this week was in Friday’s article from Zunyi city. The piece talked about Zhang Ruining, a sixth-grade student, who has become a “little red preacher.” It talks about Zhang putting on a “red scarf” and telling tourists “the story of the Red Army’s Long March.” The article talks about young Zhang’s journey as a “red preacher” and then tells us that in 2017, Zunyi city launched a project called the “Long March Stories into Campus.” The idea was to use “red resources” to pass on “red genes.” As part of this project, “over the past four years, the city has trained 640 principals and moral education teachers and trained more than 800 ‘little red preachers’.” Another example cited was that of the Loushan Pass Red Army Primary School, with comments by a teacher named Feng Xiaoli. It said: “In order to cultivate children’s firm belief and the spirit of going forward, the school also compiled red memory textbooks for different grades, and organized the study of red songs and red poems.” Feng adds to this saying that their goal has been to "incorporate the red gene into the children’s spiritual blood, let the red culture take root…”
Moving on, Xi Jinping spoke at the Global Health Summit on Friday. He made five big points, essentially telling the world what needs to be done to deal with the pandemic, before outlining tangible pledges and ideas for the future.
What needs to be done?
put people first; he talked about the need to “demonstrate a great sense of political responsibility and courage, and make extraordinary responses to an extraordinary challenge.”
pursue science-based policies; part of this is keeping “global industrial and supply chains safe and smooth” and working on debt suspension, etc.
reject attempts to politicize, label or stigmatize the virus. “Political manipulation would not serve COVID-19 response on the domestic front.”
uphold fairness and equity; strive to close the immunization gap.
the pandemic has tested global governance systems; Xi wants to strengthen and improve the UN & WHO’s role and improve, monitoring, early-warning and emergency response capacities along with an effort to fight disinformation.
New Pledges
China will provide $3 billion over 3 years for social and economic development in developing countries.
China will continue to provide vaccines to the “best of its ability.”
He supported vaccine technology transfer and joint production with developing countries.
He backed waiving intellectual property rights on COVID-19 vaccines, and wants the WTO and others to act quickly on this.
He called for a new “international forum on vaccine cooperation for vaccine-developing and producing countries, companies and other stakeholders to explore ways of promoting fair and equitable distribution of vaccines around the world.”
Finally, the Central Committee and State Council issued a new document on the struggle against the gangs and “evil” forces. It calls for the Party to:
“accurately grasp the new trends of crimes involving black and evil, and constantly strengthen the supervision and special rectification of industry, combine this with anti-corruption campaign by swatting flies and strengthen the construction of grass-roots organizations, constantly improve the social governance system led by party committees…” 准确掌握涉黑涉恶犯罪新动向,不断加强行业领域监管和专项整治,与反腐“拍蝇”、加强基层组织建设结合起来,不断完善党委领导.
An interview with an unidentified official from the National Anti-Vice (全国扫黑办) Office regarding this document was published in PD this week. The official praised “unprecedented results” that have been achieved and terms the policy of the “special struggle against gangsters” as “completely correct.” But still with the international and domestic situation changing, the task of fighting these forces was termed as a “long and arduous task.”
Going forward the priorities in this will be:
Drawing from Xi’s ideas to ensure the “normalization” this fight against “gangs” and “evil” as “fundamental compliance.”
Maintain party leadership in this process of fighting gangs.
“Taking the protection of the fundamental interests of the people as the starting point and goal, mobilizing the masses to participate, accepting the supervision of the masses, and improving the evaluation system oriented by the people’s sense of gain, happiness, and security…”
Make sure that all of this, i.e., the fight against gangs is done by using legal instruments: “ensure that the fight against criminals and evil is always running on the track of the rule of law.”
“Summarize the proven effective practices and accumulated valuable experience in the special struggle against gangsters and evils, and promptly upgrade them to institutional norms to form a long-term mechanism to prevent the re-emergence of gangs.”
You can find more details on this in this post from my People’s Daily Tracker.
IV. April Data, Employment, Commodity Prices & Property Sector
First, this week, the NBS released April’s economic data. PD reported that “production demand continued to grow, employment prices were generally stable, new kinetic energy was cultivated and expanded, and the national economy continued to recover its development trend steadily.” But this is based on select data points. For instance, here’s SCMP’s report on the data that NBS released. Do keep in mind that year-on-year numbers will have high variances just because of the unprecedented nature of last year. The key data points are:
China’s industrial output grew 9.8 percent in April from a year ago, slower than the 14.1 percent surge in March.
Retail sales rose 17.7 percent year on year in April, down from the 34.2 percent jump seen in March.
Fixed asset investment increased 19.9 percent from Jan to April, year on year. Q1 data for this was 25.6 percent.
Surveyed unemployment rate stood at 5.1 percent in April, down from 5.3 in March.
Reuters reports that average new home prices in 70 major cities grew 0.6% in April from a month earlier. On a year-on-year basis, growth in new home prices rose to an eight-month high of 4.8%, compared with 4.6% in March.
Also note this bit from WSJ’s coverage: “To strip out last year’s pandemic distortions, government statisticians and economists have benchmarked this year’s numbers against 2019’s. By that measure, official data showed industrial production up 14.1% in April, largely in line with March’s growth rate, while the pace of retail-sales slowed to 8.8% from March’s 12.9%.”
Next, Li Zhong, Vice Minister of Human Resources and Social Security, spoke to the press this week about the challenges of employment that China continues to face. The report says that:
“Last year, China launched a series of extraordinary and phased measures to reduce burdens, stabilize jobs and expand employment, and achieved the following results. A total of 1.5 trillion yuan was “reduced, exempted and delayed” in terms of social insurance burdens related to pensions, work-related injuries, and unemployment. There was an expenditure of 104.2 billion yuan worth for employment subsidies and special awards and subsidies exceeded 100 billion yuan. The country generated a total of 11.86 million new jobs in urban areas, exceeding the target. In April this year, the nationwide surveyed unemployment rate in urban areas was 5.1%, which dropped to the lowest level in recent years.”
Li says that this year “stabilizing employment still faces challenges. It is necessary to strengthen the employment priority policy, grasp the effectiveness of timeliness, and better stabilize expectations.” Doing this, requires focus on:
supporting market entities;
“promoting employment and entrepreneurship of key groups,” such as college graduates and entrepreneurs; and
“expanding unemployment insurance protection” and and provision of subsidies for those “who have not yet been employed after the expiry of receiving unemployment insurance benefits” and supporting migrant workers with living and training allowances.
He also talks about supporting “flexible employment” (around 200 million people are supposed to have flexible employment), providing funding for small and micro enterprises, reducing fees for entrepreneurs and supporting incubation of start-ups, etc.
For new graduates:
“this year’s support measures can be summarized as ‘four supports and one enhancement,’ that is, support for enterprises to absorb, support grassroots employment, support self-employment, support training and further studies, and strengthen employment services. The Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security has established a normalized graduate employment service platform, posting nearly 300,000 jobs every day. At the same time, it has continued to hold city joint recruitment and other activities, and launched online and offline industry and regional job fairs. At present, 80 special recruitments have been launched, and the demand for graduates has exceeded 5 million.”
While speaking of employment, do check out this SCMP story. It talks about the return to prominence of the civil service as a job provider amid recent economic challenges:
“China’s overall job market has improved steadily as the economy has rebounded from the worst of the pandemic early last year, but young people, particularly fresh graduates from universities, are still having a hard time finding steady employment. As a result, a new wave of young Chinese talent is spurning the private sector and settling for jobs with the nation’s civil service. Their enthusiasm for the public sector has only grown in recent months after last year’s economic downturn, as well as the government’s decision to delay the retirement age and the high-profile regulatory difficulties of some private businesses. More than 1.58 million candidates registered for China’s national civil service exam this year, up sharply from 1.05 million in 2009 and 125,000 in 2003. They will compete for about 25,700 jobs at ministries and state agencies, putting the average chance of landing a government job at about one in 61. If provincial and municipal government exams are included, there are up to 9 million candidates – most of whom are fresh graduates – vying for civil service jobs each year, said Li Dongjie, who sees a growing market for his Dongliang civil servant training centre in Shenzhen.”
Next, the State Council’s executive meeting (English report) this week focussed on the supply and prices of commodities. The statement immediately led to a price slide. It said that “since the beginning of this year, due to multiple factors, especially the transmission of global price rise, some commodities have seen extended price rally, with the prices of some varieties hitting new records. The government must take very seriously the adverse impact caused by the price hike, and take both holistic and focused measures in light of market dynamics to exercise precision regulation, so as to ensure the supply of commodities and curb unreasonable price increases and prevent transmission to consumer prices.”
A range of steps were agreed upon in this context. So basically, China wants to cut down steel and coal imports. This is going to be done by expanding domestic capacity and dis-incentivising export. I must add that this is relevant from an Indian perspective. Ores, iron and steel, aluminum, copper and organic chemicals have been among the key Indian exports to China over the past year. The higher prices have helped reduce, however limited in amount, the trade deficit too.
Here are the steps being reported:
raising export tariffs on certain iron and steel products, temporarily exempting tariffs on pig iron and scrap steel, and canceling export tax rebates for some steel products, to increase supply in the domestic market.
key coal companies will be encouraged to raise production and supply while ensuring safety, and the capacity of wind, solar, hydro and nuclear power will be increased to ensure energy supply during summer peak time.
expediting the import, export and buffer reserves of commodities, facilitate customs clearance, and better leverage international and domestic markets and resources, to more effectively ensure supply and keep prices stable.
regulation on futures and spot markets will be better coordinated, and targeted measures will be taken as appropriate to screen abnormal transactions and malicious speculations
targeting instances of monopolies and price gouging
keeping the RMB exchange rate broadly stable at an adaptive, balanced level, to guide market expectations as appropriate
assistance to be provided to support small and micro businesses and those self-employed through concessional tax policies
Finally, there are increasing signs that China’s property sector is in for a big churn. Bloomberg reports that government scrutiny is beginning to hurt capital availability. The piece says that “since China introduced the ‘Three Red Lines’ policy late last year to curb property companies’ debt ratios, regulators have required developers to turn over information on their off-balance sheet arrangements, said Adrian Cheng, senior director of Asia Pacific corporates at Fitch Ratings. The funding is often masked as equity offerings that are debt-like in nature. Another avenue is to provide guarantees to joint ventures or associates that borrow on behalf of the developers, Cheng said. Funding sourced via such guarantees for joint ventures accounted for about 9% of total debt issued by Fitch-rated developers last year, based on Fitch estimates, reaching a record 460 billion yuan ($71 billion).” So far this year, Bloomberg’s data show that developers already account for nearly 27% of the more than $20 billion of missed bond payments. In terms of the significance of all this on the overall economy, the piece informs that “real estate contributes to about 29% of China’s economic output if its wider influences are factored in.” For more context on what this means for China’s broader investment-driven growth strategy, do check out this thread by Michael Pettis.
Also note this SCMP piece which informs that commercial banks across several Chinese cities have begun raising their mortgage rates, as they increase the cost of buying homes to help the government keep a lid on speculative buying that is fuelling a runaway housing bubble. The piece says that the national average mortgage rate for first-home buyers has risen 11 basis points since January to 5.33 percent in May. Another piece from SCMP reports that a joint symposium on Tuesday, which included the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, heard opinions from municipal officials and experts about the current real estate tax reform pilot programme, further increasing speculation on the outlook for property taxation in more Chinese cities. It says that at the moment, taxes and fees are mainly collected only at land auctions, or in the property development or trading process, with few additional costs for residential homeowners. A new real estate tax, however, may be in the offing, although it has not been put on the legislation agenda for this year.
Also Read:
V. Region Watch
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had a phone conversation with his counterpart in Dhaka, Dr AK Abdul Momen on Friday evening. Wang affirmed that Beijing is keen to resume tripartite talks between Bangladesh, Myanmar and China for the repatriation of the Rohingyas. The Chinese Foreign Minister reiterated his government's commitment regarding the Rohingya repatriation,
“China fully understands Bangladesh’s legitimate concerns, and supports Bangladesh and Myanmar in appropriately addressing this issue through friendly consultations for an early start of repatriation,” Wang Yi said.
The Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill, which was criticised as being a threat to the sovereignty of Sri Lanka making it a “Chinese colony”, was debated in Parliament for two days. Government MPs endorsed the Bill stating its potential $15 billion investment and job creation prospects in the island nation. Critics maintained that it gave the Bill's governing commission overarching powers and immunity from Sri Lankan law. The Bill was passed by the Lankan Parliament on Thursday with a majority of 149 members (in the 225-member House) voting in its favour.
Thursday was also the eve of the 70th anniversary of the founding of diplomatic relations between Pakistan and China. Prime Minister Imran Khan and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang held telephonic talks to mark the occasion and underlined the need to advance with the momentum of high-level exchanges. Speaking about the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) on the anniversary, Chinese Ambassador Nong Rong in an interview said the scope of cooperation under the infrastructure project is growing and that China will continue to provide favourable conditions to deepen market ties between the two countries. On Friday, Radio Pakistan released a song to commemorate the relationship.
Also Read:
VI. China-US Ties
Before we get to news developments, this week there were a series of Zhong Sheng commentaries in PD about US democracy. These commentaries sort of represent the official voice on foreign policy. These spoke about the role of money in American politics, the disorder that has been witnessed recently and the problems related to gun violence. None of these arguments are terribly new. But the series does tell us that Beijing is clearly willing to engage in a narrative contest around systems, governance and values, and that it feels it is doing so from a place of confidence. Perhaps, there’s also the sense that Beijing has little choice but to do so, given that the Biden administration has shown that it wants to put democracy and values at the heart of its diplomacy. This was evident at the recent G7 summit, and is evident in conversations around a potential summit of democracies that Biden wants to convene. For instance, this piece by Yaroslav Trofimov in WSJ, discussing the impact and limitations of the US’ values-based approach. I have the following take on what these commentaries tell us about China’s policy approach to the US.
First, Beijing is keen to push back on the Biden administration’s values agenda. This includes defensive actions like defending policies in Xinjiang and offensive actions like working with Russia and such pieces.
Second, these commentaries are primarily aimed at a domestic audience and they go hand-in-hand with pieces and propaganda about how China’s system works and is far more efficient.
Third, the fact that these pieces are about long-standing and systemic issues rather than specific actions or steps by the Biden administration (unlike the eventual situation in the second half of the Trump administration) perhaps indicates that despite skepticism about a reset in ties, Beijing does see room to work with Washington on certain issues.
There are, of course, more such arguments being made across Chinese media. For instance, here’s Xin Qiang, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, basically saying that “over the past few years is the exposure of the shortcomings and problems left unanswered of US democratic system. This trump card of the US has many stains on it.” Xu Liang from the Beijing International Studies University writes that “what counts as a ‘democracy?’ The answer is not supposed to be dominated by a hegemonic bully, but should instead be the result of best practices. The US will never fundamentally fix its behavior of forcibly promoting its democratic model worldwide. However, it will find it harder to continue this deed.”
Or this piece by Xinhua, which says that “an increasingly diverse and interconnected world demands more than just the West’s voice and perspective. For one thing, all countries deserve to have their voices heard in the global community. How the West is trying to define the world is another reason for a change. The West’s main narration of the world is not intended to tell the truth, but to help westernize the rest of the world.”
It further says:
“In their condescending reports, Africa, a fast-developing and promising continent, is depicted as a place of chaos and crimes, poverty and plight. When it comes to the Middle East, they beat the drum for violent anti-government protests backed by the West and praised them as struggles for ‘democracy,’ ‘liberty’ and ‘human rights,’ shying away from telling the world the atrocities the West's interventions brought to the local people. And as the global public is crying for scientific guidance and truth amid the COVID-19 pandemic, they, in the name of ‘free press,’ have been promoting ridiculous conspiracy theories, fanning racist rage, forging alternative realities, and hyping up unfounded slanders. Their actions help explain their logic: the Western world has the monopoly over the truth, and they can feel free to define what is right or wrong, good or evil in the world.”
Anyway, apart from this, Beijing would also likely have been watching Antony Blinken and Segey Lavrov’s meeting in Reykjavík at the sidelines of the Arctic Council meeting. It’s interesting that the meeting began with Lavrov sitting across the table form Lavrov quipping how no one was shouting or asking questions. Blinken responded, “I think it’s a slow night in Reykjavík,” leading a chuckle from the Russian diplomat. Yang Jiechi must not have been amused.
Anyway, after the meeting, Lavrov said that “the conversation seemed to me constructive. There is an understanding of the need to overcome the unhealthy situation that developed between Moscow and Washington in previous years…Today we confirmed our proposal to start a dialogue, considering all aspects, all factors affecting strategic stability: nuclear, non-nuclear, offensive, defensive. I have not seen a rejection of such a concept, but experts still have to work on it.” The State Department’s statement touched on the issue of Ukraine, Russia’s actions “against VOA and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the health of Aleksey Navalny and the repression of opposition organizations, among other issues.” It also said this:
The Secretary underscored the imperative of ensuring humanitarian access for the people of Syria, while they also discussed regional issues, including finding a long-term political solution to the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. They also discussed areas in which both of our peoples could benefit from sustained and enhanced cooperation, including Afghanistan, strategic stability, and curbing Iran and the DPRK’s nuclear programs. The Secretary and the Foreign Minister committed to continued discussions going forward.
Let’s see what this means in the weeks and months to come; the Biden administration has been rather clear that it wants a “predictable, stable relationship” with Russia. Time will tell how this works out in practice.
Finally, a couple of key reports to note. First, FT reports that US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has so far been unable to speak with China’s top general despite multiple attempts to set up talks. The report says that the US defence secretary has made three requests to speak to General Xu Qiliang, vice-chair of the Central Military Commission and a politburo member who is China’s most senior military officer. But China has refused to engage, according to three people briefed on the impasse. US officials have said that they do not want to hold high-level meetings with China just for the sake of it, particularly after the countries’ top foreign policy officials engaged in a public diplomatic spat in Alaska in March. But the Biden administration thinks it is important for Austin to talk to Xu because of the rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific. The two militaries are increasingly coming into closer contact, particularly in the South China Sea as the Chinese navy and air force conduct aggressive activity near Taiwan…In addition to the stand-off over Austin’s request, General Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has not talked to his counterpart since early January before Joe Biden was sworn in, according to a second official.
Second, after Japan, we now have a joint statement about the US-ROK alliance with Biden meeting President Moon Jae-in. As expected, China doesn’t get mentioned, but that’s really not needed. The statement talks about the “complex” security environment of the Indo-Pacific region, adding that the two sides share “a vision for a region governed by democratic norms, human rights, and the rule of law at home and abroad.” It adds that the two sides “commit to strengthening the alliance deterrence posture, share the importance of maintaining joint military readiness, and reiterate our firm commitment to a conditions-based transition of wartime operational control. We also agree to deepen cooperation in other domains, including cyber and space, to ensure an effective joint response against emerging threats.” It also says that “President Biden and President Moon also agree to redouble their commitment to democratic values, and the promotion of human rights at home and abroad.”
The section on emerging technologies is also an important read. It says:
“We agree on the importance of careful screening of foreign investments and cooperation on export controls on critical technologies. Recognizing the importance of telecommunications security and vendor diversity, President Biden and President Moon commit to work together to develop open, transparent, and efficient 5G and 6G network architectures using Open-RAN technology. To this end, we agree to cooperate to increase resiliency in our supply chains, including in priority sectors such as semiconductors, eco-friendly EV batteries, strategic and critical materials, and pharmaceuticals. We also agree to work together to increase the global supply of legacy chips for automobiles, and to support leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing in both countries through the promotion of increased mutual investments as well as research and development cooperation. President Biden and President Moon commit to work together to develop a future-oriented partnership by leading innovation in the areas of clean energy, such as next generation batteries, hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage, and in the emerging technologies including Artificial Intelligence (AI), 5G, next generation communications network (6G), open-RAN technology, quantum technology, and bio-technology.”
Finally, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy R. Sherman will travel to Brussels, Ankara, Jakarta, Phnom Penh, Bangkok, and Honolulu May 25 to June 4. While in Brussels, Sherman will lead the first meeting of the U.S.-EU Dialogue on China with European Union External Action Service Secretary General Stefano Sannino.
Also Read:
How Should the U.S. Respond to China’s Military-Civil Fusion Strategy?
US to send vaccines to Latin America after Taiwan ally - Honduras - warns of pivot to China
VII. The Long & Short of It…
A. Tech Talk: In a major change to hit China’s technology sector, ByteDance’s founder Zhang Yiming announced this week that he will step down as chief executive, the latest Chinese tech boss to resign as the government ramps up pressure on the sector. Mr. Zhang appointed co-founder Liang Rubo as his successor and said he was stepping aside to focus on long-term strategy. ByteDance has been facing regulatory strife in China over the past couple of weeks and months, and it looks like this is going to continue. This week the Cyberspace Administration of China targeted the company along with many others for improper collection and use of data. AP reports that the CAC said that the 105 apps violated laws by excessively collecting and illegally accessing users’ personal information, according to a statement posted on its site Friday. Other companies it named included short video app Kuaishou, search engine Sogou and Baidu. The watchdog said companies had to fix the problems within 15 working days or face legal consequences.
Finally, the State Council’s Financial Stability and Development Committee on Friday announced China’s crackdown on Bitcoin mining and trading. Reuters says that this comes just days after three Chinese industry bodies tightened a ban on banks and payment companies providing crypto-related services. The piece adds that China's state broadcaster CCTV on Friday warned against “systemic risks” of cryptocurrency trading in a commentary on its website, pointing towards black market trade, money-laundering, arms smuggling, gambling and drug dealings.
B. China-EU Deal on Hold: The European Parliament halted on Thursday ratification of a new investment pact with China until Beijing lifts sanctions on EU politicians. CNBC reports that the resolution to freeze ratification passed with 599 votes in favor, 30 votes against and 58 abstentions. The parliament “demands that China lift the sanctions before dealing with (the investment accord)”, it said in its resolution, which is not legally binding but is now the assembly’s official position. “EU-China relations may not continue business as usual,” it said. In response to the resolution, China’s mission to the EU said the investment agreement was “mutually beneficial” and not a “favour” from one side to the other. China’s sanctions were a legitimate response to EU actions, it said. “China has all along sincerely promoted bilateral cooperation and hopes the EU will meet us half way,” the mission said in a statement posted on its website on Friday. Foreign Ministry’s Zhao Lijian said that a China’s sanctions were a “necessary and legitimate reaction to the EU’s moves,” adding that the EU’s unjustified sanctions strain China-EU relations. This is what China is unwilling to see, and what China should not be blamed for. It is hoped that the EU side will make serious reflections.” He added that the agreement “is a balanced and win-win deal, rather than a "gift" bestowed by one side to the other. China is sincere about advancing bilateral relations. We hope the EU side will work toward the same direction as China.
In another blow to China’s approach to the EU, Lithuania has said that it will be quitting the China’s 17+1 cooperation forum with central and eastern European states that includes other EU members, calling it “divisive.” Also note that earlier in the week, the US and EU issued a joint statement talking about global steel and aluminum excess capacity, “driven largely by third parties.” The statement adds:
The distortions that result from this excess capacity pose a serious threat to the market-oriented EU and U.S. steel and aluminum industries and the workers in those industries. They agreed that, as the United States and EU Member States are allies and partners, sharing similar national security interests as democratic, market economies, they can partner to promote high standards, address shared concerns, and hold countries like China that support trade-distorting policies to account. They agreed to enter into discussions on the mutual resolution of concerns in this area that addresses steel and aluminum excess capacity and the deployment of effective solutions, including appropriate trade measures, to preserve our critical industries.
Beijing responded angrily. Zhao Lijian said: “How the US develops its economic and trade relations with the EU is its own business. But it should not make an issue out of China or even attempt to form a clique against China. Such a twisted and narrow mentality doesn't befit a major country.”
C. Mideast Proposal & Faux Pas: With China occupying the UNSC chair at the moment, Wang Yi put forth four proposals during a special discussion on the Israel-Palestine issue. Xinhua reports that Wang said the “situation is extremely critical and severe, and a ceasefire and cessation of violence is urgently needed...He said that the Palestinian question has always been the core of the Middle East issue. Only when the Palestinian question is resolved comprehensively, fairly and permanently, can the Middle East truly achieve lasting peace and universal security.” Here are Wang’s four points.
“First, ceasefire and cessation of violence is the top priority. China strongly condemns violent acts against civilians, and once again urges the two sides to immediately stop military and hostile actions, and stop actions that deteriorate the situation, including airstrikes, ground offensives, and rocket launches. Israel must exercise restraint in particular.”
The international community must provide humanitarian assistance to Palestine, and the UN must play a coordinating role to avoid serious humanitarian disasters.
The UNSC must take vigorous action on the Palestine-Israel conflict, reiterate its firm support for a two-state solution, and push the situation to cool down at an early date...China calls on the United States to shoulder its due responsibilities, adopt a fair stand, and support the UNSC in playing its due role...”
“China supports the two sides resuming peace talks based on a ‘two-state solution’ as soon as possible, to establish an independent State of Palestine that enjoys full sovereignty with East Jerusalem as its capital and based on the 1967 border, and fundamentally realize the peaceful coexistence of Palestine and Israel...”
Domestically, the narrative has also focussed on China’s position on the issue, i.e., an end to the violence and resumption of talks based on the two-state solution. The other strand of this has been attacking the US. A Zhong Sheng commentary this week argued that
“The overwhelming majority of the UN Security Council members have voiced a common just voice over the current Palestine-Israel situation. However, the United States has exclusively blocked the Council’s voice several times and stood on the opposite side of the international community. At this critical moment, the United States should shoulder its due responsibilities, adopt a fair stand, and work with most members of the international community to support the Security Council in playing its due role in alleviating the situation, rebuilding trust, and political settlement.”
The piece also talked about China’s invitation to both sides for dialogue and welcomes bilateral dialogue between them too. Of course, CGTN unfortunately did tremendous disservice to Chinese diplomacy this week, with a clearly problematic video about the Israel-Palestine issue. The video was targeting the US, but the anchor’s comments on Jews dominating media, internet and finance in the US, thereby potentially influencing American policies in the region, led to charges of anti-Semitism by the Israeli embassy in China. The fact that the video has been taken down from Twitter since tells us that the pushback was not something that the Party appreciated.
D. Singapore’s Lee on China-US Competition: Speaking at a public event this week, Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was asked about the tensions between China and the US. His comments are worth noting.
“For the rest of the world, everything is at stake because if the US-China relationship goes sour, you are going to have a state of tension – anxiety at the very least and conflict possibly – all over the world. Certainly, all over the Asia-Pacific, or as now America prefers to call it, the Indo-Pacific. And that is going to be bad, not just for other countries big and small, but for both America and China too…”
He then spoke about how it is “necessary for both countries to decide to work together and accept each other as they are, but work together and find common ground where they can cooperate.” And then he said this:
“for China, that is a big deal. Because the Chinese have reached a point where they feel that they have not only stood up and become wealthy, but they want to become strong and be acknowledged as such. But when you are strong, you are not the only strong guy in the world. You have to know how to have that strength accepted by others over the long term, as the US has been able to do since the Second World War. You [the US] have the most powerful fleets and aircraft and army, but you have a lot of friends around the world, and people work with you not just because they are afraid of you, but because they think that there is room for them, you leave room for them, and you are doing good for the world, generally. For the Chinese to adopt such an attitude, it takes time. For the US, to accept that China is a fact, that it is not going to disappear, and you have to work with it. You can try to influence it, but you cannot convert it. And it is not going to become like a European country, much less like the United States of America. It is a big psychological thing for America to accept, and it takes great statesmanship to make it work and to make Americans go along with such a policy, but that is what you need.”
Other Stories
How disgruntled Chinese people talk about you-know-who - Do Read
Embattled Chinese Property Tycoon Turns to Electric Cars. Cue $87 Billion Valuation
China Hones Control Over Manganese, a Rising Star in Battery Metals
'Old' Quad strategy risks provoking China: Malaysia's Mahathir
China warns Japan against stoking military tensions over Taiwan
ASEAN, China reaffirm commitment to enhance strategic partnership
China says Martian rover takes first drive on surface of Red Planet