After weeks of
international observers speculating about the impact on China of the election
of Donald Trump as the next American president, the Communist party’s flagship
(and authoritative) newspaper People’s
Daily has begun to weigh in on what it means—
for the future of the United States, perhaps for Sino-American relations.
The delay in publishing an
official reaction is interesting in itself, indicating that consensus on Trump’s
victory is proving difficult to achieve in China’s leadership circles. Contrary
to the views of many analysts outside China, there’s no preferred view visible yet
here, certainly no conclusion reached by China’s leaders about how relations
between Beijing and Washington will be impacted.
Outside China, there are understandable anxieties about how the election of Donald Trump will play out to be sure; but many of the deductions aren’t so much suppositions as projections--people dismayed by the outcome of the American election and thinking that Beijing will surely take advantage of results that the writers themselves find repugnant. Inside China, matters are more complicated--far more complex than many international observers are rendering them.
Outside China, there are understandable anxieties about how the election of Donald Trump will play out to be sure; but many of the deductions aren’t so much suppositions as projections--people dismayed by the outcome of the American election and thinking that Beijing will surely take advantage of results that the writers themselves find repugnant. Inside China, matters are more complicated--far more complex than many international observers are rendering them.
What’s important where People’s Daily is concerned is that it
has an exhaustive vetting process where writers are concerned, seeking out
officials and official scholars whose views that can best reflect leadership
thinking and unresolved debates. That’s because Chinese commentators remain
reluctant to write much that hasn't been approved or at least sponsored by
certain authorities. It’s silly to think that President Xi Jinping is
overseeing such publications personally, because that’s not how the Chinese
political system operates; bureaus and departments, retired officials and
various scholars—each and all will seek to have their views aired in print or
online instead of simply privately, and they find support far lower in China’s
political food chain. But it’s not foolish to assume that the dearth of official
essays up to this point about what Trump’s election means for China indicates
that there’s simply been no strong consensus about that event’s implications
for Beijing’s policy towards the United States.
And it’s that situation
which may be shifting with the publication of 4 essays this past Sunday in People’s Daily.
2 scholars and 2
commentators wrote the essays. There’s nothing explicit connecting the authors
to any particular part of the Communist party, and so it’s likely that their
musings are indicative of what has been agreed on (perhaps just for the moment)
before a more authoritative message is fashioned under a more recognizable pseudonym
that would indicate unified thinking in the Chinese leadership.
There are some striking
commonalities across these commentaries.
First, the authors see the
United States as becoming more divided as a society, as a more elitist culture
was taking shape, wealth was becoming a more prominent value, and the income
gap was becoming sharper. Ye Xicheng of Peking University writes that “from the
1950s and into the '90s, the middle class [in the US] enjoyed the dividends of
development...But after the 1990s, this process has changed, a small number of income
groups are getting richer…The assets of the middle class have not grown and
have fallen sharply over the past two decades.” “Two Americas” have been
created, according to Ma Feng, an academician at the Chinese Academy of Social
Science--“the elites” and everyone else.[1]
Because they’re good
Marxists, the authors of all of these essays see the economic forces of
capitalism producing social disunity leading to a distrust of change managed
from above. For example, the “insistence on a single and narrow view of the
liberal market economy,” as Peng Xiaoyu frames it, aims at wealth rather than
equality, and ends up undermining “spiritual support” for the US political
system as a whole, as well as socialism as an alternative program. Americans,
in this view, had nowhere to turn except to take a chance on Trump.
The result of this economic
disparity is cynicism that is, in the view of the various authors’, producing a
crisis in governance in the United States. Ye argues that while “America's
governance capacity almost peaked in the 1990s…since then, the United States
has been making mistakes and losing many good opportunities for development.”
Those errors are, at least according to Ye, the result of poor leadership,
declining talent in the civil service, and ineffective mechanisms by which to
govern what’s become a more complex (i.e., diverse and declining) country. Other
authors in this collection echo this assessment, with a co-authored piece by
Guo Shuyong and Cheng Yawen insisting that “as the mechanism of wealth creation
is weakening, the political operation [of the United States and other similar
systems] will inevitably be affected”—that is, Western democracies as a whole
are slipping and their economic problems are hampering the capacity of their
governments to actually govern.
None of the authors here
can resist hitting out at what they see as the decline of American power
overseas. For example, Ye contends that Washington has wasted precious resources
playing the hegemon unsuccessfully in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere, while Ma
writes that Trump’s victory is another example of “radical political ideas and
behavior winning social support”, in part because positive views of the United
States abroad have largely evaporated. Democracy—or at least its Western
version—may not be dead, but according to these Chinese commentators and their
colleagues intoning on the pages of People’s
Daily, it’s clearly dying.
Taken as a whole, these
essays don’t provide much evidence of an abrupt shift forthcoming in Beijing’s
approach to Washington. Indeed, the eulogy being sung here for United States is
the same disharmony we’ve heard chanted about before: that America (where more
than a few Chinese officials send their children to study and live, and
purchase property) is chaotic, drifting, corrupt, and in decline. For many of
China’s official commentaries, these have been the traditional lyrics for some
time—and Donald Trump’s election is simply another sign that the United States is finding the wrong rhythm all by by itself. So if the views expressed in these essays turn out to
be mainstream thinking in the Chinese leadership, the status quo in
Sino-American relations may yet remain so for some time.
[1] This isn’t the first or only moment in these
essays when comments and critiques by the authors about the United States could
be easily mistaken for (or are used to mask) concerns about China itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment