This fall, the Chinese Commu-nist Party will convene its 16th National Congress, where it will conduct its version of a transfer of power. Already, several forecasts of the new personnel configuration have begun to appear, exposing the existence of factional infighting and raising the likelihood that final decisions will be made only at the last minute.
Of interest to anyone observing the process is that now that the din of publicity is at its most deafening, critical voices are being heard in the Chinese media -- usually considered the party's mouthpiece.
On Nov. 24 last year, the Securities Market Weekly, a publication of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (
It is rare that an expose naming names in the party's highest echelons gets published in the Chinese media and the article marked the reappearance of something akin to the Cultural Revolution. Ma, however, was arrested following the article's publication.
In early December, the 23rd edition of the political biweekly China Talents -- which specializes in the bootlicking of various Chinese leaders, especially Li -- ran an exclusive interview with Li's wife, Zhu Lin (朱琳). In the interview, Zhu stated that she didn't like math and therefore wouldn't go speculating on stocks.
After news of Ma's article and arrest spread overseas in early January, the party reprinted Zhu's interview in its main overseas propaganda organ, the Xinhua News Agency. Clearly it wanted to "sterilize" the crime scene.
However, on Jan. 6, the official newspaper of the Communist Youth League Group, The China Youth Daily, published an article criticizing "the greedy wife." This term refers to the wives and children who play behind-the-scenes bribe brokers for corrupt officials.
"The greedy wife" has always been a common phenomenon in party officialdom -- what's fresh here is that an opinion article of this sort should be published during such a sensitive time.
Besides criticizing abuses of power by high-placed spouses, as well as unashamed nepotism, the author added a parting shot: "These insatiably greedy family members pulling the strings are creating an environment of bribe-taking. In the home, the husbands don't enjoy such high status and have to let their wives do as they please."
Li is famous throughout the party for being henpecked, for his not-so-high status at home and for consistently allowing Zhu to do as she wishes. For this reason, several well-known cases of large-scale deception and corruption have been attributed to Zhu. The top party leadership covered them all up, however, because "stability prevails over all."
On Dec. 17 The China Youth Daily published an article by Caoan Jushi (草庵居士) called "Who's managing the US eco-nomy?," which even included an editor's note stressing the importance of the issues discussed in the piece.
Jushi, the son of a high-ranking cadre -- and currently the vice chairman of a US-based investment banking group -- often posts articles on the Web. His articles are reportedly held in high regard by party heavyweights.
The China Youth Daily plan-ned to reprint the article in a three-day installment, but after the second day the piece was terminated by the party's Central Propaganda Department. The reason given was that, while on the surface the article introduced the US economy, it also included criticism of China's economic system.
After this slap in the face, it was brave indeed for the paper to come out with Ma's piece on "greedy wives" in January.
Even before these opinions appeared in print, an extensive article on the religion question, penned by Pan Yue (
In the piece, Pan points out that Marx's statement that "religion is the opiate of the people," was neither laudatory or critical in nature, and goes on to say that that religious beliefs can contribute to social stability.
It was rumored that the article angered Li, who wanted to strip Pan of his post and block Pan's accession to the party's Central Committee during the upcoming congress.
Pan is the son-in-law of Liu Huaqing (劉華清), former member of the standing committee of the Central Committee's Political Bureau and first vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission Standing Committee. Pan has previously held the post of deputy editor-in-chief at The China Youth Daily, and is considered highly influential in the communist party's "Princeling Party" (太子黨, a group composed of children and relatives of the ruling elite).
Following the Tienanmen massacre and the disintegration of the USSR and its Eastern European satellites, the Chinese Communist Party was in a virtual state of shock. After holding discussions in late August 1991, the Princeling Party, led by Chen Yuan (
Published under the name of The China Youth Daily's theory department, the piece expressed the group's new conservatism, expounding not only the mem-bers' desire for stability and fear of chaos, but also its unwillingness to let China retrogress to pre-reform times. Pan was one of the main writers of the article.
The strangely-timed appearances of the above-mentioned articles in the Chinese media is surely no coincidence. Whether this constitutes a fight for press freedom, or whether it is due to internal factional fighting, these expressions all reflect the restlessness and anxiety of the party in the run up to the National Congress.
At least it is clear that the party's most conservative leaders -- represented by Li -- stand on one side, while the Communist Youth League Group and Prince-ling Party's "young guard" stand on the other.
The latter is represented by China's vice president Hu Jintao (
President Jiang Zemin (
As long as Hu agrees to offer Jiang a number of perks, such as allowing him to remain chairman of the military commission, giving Jiang's confidante Zeng Qinghong (
Thus, when Li threatened not long ago that he would knock off anyone who violated the Constitution, it was done both in an effort to protect himself as well as to warn Jiang not to violate the party's Constitution by promulgating the "three representations" (
With all this happening, apart from closely observing events, Taiwan and the US should also make an effort to act in the best interests of the free world, and for the development of Chinese democracy.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Scudder Smith
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS