The fall of former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak seems to have set off what could become a wave of democratization similar to the liberalization of eastern Europe that precipitated the collapse of the Soviet Union. A “Jasmine Revolution” movement started by a group of Chinese Internet users calling for an independent judiciary, democracy and an end to one-party autocracy also seems to have shaken the Chinese leadership.
The Chinese authorities, very experienced in totalitarian suppression of public movements, reacted as if they were facing a formidable enemy. They immediately dispatched police in large numbers to the urban areas where protests were taking place to seize control and stop the protests from spreading. Officials also strengthened their control and supervision of the Internet, censoring articles and reports including words and phrases like “Jasmine Revolution,” “Egypt,” “Mubarak” and “Wangfujing” — a shopping street in Beijing. They also restricted text messaging, all in an attempt to do whatever is necessary to suppress the “jasmine blossoms.”
A closer look at the causes behind the Jasmine Revolution shows that, although elected, the presidents of both Tunisia and Egypt had been in power for an unreasonably long time. Both countries lacked supervisory mechanisms, there had been no valid handovers of political power and the governments ruled their countries through autocratic methods. Once a spark was set off through the Jasmine Revolution, the revolutions took off.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has run China as an autocratic one-party state since 1949. The country lacks substantive democratic monitoring forces, and there are no free and independent media or any freedom of expression. Nor is there an effective political party system, and the government relies on the military and police force to suppress public movements and ethnic minorities. These similarities in the political environment are why the Chinese leadership fears that a Jasmine Revolution could take off in China.
Although China’s power is growing for the time being, and it recently leapfrogged Japan to become the world’s second-largest economy, there are a considerable number of destabilizing factors lying just below the surface. These include severely worsening social inequality, uneven development between the coastal cities and inland regions, increasing inflation, soaring commodity prices, prohibitively high housing prices in urban areas, an unusually serious drought that could well turn into a famine this year, government corruption and simmering discontent among the people over the wider social conditions in China, which make it a hotbed for a Jasmine Revolution. China already has many of the conditions in place for a revolution to break out; it just lacks the fateful spark to ignite it. This has got the powers that be worried, and they are on tenterhooks over the Jasmine movement. They fear that if they don’t proceed with caution, that spark might still start a fire that will burn their house down.
It is of course possible that the people’s pride in the rise of their nation, coupled with the rapidly rising GDP, will prove stronger than their revolutionary verve and dampen their sense of urgency. The likelihood of a Jasmine Revolution in China anytime soon is not too high, but the Jasmine movement is nevertheless emerging as a force for change in China. The Chinese authorities would be well advised to heed the winds of change blowing through their lands. They need to step up democratization and political and judicial reform, because if they allow political development to lag too far behind economic development, this gap will feed the revolutionary rumblings of the people. Once the ball has started rolling, no amount of force, censorship or “golden shield” initiatives will keep the people down. If they want proof, they need look no further than Tunisia and Egypt.
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
RSS