The 16th session of the fourth plenum of the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has started. The issue of whether or not Jiang Zemin (
Recently, the media in Hong Kong and Taiwan, as well as the New York Times, picked up on a July 12 article that appeared in the People's Daily. The article said reform in China had reached a critical stage in its development and a fundamental problem was emerging. Signs of differences between party figures and President Hu Jintao (
On Aug. 23, during the party's 100th anniversary celebrations for former leader Deng Xiaoping (
There was also the case of the different versions of a photograph of Hu shaking hands with Deng, one showing Jiang Zemin standing between them, and the other with Jiang missing. The early conclusion of the military exercises on Dongshan Island also led to clashes between Jiang and Hu.
Policy on Taiwan is often influenced by power struggles and there is therefore a need to accurately analyze the internal affairs of China to avoid errors of judgement.
With single-party communist regimes such as China and the former Soviet Union, the handing over and succession of power is conducted in a completely different way to Western democracies, with those looking in from the outside often at a loss as to what is going on. For this reason the outside world generally has to rely on press reports supplied by the Communist Party.
In the past, we have had to rely on the Chinese media to act as the mouthpiece of the party, and from clues such as the importance accorded individuals in major ceremonies, meetings and events, the amount of exposure they receive, any words that make it into print and names and photos that are published. On occasions different factions will test the winds by using influential foreign newspapers, or ones that they have good relations with, to gauge what is happening in power struggles within the upper echelons.
The main items on this session's agenda are the economy and the party's hold on power. However, with the 78-year-old Jiang retaining power over the military, the radically different leadership styles of Hu and Jiang, and the belief that the CCP currently has two centers, there are naturally many questions regarding internal power struggles whenever there is a major conference or meeting.
In 1989, during the 13th session of the fourth plenum, Jiang moved up from Shanghai to take the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee. Deng Xiaoping resigned from the Politburo in 1987, left his position of chairman of the military commission in November 1989, and the central military commission in the following year. Therefore Jiang, if he is to follow the precedent set by Deng, should step down from his position as chairman of the military commission either in this session of the fourth plenum, or at the beginning of next year.
It is true that the high levels of the CCP put a premium on political stability, but one could ask what Jiang's position as chairman of the military commission actually has to do with political stability. There are many different takes on this. Some believe that Jiang will hold the post in the short term to relieve the pressure of military affairs from Hu's shoulders, thereby facilitating political stability. Another way of looking at this, however, is to say that his retention of the position indicates a reluctance to completely hand over the reins of power for the moment. Reading between the lines, some people believe that Jiang is still unsure of Hu and may possibly choose another as his successor, just as Deng did when he held back from relinquishing the position of head of the military to Hu Yaobang (
In my view, Jiang is no Deng and will not be able to maintain control of power from the sidelines in the capacity of retired party elder. What's more, both he and those close to him will be concerned that, without the protection of a high position, their children and associates may fall foul of Hu's anti-corruption drive as soon as Jiang hands power over. Also, Hu Jintao is no Hu Yaobang, and has held his own for a decade in the politburo without slipping up. He is unlikely to be overly anxious about losing to Jiang after only having been in his position for less than two years. Time, after all, is on the side of Hu and Wen.
Therefore, if there really is a power struggle going on between Hu and Jiang, it is concerned with those affiliated with them vying for power rather than a fundamental difference between the two men.
The most important thing for the Taiwan side to take note of is the gradual democratization in China, concomitant with increasing numbers of people going online -- according to statistics, roughly 90 million people in China have access to the Internet -- and the increase in sensational media reports, especially by papers such as the Global Times.
In the event that there are serious internal problems in China in the future, the authorities may well take a harder line with Taiwan to deflect the attention of the media, both within China and abroad. This has been true since 1950: With every military foray abroad and every internal problem or change in power, the high echelons in China have always done the same.
Therefore, if we want to analyze what is happening on the other side of the Strait, and the power struggles that are occurring there, we have to avoid letting the Taiwan question become a way for China to let off steam over its internal struggles. It is far more important to handle cross-strait relations skillfully than to be affected by what is happening on the other side.
Chang Wu-ueh is director of the Institute of China Studies at Tamkang University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS