The Arrogance of China’s Leadership
That’s not my headline.
It belongs to an short article by Spiegel Online about Beijing’s less than humble, increasingly confrontational, and vocally intolerant manner in the wake of growing global power:
While some in the US think they can manage China’s ascent to a global power, China is dreaming of “arranging” America’s decline. And in this context the West should bid farewell to its cherished notion that China’s economic progress will lead to political liberalization and turn it into a responsible partner on the world stage. The reverse is likely to be the case.
Beijing is currently playing the provocative troublemaker, both at the climate conference in Copenhagen in December and in the UN Security Council, where it is likely to stand alone in resisting a new round of tough sanctions against Iran.
China thinks it can afford to behave in this way. In Africa and Asia, Beijing’s authoritarianism is regarded as a successful model worth copying.
At home, the Communist Party is intensifying its brutal methods. It allowed an apparently mentally unstable British drug smuggler to be executed, and Liu Xiaobo, a respected civil rights activist who only exercised his right to free speech, was sentenced to an outrageous 11 years in jail.
The Germans can spot the warning signs. They’ve been there before.
February 25th, 2010 at 9:30 am
Here we go again, stuart. Your rumbling complaint about the same stuff over, over and over again is so boring. Can’t you come up with something new?
That Die Spiegel article is pure garbage. What’s wrong with China being confident? Troublemaker? Sure, when you don’t play by my rules, heed my calls and satisfy my demands and my interests you are absolutely a troublemaker.
The Germans can spot warning signs? Haha, that has to be the most hilarious thing that I have ever heard. The Germans?????
February 25th, 2010 at 10:27 am
@ Juche
It may seem a bit ‘same old, same old’, but I assure you that the Spiegel’s complaints and concerns are going to become louder and more widespread if Beijing continues to stomp and strut around the globe with a superior sense of entitlement.
There’s nothing wrong with China being confident, of course, but arrogance is a different animal altogether. And this isn’t the embittered ranting of a publication that is given to such diatribes; and it’s a disturbingly common and recurring theme as the CCP become more intoxicated by their global clout.
I’ve also got no problem with a new player who wants to shake up the old ‘rules’, but only if the new rules are based on moral restraint and responsibility. Thus far, Beijing has not delivered in this regard – and worse, she appears entirely disinclined to do so.
February 26th, 2010 at 8:30 am
What do you mean Beijing is arrogant? By sticking to its own agendas, timetable and interests? Come on, you and I both know why the west is pissed. Because China has the balls to say no to them. Of course the west wants a yesman out of everyone. I am saying on issues that China agrees with the west go ahead and be the yesman, on issues China doesn’t she should have no problem saying “no”.
Once again stuart, nobody is moral. China is as bad as the next country. Remember you were not able to name one country that is moral, one country is not driven by self-interests.
February 26th, 2010 at 10:34 am
“Come on, you and I both know why the west is pissed. Because China has the balls to say no to them. Of course the west wants a yesman out of everyone.”
Are you sure you’re not getting your ‘west’ and China mixed up there? Sounds like it to me.
“Remember you were not able to name one country that is moral…”
Chose not to, old sport – because we were talking about a Chinese leadership that is anything but moral, at home or abroad.
March 1st, 2010 at 2:21 pm
I must say that the Spiegel article by Erich Follath was quite biased and contained some unverified statements, so much so that I’m beginning to think that it borders on simply having a rather irresponsible sense of humour. I don’t even know where to begin.
Take Copenhagen for example. The author has conveniently forgotten that China was vehemently supported by India, Brazil and South Africa. Maybe those countries too posses “Self-Confidence Bordering on Arrogance” and are “troublemakers”!! As if the greenhouse gases that the industrialized nations have been emitting since 1900 haven’t contributed to global warming at all!
The article says that ‘Beijing’s leaders are behaving like the masters of the world, as aloof as if they could walk on water’ !!!!
I guess that’s why they frequently take pains to emphasize that they are still a developing country! Not to mention the fact that Wen Jiabao publicly rejected becoming part of a so-called ‘G2′ with the US!
AND THE WINNER IS –
the statement of the article which says that the communist party is ‘omnipotent’ !!!
I guess that’s why it couldn’t prevent riots!! Or stop international leaders from meeting the Dalai Lama!! Or stop arms sales to Taiwan!!
Notify the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary everyone, the definition of ‘omnipotence’ has just been changed by Spiegel!!
There is no evidence that China is ‘arranging’ America’s decline. As if China has the power to do that (No wait, but China is ‘omnipotent’!!)
A more appropriate statement would be that it is arranging its position so as to obtain maximum advantage and leverage from America’s decline.
Chinese analysts frequently concede that the US will not be replaced as the sole superpower anytime soon.
The US called upon China to become a “responsible stakeholder” in world affairs without asking whether or not China was ready for it.
I think that the author thinks that if a country refuses to concede to the west’s demands, it is ‘arrogant’!
The article says: “In Africa and Asia, Beijing’s authoritarianism is regarded as a successful model worth copying.”
Well, the author forgot Russia:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/world/europe/18russia.html
Further proof, if any were needed, that ‘political liberalization’ need not necessarily ensure growth. Just look at India.
In the US, what Friedman calls a ‘one-party democracy’ is also not helping matters either.
Not to mention that China’s experiment of opening up its economy in the late 70s and early 80s was one of the inspirations for many other countries following suit.
I can understand that some elements in the western media are concerned that the US will be replaced as the sole superpower someday. But that’s no reason to throw your professionalism out of the window.
– Maitreya Bhakal
India’s China Blog – http://indiaschinablog.blogspot.com/
March 1st, 2010 at 3:13 pm
“Wen Jiabao publicly rejected becoming part of a so-called ‘G2? with the US!”
Beijing is only interested in a ‘G1′ world – zero sum mentality, Maitreya.
“The US called upon China to become a “responsible stakeholder” in world affairs without asking whether or not China was ready for it.”
And written, I assume, without a hint of irony.
The only thing required to be a responsible stakeholder once global influence has been established is the will to behave in a morally accountable way. China has yet to demonstrate any such inclination, which is the underlying tenet of the Spiegel piece.
March 2nd, 2010 at 3:56 pm
“Beijing is only interested in a ‘G1′ world – zero sum mentality”
None of the statements or actions of China serve to affirm that accusation.
“And written, I assume, without a hint of irony”
Obama publicly called upon China to be a ‘responsible stakeholder’ in global affairs. The only irony in that statement is that the US considers itself a responsible stakeholder and is asking China to join in when the US finds it convenient!!
To me US intentions are as clear as daylight – If an international problem is solved, take credit (and use it as an excuse to become even more complacent); and if it is not, blame China.
When the US alone cannot fulfill its ‘responsibilities’ as a superpower, it conveniently thrusts ‘stakeholder’ status on China to divert attention from its own faults. The US simply uses China as a smokescreen. An excuse to NOT commit to anything itself, as in Copenhagen.
On the one hand, the US calls upon China to take a leadership role (which it cannot itself handle on its own); and on the other hand, Hillary Clinton makes statements like, “People want to see the United States fully engaged in Asia, so that as China rises, there’s the
presence of the United States as a force for peace and stability, as a guarantor of security”
I guess going around the world establishing miltary bases is the way to do that!!
BTW, without meaning to, you actually used the right word – “tenet” – “A religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof“.
Exactly as I said earlier – many of the accusations of the article ARE without proof.
March 2nd, 2010 at 9:22 pm
“BTW, without meaning to, you actually used the right word”
I used the right word; you used the wrong definition. A more comprehensive dictionary is strongly advised.
“None of the statements or actions of China serve to affirm that accusation.”
Look closer.
March 2nd, 2010 at 10:22 pm
Well but that’s my point. You used the right word, but in a different meaning/context. If the context is changed or if a different meaning of the same word is considered, then the word becomes completely relevant from my point of view too. That’s why I added the “without meaning to..”, because you didn’t mean to use this other definition.
Again, none of the statements or actions of China’s leaders indicate that it is interested in a G-1 world.
If you have any explicit evidence to the contrary, I am all ears.
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:21 am
“Are you sure you’re not getting your ‘west’ and China mixed up there? Sounds like it to me.”
China is not whining and bitching how the west is “strident”, “confident” or harboring “triumphalist sentiment”, is she? You people are used to being in the dominant position for too long and you thought this is the way it is going to be for the next 2 million years. Guess what, some rude awakening for you people: You are not the thousand-year-Reich. Nobody is. China rose. China fell. The west rose. The west will fall too.
March 3rd, 2010 at 7:56 am
China is not whining and bitching how the west is “strident”, “confident” or harboring “triumphalist sentiment”, is she?
They have no case.
Guess what, some rude awakening for you people:
‘You people’ ?
The west will fall too.
Not of its own volition – only with the CCP’s rather too obvious strategising and scheming in that general direction. Responsible stakeholder, anyone?
Btw, the last time China fell it was to the Japanese. And who was there lending the hand without which she would have struggled to get back on her feet? That’s right, your good old pal from across the Pacific.
I’m just saying.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:02 am
“The important thing is the Chinese themselves must not be confused and misled to think that the times are really different now. “Hide your capacities and bide your time” from the late leader Deng Xiaoping rings truer than ever.”
Juchechosunmanse, Febr. 8
“The west rose. The west will fall too.”
Juchechosunmanse, March 3
Some advice is easily given, but not so easily put into practise.
March 4th, 2010 at 8:42 am
“they have no case”?
Sure, the west is so used to being arrogant and bullying everyone and the rest of the world has gotten used to it and that’s probably why you don’t see loud whining and complaints about the west. I mean what do you expect China to behave? Be your yesman forever?
“You people?”
Yes, the west.
“Btw, the last time China fell it was to the Japanese. And who was there lending the hand without which she would have struggled to get back on her feet? That’s right, your good old pal from across the Pacific.”
Scheisse, where were they before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor?
March 4th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Justrecently,
Yes China should follow what Deng Xiaoping prescribed when it is lagging far behind the west; in the meantime the west needs to tone down its bitching too which is getting really old. Do you see contradictions? I don’t.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
“Sure, the west is so used to being arrogant and bullying blah, blah, blah…”
Correction: The CCP have institutionalised a rigid, rote-implemented belief in such nonsense, which is the root source of a million daily logical fallacies. Unfortunately, at some point you came under that spell, Juche.
Btw, this mantra about ‘hiding capabilities’ (most recently espoused by some PLA nutcase) is nothing more than a reversion to the Chinese principle of all warfare being based on deception. Again, this is neither a transparent or responsible course that Beijing is plotting, and has all the hallmarks of a regime intent on global domination.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
If the context is changed or if a different meaning of the same word is considered, then the word becomes completely relevant from my point of view too.
But utterly irrelevant to the author’s context.
Go figure.
March 4th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
Juchechosunmmanse:
the West’s “bitching” (lots of it is bitching indeed) isn’t really old – it started only some two years ago. As I said in a different discussion of ours before, I’d appreciate a more to-the-point discussion in my neighborhood, as we need to base our relations with China – a totalitarian country – on a more comprehensive approach of ourselves. Just to make sure that Beijing won’t take charge of our politicians’ appointment diaries, for example.
And yes, I do see a contradiction between your advice to your leaders, and to what you wrote on your blog. But I don’t mind at all if you (or Ma Zhaoxu) speak out loudly. Clarity is a virtue, and helps to deepen understanding between our peoples.
March 5th, 2010 at 9:09 am
stuart,
If you believe that the west is this benign and benevolent entity that everyone with a free-mind loves and that China is this evil wolf who is disguised as a harmless sheep (the DL? haha), you might as well believe the British people have good teeth. Whatever. You are hopeless. I am not wasting my time on you.
Justrecently,
Granted that I know next to nothing about the German media other than that POS called “Deutsche Welle”, I have been following the English-language discussion/debate (I am talking about “scholarly” periodicals like the FP, National Interests etc.) on US/western China policy for a while and I can tell you the west has always been very wary of China and they often bitched about how China was threatening western interests in various respects. Sure, the bitching might have become more stand-out, less subtle and more over the top the past couple of years with the west believing that somehow China thinks it is already a superpower. The west is a bunch of hypocrites, they are bitching about China SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT TO LOSE THEIR GRIP on the world order, aka “unchallenged western primacy”. They want to keep the way it has been for the past several centuries with the west being in the dominant position on pretty much everything. As much I understand where you guys are coming from, sorry, unfortunately the there is much more to this world than just the west. You will keep bitching for the next decades to come. People just have to ignore you.
Again I see no contradictions between what I am saying on my blog and what I have been saying here. Make no mistake, China is NOT a superpower. China is lagging far behind the developed world. China has come a long way but she still has a long long long way to go. I don’t think it will do China any good if the Chinese mistakenly believe that they have been joined the big league. They have not. I am saying China should keep her low profile and focus on tackling her problems. I am saying China should avoid talking too much and adopt the Nike philosophy, “just do it”. I am saying China must do her homework. However, that is not to say China should just be the west’s yesman. China should be confident but not over-confident, China should pursue her interests relentlessly (just like the west does) and never hesitate to say yes whenever they agree with the west and say “no” whenever they don’t. That’s what I am saying. Bu Bei Bu Kang, you know what I am saying, justrecently?
March 5th, 2010 at 9:32 am
Juche,
When one of your replies begins (or includes) “If you believe…” and you finish off the sentence with a list of deliberate misrepresentations of my position you are railing against a straw man.
Just to let you know.
March 5th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Oh, and a couple more things:
China is NOT a superpower.
She’s only waiting for the jackets to be made.
China is lagging far behind the developed world.
Of course it isn’t.
March 6th, 2010 at 12:27 am
????, right? I think I know what it means, and I surely have no objections against such a stance. It can make things much less complicated, and much more pleasant.
People just have to ignore you.
Ignore me, if you can, and ignore my country, if you can. But I think you are contradicting yourself once again, as you spend quite a lot of time with arguing online.
Personally, I believe that it is wrong to have long discussions with each other without trying to stay polite and matter of fact. Politeness doesn’t need to spell love – it’s only a matter of civility, and it helps to inform oneself. Anyway – just my opinion.
The “POS” (aka Deutsche Welle) seems to draw quite a number of listeners (and web readers, when the connection is open) in China. If ppl listen or read to get excited, or to get information, is not for me to judge.
Generally, I believe a foreign radio station should neither be a “platform for human rights”, nor a mere sales instrument that looks sufficiently nice to Juchechosunmanse. It should be informative (which may still leave space for commentary and opinion).
I can probably sum my views about my country’s international broadcaster mostly up with this link.
March 6th, 2010 at 12:29 am
???? = http://baike.baidu.com/view/59162.html?fromTaglist
March 6th, 2010 at 5:48 am
Justrecently,
I wasn’t trying to be impolite to you (as an individual) at all, by “you” I mean the west. Certainly I am not ignoring you the German teacher that I am talking to right now, right? If I have insulted you unintentionally, I apologize. Ignoring the west, how is that not polite enough? I think if we constantly worry about not to offend people when we engage in a discussion/debate, we are not going to go anywhere. How am I contradicting myself? Apparently know what Bu Bei Bu Kang means, so why can’t I argue ignoring the constant bitching from the west (meaning not letting it get to you and influence you) while arguing that China should keep a low profile, be a doer not a talker?
I agree with you on what role these radio stations and media outlets from the so-called “free world” should play. Provide information and facts (what happened), let the readers digest and form their own opinions themselves. Too bad Deutsche Welle, being a government-affiliated station spends more time steering and influencing people’s opinions (to the point that it almost feels like indoctrination) than provide information and facts, more so than the VOA. That’s why I call it a POS. It is what it is.
March 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Juchechosunmanse,
I see no need for an apology – I don’t feel insulted at all. The only problem I see with tagging angry adjectives to every innocent noun is that it is an unnecessary distraction from a meaningful discussion.
But you see, the “bitching of the west” does make a difference. It raises awareness on this side of the Ural Mountains, and it leads to a lot of angry replies from Beijing, and from Juchechosunmanse. And for the latter, I wrote that some advice is easily given, but not so easily put into practise (#12). Ic an inconsistency between your advice and your action there.
I have my objections in detail when it comes to the work of stations like Deutsche Welle, but I shouldn’t expect them to be doers rather than talkers. It’s their job to talk. Btw, when Ma Zhaoxu is making another statement, it’s media work – among other things -, too.
The Deutsche Welle, whatever it is, is what it is. But if it is a POS, what is China Radio International, or China National Radio?
March 7th, 2010 at 9:37 am
Justrecently,
There is no inconsistency between my advice to China (or the Chinese government) and my action here. I am saying China as a nation should continue to keep a low profile, be prudent, be a doer and not a talker (but again, that is not to say she should not do anything when confronted with policies and actions from the west), but I as an individual should never hold back when I see BS, you know what I am saying? I am not saying that I should just keep silent when I see BS like that piece from Spiegel. Angry? Is calling something POS or BS indicative of anger? What else do you want me to call that piece from Spiegel? German progaganda? Helpless hypocrisy and self-entitlement? To me “BS” describes it far better than these. Sorry for my choice of words, it is what it is.
Yes, to me DW is POS. As to CRI or CNR, I don’t know much about them. My hunch is they are like People’s Daily, right? POS too. But at least they don’t pretend to be something better whereas Deutsche Welle is shamelessly hiding under the pretense of German/westen appeal of freedom and democracy while sprouting propaganda. You see? Everyone knows the likes of PD, CD, CRI, CNR are mouthpiece of an authoritarian (I still don’t get the difference between authoritarian and totalitarian) government, the so-called “organ ofpropaganda”. What people don’t know is that the likes of DW are not that different, albeit a different type of propaganda (certainly more subtle and more “convincing”).
March 7th, 2010 at 11:31 am
“Everyone knows the likes of PD, CD, CRI, CNR are mouthpiece of an authoritarian government…”
The crucial difference being that such content is, generally speaking, critiqued by readers/listeners in the west but accepted without question in China. That’s what happens when there is no alternative world viewpoint and stifled discourse.
The result? Rabid nationalism and knee-jerk objections to anything that deviates from the CCP’s narrative. In turn, a consequence of this blind domestic support is the kind of arrogance that Spiegel quite correctly identify in their article.
March 7th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Juche: I can understand that you don’t get the difference between authoritarianism and totalitarianism. But if my explanations (point 5) of before aren’t informative for you, and if you still want to know the difference, I’d recommend Wikipedia next. Their articles also include footnotes with further sources.
When you refer to everything you dislike as a POS, that will make it difficult for me to understand what your beef with us is. Do you fear that Der Spiegel or Deutsche Welle will whip up a human wave from the West that are going to invade China? Or do you think of Chinese listeners to the Welle as gullible people, who will become dangerous Trojan horses? And if so: Trojan horses for what?
One more thing to point out: of course the heads of the Deutsche Welle aren’t necessarily better people, morally speaking, than those heading China Daily. But the leading managers’ powers are checked by a parliament, a public, and the staff themselves who aren’t easily cowed. If that’s a more “subtle” approach, then I’m all for subtleness.
March 8th, 2010 at 7:25 am
“The crucial difference being that such content is, generally speaking, critiqued by readers/listeners in the west but accepted without question in China.”
That just shows how damn clueless you are when it comes to China. China is a superpower? China doesn’t lag far behind the developed world? Propaganda is accepted without question? Where the hell were you when you were in China? What the hell did you do when you were in China? I’d say most people sneer at the People’s Daily and that kind of propaganda stuff. Does anyone take the PD seriously these days? Probably not even President Hu.
I know someone who went to the States when he was 8, barely finished the second grade before he left China. Today he is in his early 30′s. He is more patriotic/nationalistic than many Chinese who have spent their entire life in mainland China. Don’t blame everything on CCP propaganda. The notion you implied that a free-minded person (without being influenced by CCP propaganda) will only realize how benevolent the west is is utterly disgusting and garbage.
March 8th, 2010 at 7:43 am
Justrecently,
I don’t detest DW for those reasons you mentioned as I don’t think the west (particularly the Europeans) is in any position to invade China (your prime years are long gone), nor do I think the Chinese who listen in or read their stuff will become pro-German, pro-western freaks (I think most people are capable of forming their own opinions, rejecting both CCP and western propaganda). I detest it mostly because it is partisan while pretending to be not. I reject it for its hypocrisy, got it? Once again, the difference between the PD and DW is that the PD never shies away from declaring that it is toeing the CCP party line and that it sprouts CCP propaganda while the likes of DW are hiding under the banner of so-called “freedom” and “democracy” (fair and balanced?) sprouting western propaganda.
By saying the western propaganda is much more subtle I am not saying it is something you should be proud of. It is subtle and it is effective because more people fall for this kind of subtle western propaganda without realizing it. On the other hand, other than a few die-hard CCP zombies most people can tell CCP propaganda when they see it. How many westerners ridicule people like the Chinese about how they have been “indoctrinated”, “brainwashed” etc. on a daily basis? Sure, the Chinee have been brainwashed. And these self-righteous westerners thought they had not been brainwashed? I find the average westerners more gullible than the average Chinese!
March 8th, 2010 at 7:49 am
I forgot to say justrecently, I have no beef with you, the German teacher. I don’t even know you, how can I have any beef with you? I do have a lot of beef with many, many self-righteous folks out there who think they know better, who think that they have the answer to everything, who belittle those that think differently. Hey, that applies to the CCP too!
I love my apple and you love your orange. Great. Just don’t tell me I should ditch my apple and go for your orange. Not saying that I don’t like oranges, when I want to go get a bag of oranges I will. You don’t have to tell me.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:18 am
“I’d say most people sneer at the People’s Daily and that kind of propaganda stuff.”
Not most; not by any stretch of the imagination. And even those with a healthy dose of scepticism are still influenced by what they read, despite themselves. That’s because there’s no alternative to the pro-party, anti-western narrative – and eventually some of that rubs off.
March 8th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
I don’t detest DW for those reasons you mentioned as I don’t think the west (particularly the Europeans) is in any position to invade China (your prime years are long gone), nor do I think the Chinese who listen in or read their stuff will become pro-German, pro-western freaks (I think most people are capable of forming their own opinions, rejecting both CCP and western propaganda). I detest it mostly because it is partisan while pretending to be not. I reject it for its hypocrisy, got it?
So you are filling the threads with your comments merely because you detest hypocrisy? Are you a missionary, Juchechosunmanse?
March 9th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
“But utterly irrelevant to the author’s context.”
May I remind you that the author has not used that word. You have, to describe the author’s article.
It is your context that I am talking about.
The only reason that I said that the other context/meaning of the word ‘tenet’ (“A religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof“)
is more appropriate is because many of the author’s accusations against China in the article ARE actually without proof, as I have already demonstrated.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:17 am
“So you are filling the threads with your comments merely because you detest hypocrisy? Are you a missionary, Juchechosunmanse?”
I am not, why would I be? Western hypocrisy runs deep, it is something that many westerners fail to realize and I felt that it is important to point it out and leave it in the open. What, you have a problem with me doing that?
Once again, I am just saying: don’t be so self-righteous and assertive and believing that you know better. EVRYONE has been brainwashed.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:40 am
“May I remind you that the author has not used that word. You have … It is your context that I am talking about.”
NEWSFLASH: I am ‘the author’ of the comment.
March 10th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
OK. Now I can see where the misunderstanding arose.
When I said ‘ the author’, I meant Erich Follath, the author of the Speigel article which you have linked to. (I thought that you meant him too when you said ‘the author’ – that’s why I was surprised.) If I wanted to refer to you, I would simply have used the word ‘you’ or ‘yours’. Or, to identify yourself, you could have used the word ‘me’ or ‘mine’.
In any case, the bottom line is that the article hurls many accusations on China without proof.
March 10th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
“…the bottom line is that the article hurls many accusations on China without proof.”
Only if we radically alter the definition of arrogance.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:39 am
Western hypocrisy runs deep, it is something that many westerners fail to realize and I felt that it is important to point it out and leave it in the open. What, you have a problem with me doing that?
Not at all. I asked you a question, and you have answered it, Juchechosunmanse. My motivation to ask you was to understand yours.