Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平), who is expected to take over as the top leader of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) this autumn, recently concluded a visit to the US, during which he held talks with US President Barack Obama. Xi’s visit has brought him to the world’s attention, just as was the case when then-Chinese vice president Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) was welcomed to Washington by then-US president George W. Bush in 2002.
Today, just like 10 years ago, the US and China have both used the diplomatic occasion to play a game of give-and-take according to their respective interests. The US leaders wanted to get on good terms with their new counterpart, while Xi wanted to use his performance to prove his ability in handling international affairs. The visit is also a sign that the rules of the game for US-China relations over the next decade are gradually taking shape.
Who is this Xi? That is the question being asked not only in the US, as it welcomed China’s incoming leader in the midst of a recession, but also by people around the world and from all walks of life. Although plenty of research is being done about Xi’s personality and way of thinking, it is still hard to find much in the way of true and accurate analysis.
Just as Xi was visiting the US, the Washington Post and ABC television network published a joint survey on the US public’s opinions about China. The survey found that 52 percent of respondents did not like China, while 37 percent said they liked it. The proportion of respondents who said they did not like China rose by 3 percent compared with 49 percent at the time of Hu’s visit to the US last year, while those who said they liked China dropped by 5 percent from last year’s 42 percent. This is an indication of the growing unease that Americans feel about China’s burgeoning economic and military power.
China is a fierce competitor for other countries, but they also have to cooperate with it. That being the case, knowing whether China is going to change when Xi takes over is not just very important for the US, but even more imperative for Taiwan as it does its best to maintain its existence within the international framework.
Western commentators’ observations about Xi focus largely on the following aspects.
First, that he is the son of Xi Zhongxun (習仲勛), a key figure among the communist leaders who established the People’s Republic of China. In other words, the younger Xi is one of the so-called “princelings.” His father fell victim to political criticism and struggle on more than one occasion, but was later rehabilitated. These experiences have led to the elder Xi being categorized as a relatively enlightened reformer, and people wonder whether he has had any great influence on his son’s political beliefs.
Second, observers note that US Vice President Joe Biden met Xi during his visit to China’s Sichuan Province in August last year. The message some people in US political circles got from that meeting is that Xi seems to be a bit different from Hu, with a more cosmopolitan and amiable style. Observers ask whether this will open up new possibilities for interactions in US-China relations. Similar questions are being asked in Taiwan. Since Xi once served in a leading post in China’s Fujian Province, which lies just across the Taiwan Strait, he has had dealings with many Taiwanese businesspeople and cultural figures. That being the case, some people think that Xi must have a better understanding of Taiwan than his predecessors, and hope that Taiwan will come under less pressure from China as a result.
Those who have high hopes of Xi may like to refer to the pointed remarks he made during a visit to Mexico in 2009, when he said: “There are a few foreigners, with full bellies, who have nothing better to do than try to point fingers at our country ... China does not export revolution, hunger, poverty, nor does China cause you any headaches. Just what else do you want?”
Before his recent visit to the US, Xi used a written interview with the Post to hit back at the US for strengthening its military deployment and military alliances in the Asia-Pacific region.
The examples show there is not much reason to invest a great deal of hope in Xi, and that it is wishful thinking to do so. Those who think that way also make the mistake of thinking that Xi is just someone that the collective leadership of China’s powerful and wealthy class has picked to represent it. Based on the need to consolidate the CCP’s eternal hold on power, safeguard its collective interests and ensure that it is not challenged, Xi is likely to stick to the idea that it is better to err to the left than to the right — all the more so at a time when contradictions are springing up and sharpening all over China.
That is where China will not change. Where it will change is that the 58-year-old Xi is better than his predecessors at presenting and selling his country’s policies to the outside world. This can be seen from his insistence during his US trip of paying a return visit to the small town of Muscatine, Iowa, where he first visited during a study tour in 1985, and the way he wrapped up his trip by watching a Los Angeles Lakers basketball game.
What is true with regard to the US is all the more so when it comes to Taiwan. Xi is expected to take over as General Secretary of the CCP in autumn and to become president of China next year. Hu and former leaders have all been heads of the “nine-person team” — the Standing Committee of the CCP’s politiburo — so it can be expected that the trend to get softer on soft-line issues and tougher on hard-line positions that we have seen under Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) will become even more pronounced in Xi’s hands.
It should also be borne in mind that when China’s leaders need to tackle the complicated challenges they face on the home front, playing up the Taiwan issue is the easiest way for them to distract people’s attention from the real problems.
Xi visited the US with a smile on his face and projected a friendly image, but some people who have a deep understanding of China’s current stage of development, the way the CCP operates and Xi’s personal background define him as a man who wears many masks, and this observation may be pretty close to the truth.
As Xi gets ready to step up to the plate, we in Taiwan should ask ourselves how much we know about him, and think about how we will respond to him. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his government, overjoyed as they are at having been re-elected in last month’s presidential and legislative elections, had better get over it now and start thinking about how they are going to deal with this new adversary who is so skilled at presenting different faces depending on the occasion.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US