There are two recent political developments in China worthy of our attention.
The first is that the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) publicity department last month criticized more than a dozen news organizations at a conference in Beijing for "taking wrong directions in their political commentaries." It also designated seven issues as "sensitive" and demanded that the media follow the Xinhua News Agency when reporting on these issues.
The lively media reporting that was seen not long ago looks likely to disappear again.
The second development was the CCP headquarters issuing a notice on June 22 demanding that all party members "create a new trend of learning [former president Jiang Zemin's (
These two events, which appear unrelated, are actually closely tied. Jiang's attempt to save his political influence is an open secret, but why is he starting by tightening controls on the media?
Jiang's ultimate aim is to relieve the lethal threat to his legacy posed by the case of Shanghai tycoon Zhou Zhengyi (周正毅). With his experience in the Chen Xitong (陳希同) case, Jiang knows that he will not have a leg to stand on if he prevents a judicial investigation into Zhou's alleged loan irregularities. After all it was Jiang himself, as part of his anti-corruption campaign aimed at expanding his own influence, who ensured Beijing-clique member Chen was put on trial. Now all he can do is try to minimize the political harm caused by this case. This requires the media stop reporting on the Zhou scandal.
Zhou's case was one of those "sensitive issues" that the party told the media to follow the party line on. Rumor has it that the crackdown on the financial magazine Caijing was triggered because its cover story on Zhou got on the government's nerves.
Jiang is apparently trying to prevent Zhou's case from becoming an issue of public concern. Otherwise, President Hu Jintao (
Will the actions of Jiang and his Shanghai clique be enough to ensure Zhou's case evaporates? The possibility does exist. Although Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao (
The fuse that touched off the scandal was the serious disputes Zhou had with the residents of Shanghai's Jing An District whose houses will be dismantled as part of one of his projects. Media from outside Shanghai have been trying to dig up information about the land dispute. District residents, however, held a meeting not long ago and proclaimed that "there was no problem with Jing An District." Attorney Zheng Enchong (鄭恩寵), who represented the residents, has been arrested on charges of illegally obtaining state secrets.
The intent to keep a lid on the case is obvious. Shanghai city authorities' boldness in taking these actions comes from Jiang's backing and from what they deem a righteous cause. When Hu and Wen were leading the anti-SARS campaign, Shanghai residents complained that Beijing authorities' over-reaction to the epidemic had seriously impacted their city's economic development.
With economic development outweighing everything else in China, if Shanghai says it's worried that the Zhou scandal might harm its economy, Hu and Wen will find it hard to voice direct opposition.
At the same time, the outside world's playing up the power struggle between the Hu-Wen faction and Jiang's Shanghai clique put great pressure on Hu and Wen. This isn't the time for them to be seen as hostile to the Shanghai clique.
The fact that the CCP's publicity department, which has always been led by Hu and Wen, has tightened control over the media can be interpreted as the two leaders' effort to express goodwill and compromise to Jiang.
If this interpretation is correct, Zhou's case might become the next goodwill bargaining chip. Hu can temporarily shelve the case as a way of extending an olive branch to Jiang and placating the Shanghai clique. Keeping the case on the shelf gives him a weapon -- the possibility of restarting the investigation -- he can use later to frighten the Shanghai clique. For now at least, Zhou's case is unlikely to become another Chen Xitong incident.
Wang Dan was a student leader during the 1989 Tiananmen Square demonstrations.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS