The year 2002 is a momentous political year for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is the year of the 16th National Congress, at which grand occasion decisions about the transfer of power to a new generation of leaders must be made. Taiwanese and international media are all paying close attention to this issue. As the national congress approaches, the CCP leaders have gone to Beidaihe where political in-fighting is underway on a small scale as a prelude to the real CCP power struggle at the 16th National Congress.
The reason why the international community attaches great importance to the generational changes in the CCP is that China is an authoritarian society, characterized by the rule of man and not by the rule of law. Since transfers of power in the CCP are not conducted in accordance with any formal, institutionalized system, the outcome of the power struggle will determine who gets promoted and who has to step down. There is a high level of general interest in the power transfer because of the general opinion that it could affect CCP policy. The media have already speculated extensively on a possible reorganization of the CCP. Many media have reported that President Jiang Zemin (江澤民) is in love with his power and does not want to step down. Many specialists on the other hand say that Jiang will go into full or semi-retirement, while some media place the focus on the awkward position of Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) and other would-be fourth generation leaders.
The common feature of these media reports and expert analyses is the high level of uncertainty that surrounds them, not least because the CCP's own history has highlighted the fact that the outcome of a power struggle is by nature highly uncertain. In the past, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) appointed first Liu Shaoqi (劉少奇) and then Lin Biao (林彪) as his successor, both of whom ultimately met tragic fates. Finally, he came up with the little known Hua Guofeng (華國鋒), confounding all the experts. In the same way, Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) appointed first Hu Yaobang (胡耀邦) and then Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) as his successor. But the two of them were also sidelined, and in the end the appointment of Jiang was just as unforeseen as that of Hua had been. Thanks to these historical lessons, some experts on the CCP simply duck questions about the power transfer since they just don't have answers.
It is interesting to see that in the face of this media frenzy, however, the Chinese media maintain their silence, as if the issue is not worthy of any attention, even though everyone knows that this is not the case. The reason why the Chinese media hold their tongue is that they are controlled by the CCP. On this important issue, they do not have the freedom to choose to report or not to report. The media, which in the West are respected as the fourth estate, lack freedom in China. This reflects the true nature of the CCP dictatorship and its authoritarianism.
The 1.3 billion Chinese people who also should be given attention in this media feast are instead ignored. They are outsiders, mere observers, in this competition for power. Their likes and dislikes are unrelated to the outcome of the power struggle. While an absolute majority of the world's nations now elect their presidents, prime ministers or premiers, the people of China can at best elect their village leaders. The right to vote or stand for election is still controlled by the CCP. The people have no say in the matter, much less any power to make decisions, and have no choice but to accept changes to the CCP's central leadership. Things that the vast population of China cares about, such as steadily rising unemployment, constant increases in the numbers of laid-off workers, the huge migrant population, the difficulties of farmers in making ends meet, the rampant corruption among government officials and the increasing income gap are all unrelated to this ongoing power game in the CCP.
It seems as if Taiwanese and international media routinely ignore the existence of the vast Chinese population in their reports on the CCP power transfer. The media only care for news directly related to the power struggle inside the top CCP leadership, neglecting China's hidden political, economic and social issues, when in fact these are the issues that will decide the future of China. Many local media are in the habit of only reporting positive news from China, leaving out any negative reports. This can only mislead the people of Taiwan and land Taiwanese businessmen in trouble, while exerting no positive influence on China and its development. When we read news about the Chinese power struggle and the generational change, we would hope for more in-depth reporting giving a more complete picture of the true situation in China.
Lin Wen-cheng is director of the Institute of Mainland China Studies at National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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