Control is the mantra with which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) governs its people, and during his presidency, Xi Jinping (習近平) has restored its central role in society. Unprecedented levels of surveillance and a “neighbor watch thy neighbor” system are some of the methods used to maintain order among the 1.4 billion population. However, a spate of random acts of violence is challenging the “party knows best” narrative.
The CCP is paramount in China and is enmeshed within every organ of government. Its legitimacy after 75 years in power depends on continued economic growth. However, the recent downturn has hit millions of young jobseekers hard and has rippled through the workforce. There is no way of knowing whether economic reasons were behind the most dramatic of several recent tragedies that have shocked the nation, but commentary on Chinese social media has linked the violence to worries over social stability.
On Nov. 11, a 62-year-old man rammed his four-wheel drive into a crowd of pedestrians outside a downtown sports center in the southern city of Zhuhai, killing 35 people and injuring dozens more. It was the country’s deadliest known act of civilian violence during Xi’s reign.
The attacker struck after becoming disgruntled over the division of assets in his divorce settlement, reports said. He was subsequently arrested on suspicion of endangering public safety by dangerous means.
A stabbing attack last weekend that left eight people dead was also apparently the result of a personal grievance: a 21-year-old man’s unhappiness with his school over a graduation matter. Both incidents have shone an unwelcome spotlight on the government’s criminal safety record. Known random acts of violence are uncommon in China, but they are being reported more frequently and with greater detail, from state and social media.
Official outlets took more than a day to report the Zhuhai incident, and did not explain reasons for the delay. Very quickly, though, any hint of what happened was swept away, both on and offline. This level of censorship is par for the course in authoritarian regimes, but it is also a reflection of the deep fear that the party has about any mass expression of emotion that could threaten its grip on power.
“They understand that if people gather and come together, their grief can be a powerful mobilizing force,” Freedom House research director for China, Hong Kong and Taiwan Yaqiu Wang said. “They are extraordinarily afraid of any kind of collective action that could be directed at them.”
In the wake of the car killings, Xi has ordered officials to tighten security networks even further to “protect people’s lives and social stability.”
That argument is often used in clampdowns in the province of Xinjiang, where an estimated 1 million Muslim ethnic Uyghurs have been locked up in detention centers. However, the CCP is not increasing its control only over what it considers troublesome hotspots. There are more CCTV surveillance cameras in Chinese cities than anywhere else in the world. Digital authoritarianism has meant that everything from facial data and DNA, to voice imprints and even iris scans, are being collected and stored in giant databases in the name of improving public safety.
Official statistics do show declining crime levels. (Caveat: This data is being used to further cement control.) Even some independent data points to the perception that China’s law and order standards are among the best in the world. There are obvious political points to be scored. Officials often warn their citizens about mass casualty events and gun fueled violence in the US, holding up their own system of governance as superior at keeping people safe. However, this success has come at a great personal cost: individual freedom.
Authoritarian regimes use inordinate levels of control as a way to justify their hold on power. We keep you safe and in return you give us ownership over every aspect of your lives, the unsaid promise says. That deal in China has worked so long as the CCP continues to provide clear evidence that living standards are improving. When that starts to fray, people feel increasingly disaffected with their leaders and would complain.
Some brave citizens do protest.
The China Dissent Monitor, a database assessing the number of demonstrations every year, has documented more than three dozen types of dissent. These range from physical in-person protests, to those expressed through art, non-cooperation, cyber dissent and contentious petitioning or lawsuits. Many are over economic grievances, such as property and job-related issues. Such independent windows into the party’s opaque world challenge the narrative that citizens are satisfied with their government. China’s citizens are not that different from the rest of us. Sweeping problems away is not a long-term solution.
Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC’s lead Asia presenter and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS