FANG JUE
NEW YORK, Aug. 30
http://www.upiasiaonline.com
The United States needs to take powerful action to stem China's irresponsible economic expansion. In the past half year Western countries have been resisting Chinese products -- which are cheap but often of poor quality and sometimes unsafe. From toxic pet food to polluted aquatic products, from unsafe toothpaste to unsafe vehicle tires, Chinese products are failing to meet Western standards.
The biggest recent news was the recall of 20 million toys made in China by Mattel, the largest U.S. toy company. Some toys were found to contain lead, and others had small parts that could be swallowed by young children. This trend of rejecting substandard Chinese goods is likely to continue for some time, and to impact China's irresponsible economic expansion.
This recalls the situation when former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping ordered the army to repress the peaceful student protests on June 4th, 1989, in Beijing. His intention was to maintain his position as paramount leader. Deng established an important concept through his actions, however: As long as China develops and grows stronger, it need not fear sanctions or attacks from Western countries, or abandonment by them.
In early 1992, during his famous trip to southern China, Deng condensed this concept into one sentence: "Development is the absolute principle." This principle became the motto for the third generation leadership under former President Jiang Zemin and continues for the fourth generation leadership under current President Hu Jintao.
This "absolute principle" shows that the Communist Party's greatest asset in deterring China's transition to democracy is the rapid growth of the economy. This economic growth is mainly export-led. That is to say, the direct impact of U.S. rejection of Chinese products will be to slow China's rampant exporting impetus.
U.S. workers are under no obligation to sacrifice their job opportunities in return for problematic Chinese products that harm U.S. consumers. U.S. enterprises are under no obligation to sacrifice their own benefits in return for dealing with corrupt Chinese bureaucrats and rich people. The U.S. government is under no obligation to sacrifice its country's interests in return for China's developing anti-satellite weapons and intercontinental missiles. Furthermore, U.S. security organs are under no obligation to sacrifice their own duties in return for all types of Chinese spies in their country.
If China's export momentum is slowed, U.S. workers can have more job opportunities, U.S. enterprises can make more reasonable profits, the Chinese communist regime's military funds will be reduced and Chinese spies will find it harder to carry out their underground tasks.
For a long time, U.S. enterprises that earn profits from trading with China have lobbied the U.S. government, Congress, and leadership of states and major cities in favor of the Chinese Communist Party. But growing opposition to poor quality Chinese imports will diminish these voices singing the praises of China's economic miracle.
In addition, some insightful Americans will begin to reevaluate this seriously defective economic miracle, as well as China's worldwide ambitious diplomatic strategies and its potential threat in terms of military expansion.
Some Americans have advocated economic dialogue with China and disapproved of legislation and sanctions aimed at reshaping China's economic behavior. In practice, various Sino-U.S. economic dialogues have achieved no substantial results, nor do they promise substantial results in the foreseeable future. When dealing with such issues as the low exchange rate of the yuan, the piracy problem, the granting of approval to enter China's market and export subsidies, the Chinese government has always considered its own benefit. It has no intention of finding fair and timely solutions to these problems, preferring to engage in "shadowboxing" with the United States.
Some U.S. companies have begun to resist the irresponsible economic expansion of China. This will encourage those who think the United States should respond to China's economic wrongdoings with legislation and sanctions. Eventually most U.S. consumers and voters will follow and support these actions.
Communist China is actually not strong enough to win an economic showdown with the developed countries. Therefore the developed countries, led by the United States, should deal with China based on strength, not just on dialogue. Any Sino-U.S. dialogue should be based on strength rather than goodwill.
The Chinese government is finally growing nervous about U.S. rejection of its exports. Premier Wen Jiabao held a meeting of the State Council to demand improvements in the quality and safety of products for export. Ministry-level officials in charge of product quality and safety have declared that these are not only economic issues but also critical political issues.
The rejection of China's goods by U.S. companies is more effective than official channels of Sino-U.S. dialogue. In this world, compared to development, strength and action are even stronger absolute principles.
Recent history should not be forgotten: The Soviet Union launched comprehensive reforms after 1985 largely because of its poor economic situation. Thus Communist Party General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev was willing to explore "new thinking." However, after 2005, Russia's democratic transition was reversed. One major reason for this was that the country's economy improved and President Vladimir Putin was more willing to revert to authoritarianism.
Likewise, the major reason for the ongoing rejection of democratic reforms by the third generation leadership under Jiang Zemin and the fourth generation under Hu Jintao is that China's rapid economic growth has provided plenty of financial resources for the Communist Party. As long as the developed countries are willing to assist China's rapid economic growth and maintain its position as the world's factory, China will never become a democratic country, nor will it ever be a "responsible stakeholder" in the world.
--
(Fang Jue is a political activist and freelance writer living in the United States. He was a former government official in China and worked in the Politics Research Institute of China's Academy of Social Sciences. He was a visiting scholar at the Fairbanks Center for East Asian Research at Harvard University in 2003. This article is translated and edited from the Chinese by UPI Asia Online; the original can be found at www.chinaeweekly.com. ©Copyright Fang Jue.)
没有评论:
发表评论