Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) 70 years ago, the country, under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), has had its fair share of successes and failures. After a great start that in the 1950s saw the Chinese peasantry break free from the yoke of serfdom and the establishment of a communist egalitarian society, came the disastrous Great Leap Forward in the 1960s and the Cultural Revolution in the 1970s: two decades of indisputable failures by the CCP to deliver on its promise to establish a prosperous society.
In the late 1970s, Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) introduced the “open door” policy that brought economic growth and prosperity to China. This economic growth has been the driving force behind the continuous development of the country’s infrastructure, and education and healthcare systems. Today, the large majority of Chinese enjoy living standards that they could not have dreamed of just a generation ago.
A World Bank report shows that since the introduction of market reforms 40 years ago, about 850 million Chinese have been lifted out of poverty. This near-miraculous achievement is the result of the hard work of the Chinese people and the effective leadership of the CCP. Together, they have turned poverty-stricken dysfunctional China into a prosperous and powerful country.
The socioeconomic improvements can be seen in every domain. While in the late 1970s access to higher education and proper healthcare was the privilege of a few, today most Chinese have access to them. As for working conditions, in the 1980s they were often extenuating and hazardous, and the average Chinese worker would be poorly remunerated.
Today, most Chinese enjoy good working conditions and income. While in the 1980s freedom of movement was practically nonexistent because of bureaucratic barriers and substandard infrastructure, today Chinese enjoy freedom of movement, and state of the art road, rail and air infrastructures.
Internationally, China has also made significant progress. It went from being a minor player in the 1970s to a dominant one today. China has managed to develop increasingly strong economic relations with almost every other country in the world, making it the largest contributor to economic growth in the developing world.
China has the capacity and the willingness to invest in infrastructure in almost every country, including in those countries where no one else is willing to do so. Countries such as Pakistan and Angola would be hopeless without China’s investment.
Moreover, China’s relations with most countries are mutually beneficial and respectful. The CCP claims that it uses its newly acquired global influence to promote peaceful development and, as put by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), to build an “international community with a shared destiny for mankind.”
There is a long list of domestic and international achievements that China and the CCP could have proudly showcased at its 70th anniversary celebration. Why then did they choose to focus only on its massive military might? The domestic message was clear: The CCP is powerful, Chinese people are in good hands, and can be proud of their leadership and country.
As for its international message, the CCP wanted to send a stern warning to dissenters in Hong Kong and its neighbor Taiwan, as well as to international actors challenging China in general.
This warning was explicit in Xinhua news agency’s central headline for the event: “Xi says no force can ever undermine China’s status.”
As for the CCP’s willingness — or, rather, its eagerness — to go to war over any significant disagreements, the Chinese defense minister’s words were clear: “Fight? We are ready. China will not be bullied.”
Hong Kongers should realize that they cannot rely on the “one country, two systems” policy. Since before the founding of the PRC, the CCP has followed a well-known Machiavellian strategy — “The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.”
To gain support from ethnic minorities during the Chinese Civil War, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) assured them that they would be allowed to choose between joining the new China or establishing independent states. Just after the success of the communist revolution, he retracted his promise and forced them to join his China.
Look also at China’s handling of territorial disputes in the South China Sea, which initially was cloaked under a disguise of friendly cooperation. Now that China has built and consolidated its military bases in the region, there is almost no space for negotiation, because China argues that its territorial rights in the region are indisputable and that it is willing to defend them using its far superior military might.
By implementing the “one country, two systems” model, the CCP promised Hong Kong high levels of political, economic and social autonomy. This model is about to be replaced by the “one country, one system” model, ie, China and the CCP.
The CCP is just waiting for the right timing — which could come sooner rather than later — to enforce a change that would result in its full supervision of the political, economic, cultural and social lives of Hong Kongers.
The CCP’s desire to control everything and everyone is rooted in its belief that to ensure its own survival it must preserve China’s prosperity, which, in turn, depends on maintaining domestic sociopolitical stability.
To achieve this, the CCP believes it must homogenize the multicultural and multiethnic Chinese family. Therefore, it cannot allow any kind of significant dissent or diversity within China.
Currently, the most obvious of these social homogenization processes is the forceful assimilation of Uighurs in Xinjiang. They are seeing how their cultural and religious rights enshrined in China’s constitution are being drastically and swiftly eroded.
Unfortunately for dissenting Hong Kongers, they cannot realistically expect any fate other than being forcefully assimilated into the Han Chinese communist family. If they resist, the CCP has warned them that it is willing to use brute force.
China’s 70th anniversary celebrations could have been an opportunity for the CCP to highlight the fact that 850 million people have been lifted out of poverty or that China enjoys state-of-the-art infrastructure, and healthcare and education systems.
For its international audience, it could have showcased its successful promotion of peaceful development to build an “international community with a shared destiny for mankind.”
Instead, the CCP chose to display its military might with a massive and meticulously planned military parade to accompany Xi’s assertive and bellicose discourse. It seems that the time for preaching peaceful and harmonious development and relations is over. The time is ripe for the CCP to forcefully homogenize China and impose its will internationally. Hong Kong and Taiwan cannot expect to be spared.
Patrik Meyer is a visiting professor at Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta in Indonesia.
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