A day before China marked its first annual Disaster Prevention and Reduction Day — declared to mark the anniversary of last year’s catastrophic Sichuan earthquake — the country confirmed its first case of the A(H1N1) swine flu outside Hong Kong. Chinese authorities were quick to respond by quarantining the patient, a man who returned from the US last week, and seeking contact with hundreds of passengers who traveled on the same Tokyo-St Paul, Minnesota, and Beijing-Chengdu flights.
Unlike China’s infamous mishandling of the SARS outbreak in 2002 and 2003, no attempt was made to hide the case — a small victory for transparency. The promptness with which it was reported is appreciated in Taiwan, where authorities lost no time in tracking down travelers who had boarded the cross-Pacific flight with the Chinese man. Within 24 hours, the Department of Health was able to locate most of the 23 Taiwanese passengers to inform them of their possible exposure to the virus.
This exercise in Chinese transparency came the same day that Beijing released a white paper on disaster relief efforts. On the eve of the first anniversary of the May 12 temblor that left tens of thousands dead or missing, the paper, entitled China’s Actions for Disaster Prevention and Reduction, was another show of transparency, but one less likely to win praise.
Although it recognizes the potential for increased frequency and severity of natural disasters and the need for effective safety measures, the paper is largely show. Beijing pats itself on the back, listing legislation and other action over the past decades to address various aspects of natural calamities. Its lavish self-praise would read as a cruel joke to the thousands of parents whose children died in shoddily built schools: “Always placing people first, the Chinese government has all along put the security of people’s lives and property on the top of its work.”
Conspicuously absent from the paper, which lists strategies for reducing the financial and human toll of disasters, is any mention of corruption. A key lesson learned from the devastation in Sichuan was the role that fighting graft must play in reducing the casualties of future disasters. Chinese authorities remain tight-lipped on the greed that led to hundreds of schools referred to as “tofu-dreg constructions” crumbling in the quake.
The topic has the potential to drag down scores of local officials in criminal liability and compensation suits, increase domestic discontent and international embarrassment over unscrupulous administration, and highlight jerry-built public construction that is ubiquitous in China.
Side-stepping this elephant in the room, the paper says only that the government spent 9 billion yuan (US$1.32 billion) between 2001 and 2005 to renovate 40,000 schools. It also mentions a new program to ensure that schools meet earthquake safety standards.
The paper is also silent on the rights of victims to seek compensation in disasters where official incompetence or corruption results in loss of life. The omission is a slap in the face of the grieving parents. More than just ignoring them, authorities including police have punished those who seek redress with physical and psychological threats and harassed the lawyers who try to help them.
If Beijing has learned something of the value of government accountability and openness from the Sichuan disaster, it has refrained from sharing it in its white paper. Instead, it indulges in self-congratulation while continuing to silence bereaved parents. Rather than illustrating transparency, the only thing China has highlighted is the utter lack of it.
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