How China could benefit from Pakistan's 'dream corridor'

My article How China could benefit from Pakistan's 'dream corridor' appeared in Mail Today/Daily Mail

Here is the link...

For Pakistan, it was a dream come true.
When President Xi Jinping visited Islamabad in April 2015, he pledged an eye-popping 46 billion dollars for the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). While for Beijing the mega project was a vital element of the One Belt, One Road (OBOR), it was a ‘game-changer’ for Pakistan which would bring prosperity to the entire region.
It is true that Xi brought with him munificent gifts for Pakistan: the Chinese billions would boost Pakistan’s flagging economy with massive energy and infrastructure projects. This included an additional 12,000 megawatts to Pakistan’s national grid through coal, hydro and renewable energy projects.
The Corridor would have railways, roads, optical fiber cables, dams, pipelines, you name it! Observers the marveled at Beijing generosity (and wealth), but lately, the ‘beneficiaries’ have started realizing that the project may first and foremost benefit Beijing!
The architects of CPEC plan to build a 2,700-kilometre corridor stretching from Kashgar to Gwadar, which will link Central Asia (via Xinjiang) to Europe and Africa (via the maritime route).
Is it a boon for Islamabad?
Not everyone agrees, even in Pakistan. Salman Rafi Sheikh, a research analyst wrote in Asia Times: “The CPEC continues to look like a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. In the absence of agreements stipulating and documenting both countries’ interests, the CPEC is creating problems that would strip Pakistan of whatever benefits the multi-billion-dollar project promises.”
He continued: “Claims about CPEC’s ability to change Pakistan’s economic outlook appear hollow and unreal. …The question remains: what’s the game changer for the region when CPEC is changing nothing in Pakistan?”
The author certainly has a point.

Security
It is true that the Corridor faces several serious issues, security for example. Now, suppose the scheme becomes ‘unstable’ due to terrorism (presently localised in Pakistan, but which can be easily exported to Xinjiang), the cost of the project could tremendously shoot up. This deeply worries Beijing.
Last month, The Dawn reported that Pakistan has deployed 15,000 military personnel, “as part of the Special Security Division (SSD) and Maritime Security Force (MSF) to protect projects under the CPEC”.
Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed, chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on CPEC, noted: “Both forces will work under the interior ministry, in coordination with the provinces.”
The question is who is going to pay the bill?
Quoting military sources, The South China Morning Post affirms that the PLA would soon increase its fighting force to 100,000 personnel, “allowing for deployment in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa and Gwadar in southwest Pakistan.” Chinese troops in Gwadar, the main entry to the CPEC, is worrisome, to say the least.

The economy of the corridor
Recently Pakistan’s Public Accounts Committee asked for the details of rate of interest for the loans obtained from China.
The secretary of the Ministry of Water and Power gave some figures: there were 19 power projects under the CPEC with the capacity of 12,114 MW; out of which 3,960 MW from coal, 2,714 MW from hydro projects, 900 MW from solar projects and 4,260 MW from imported coal.
The amazing part is that after the COP21 accords, the planet is abandoning coal, but China is financing new coal projects in Pakistan ….with Chinese coal!
Beijing has agreed to provide a $ 6 billion loan for road infrastructure and Rs 2.8 billion for Railways ‘on lowest interest rate’. While these loans are at a reasonable 1.6% interest, in some other cases, they can be as high as 6 or 7%. Will Pakistan be able to repay these loans?
By including the cost of insurance, also paid to a Chinese insurance company, the cost of borrowings could surge to 13%: “Adding insult to injury, the government has already exempted income of Chinese financial institutions from dividend income tax,” said The Pakistan Herald.
Another issue is regional disparity: on February 28, Sardar Akhtar Jan Mengal, president of the Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M), accused Islamabad of getting funds for the project in the name of Gwadar while using them in one province only, Punjab. Mengal argued that the people of Balochistan, a province through which a major portion of the Corridor passes, have neither been consulted nor taken into confidence on CPEC projects. Other provinces, particularly Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (for the western route of CPEC) and Gilgit-Baltistan have similar views.

India’s position
As the project crosses Indian territory in PoK, the CPEC is unacceptable for India. Delhi cannot pretend that nothing is happening and forget about the legality of the accession of Jammu & Kashmir State to India.
Beijing has hinted that India should join the ‘global’ project, but China does not seem to be ready to implement what it is preaching.
After Tibet was invaded by China in October 1950, the traditional Himalayan trade routes were progressively closed down. An effort was done in 1954 to regulate the flow of people and goods through the 'Agreement on Trade and Intercourse between the Tibet region of China and India', i.e. the Panchsheel Agreement; however China was not ready to implement the letter or the spirit of the Agreement which eventually lapsed in 1962.
While China is adamant to not reopen the Himalayan land ports between India and Tibet, why ‘invite’ Delhi to join the CPEC bandwagon? There is no logic.
In any case, the Corridor is first and foremost a vital investment for Beijing, which is slowly ‘buying’ the strategic corridor; Beijing will soon control its new dominion, Pakistan. For India, it will be a game changer as it will then face China on two fronts, the northern and the western ones.
Modi Sarkar should ponder about this.

China innovates

J-31 Prototype

I am posting my article entitled Chinese innovations published in the Indian Defence Review (Vol 28 (4) - Oct-Dec 2103)
 
The Chinese Dream
A few months ago, The People's Daily provided some details on the Chinese Dream, so dear to President Xi Jinping. The mouthpiece of the Communist Party first explains why a Dream: “The concept of Chinese dream has been widely spread for some time. In the context of weak economic recovery, complicated security situation and accelerated adjustment of international order, the world needs dreams indeed. ”
But who is this Dream for?
Beijing answers that it is for peace, for the world: “The Chinese dream is a dream for peace. Adhering to the peaceful development is China’s choice of the times. China stands for peace settlement for global disputes and issues and the new security concept of mutual trust, mutual benefit, equal and cooperation. The country strives for development under peaceful global circumstance and promotes world peace by self-development. China has actively participated in the dialogue and cooperation for international security. It has contributed to world peace.”
But there is more to the Chinese Dream: “The Chinese dream is a dream for cooperation. The interrelation and interdependency of countries have deepened largely, and cooperation and mutual benefits have become a common view. ”
The new Chinese president Xi Jinping dreams of Harmony for China and the rest of the world: “The Chinese dream is a dream for harmony …the Chinese dream belongs to the world.”
Well, it is unfortunate that recent events on the ground do not reflect these high philosophical objectives. The South China Sea, the East China Sea as well as for the Himalayan borders between India and China, (whether it is in Ladakh, Uttarakhand, Himachal or Arunachal Pradesh), have only witnessed tensions, not harmony.

The Chinese Dream passes through an Innovative China
It is certain that India has to learn something from China in terms of ‘dreaming’. But first Delhi should realize the true objective behind the Chinese Dream which is to make of China a dominant, self-reliant superpower.
Very early in its history, the Chinese Communist leadership realized that the great renaissance of the Chinese nation was dependent on ‘innovation with Chinese characteristics’. Beijing has now taken decisive actions to remedy some of the nation deficiencies in this field. India has not yet.
On June 22, 2013, The South China Morning Post affirmed that “China's top science advisers have listed 19 projects as the research priorities of the next decade. They include quantum telecommunications and a high-performance jet engine that could drastically improve the capacity of its indigenous fighter jets. ”
According to the Hong Kong newspaper, the report was prepared by more than 200 experts associated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It was a road map for breaking into the US dominance in domains as diverse as military, space, new materials, energy or agriculture.
Though not all the projects have a direct military implication, ultimately, ALL the projects will help the progress of the Chinese indigenous technology and most of them, will have a dual use.
The South China Morning Post mentioned: “The most eye-catching one is a new jet engine that promises to deliver thrust equivalent to 15 times its own weight. The thrust-to-weight ratio is a key indicator to measure a jet engine's performance. In comparison, the Pratt & Whitney F119 turbofan engine used in the United States' F-22 raptor fighter has a thrust-to-weight ratio of eight and is widely considered one of the most advanced jet engines today.”
This particular field is usually considered to be the weakest in China's aviation sector. Beijing has had to rely on foreign imports (mainly from Russia) for its fighter jets. Even China’s purported heavy-hacking activities have not so far been able to reduce the dependence on the Russian technology.
Of course, the Chinese plans for the new proposed engine have triggered wide-spread skepticism, but the point is that China has the political will and the economic means to jump into such innovative adventures.
The Chinese Dream goes hand in hand with military modernization. It is not new, but in the recent years and months it has been taken up by the new leadership in Beijing with a renewed vigour

The History of the Chinese ‘Innovations’
Following the ‘Two Weapons, and One Satellite’ program included in the science and technology development plan for 1956-1967, China took the decision to overcome deficiencies in areas critical to its national security and in March 1986, initiated the National High Technology Program (known as Program 863 – for 1986/03).
Program 863 was launched to promote China’s high-tech development in key areas such as information technology, biology, aeronautics, automation, energy, materials and oceanography.
Government institutes, university research labs and state-owned company R&D departments were all asked to participate in Program 863; the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) was the main recipient of the 863 funds.
According to a Chinese official document: “In 1983 the United States put forward the Strategic Defence Initiative (i. e. the Star Wars Initiative), then came the EURICA of Europe, …which are all strategic plans aimed at the 21st century. The implementation of those plans has created impacts on the great development of high technologies in the world. ”
It was enough to convince the Communist leadership in Beijing to undertake a similar ‘indigenous program’, especially after four top scientists, Wang Daheng, Wang Ganchang, Yang Jiachi and Chen Fanyun submitted, in March 1986, a letter to leadership in which they suggested that China should adopt appropriate countermeasures to catch up with the development of high technologies in view of the impacts on China of recent world advancements in the fields of high technologies.
Deng Xiaoping immediately instructed the government “Quick decision should be made on this matter without any delay”.
It was done. The 863 Program with the objectives: “to combine military use with civil use, with stress on the latter and limit objectives and concentrate on focal points”, was soon included in the Ninth Five-year Plan.
Fifteen years later, another landmark document was published, “The National Medium- and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Science and Technology (2006-2020)”, is also known as the MLP.
The MLP describes itself as the ‘grand blueprint of science and technology development’ to bring about the ‘great renaissance of the Chinese nation’.
The preamble calls for the Chinese people to “seize the opportunities and meet the challenges brought by the new science and technology revolution …despite the size of our economy, our country is not an economic power, primarily because of our weak innovative capacity.”
An excellent report China’s Drive for Indigenous Innovation prepared by James McGregor for the Global Regulatory Cooperation Project of the US Chamber of Commerce, says: “The MLP blueprint is full of grand visions, good intentions and gilded rhetoric about international cooperation and friendship. …It also sets goals for expanded cooperation with foreign universities, research centers and corporate R&D centers. ”
The MLP defines indigenous innovation as “enhancing original innovation through co-innovation and re-innovation based on the assimilation of imported technologies.”
What ‘assimilation’ and ‘re-innovation’ means is well-known from those who deal with China; “Importing technology without ‘transforming it into Chinese technology’ is not acceptable to China anymore”, the report states. “One should be clearly aware that the importation of technologies without emphasizing the assimilation, absorption and re-innovation is bound to weaken the nation’s indigenous research and development capacity, ” adds the MLP.
The plan is often considered by many international technology companies to be a blueprint for technology theft on a scale the world has never seen before. That is not true innovation, but re-innovation.

A few innovations
When President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao came into office in March 2003 as PRC’s President and Premier of the State Council respectively, innovation in science and technology was at the top of their minds, particularly as Beijing was to be the center of the world for the 2008 Olympics.
Apart from the launch of Shenzhou V, its first manned spacecraft and a first home grown Chinese microprocessor (with the capacity to process 200 million instructions per second, proudly fulfilling a nearly two decade-long national goal) invented by Chen Jin, a 35-year-old Fujian native with a University of Texas PhD working at Shanghai Jiaotong University, there was little innovation in China in 2003.
At the same time, the US employed some 62,500 Chinese-born science and engineering PhDs. Mainland natives were heading many American research labs and university departments; further most of the 60,000 Chinese students living in the US, had been granted residence permits by President George Bush in 1990 in the aftermath of Tiananmen events.
Interestingly, the ruling 9-member politburo standing committee was composed of 8 engineers and one hydrologist; they could therefore grasp the importance of ‘innovation’.
McGregor explains: “With the rallying cry of ‘innovation’, Premier Wen in mid-2003 used his position as head of the Leading Group on Science, Technology, and Education to bring together the two heavyweights of science and technology in China – CAS and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) – to coordinate an old fashioned Soviet ‘big push’ style campaign. ”
Nature magazine had a special issue (Fall 2004) with a collection of essays from prominent Chinese scientists also criticizing the draft plan for giving bureaucrats of the Ministry of Sciences and Technology (MOST) too much power over scientists. They believed that if megaprojects should remain the central focus, money was bound to be allocated to mediocre projects, based on ‘connections’, a well-known Chinese disease.
It was suggested that the power of MOST over research funding should be reduced, and perhaps the ministry should be disbanded altogether.

Assimilating and Absorbing
The idea of Megaprojects for ‘Assimilating and Absorbing’ technology was mooted. It was an import substitution action plan in order to create Chinese indigenous innovations through ‘co-innovation’ and ‘re-innovation’ of foreign technologies.
The megaprojects have an objective of ‘assimilating and absorbing’ advanced technologies imported from outside China to help the country to ‘develop a range of major equipment and key products that possess proprietary intellectual property rights’. The MLP speaks of ‘major carriers of uplifting indigenous innovation capacity’.
While the MLP identified the goals and specific sectors in which government innovation was of strategic importance, the 11th Five-Year Plan issued in December 2007 formally detailed the 16 megaprojects. While 13 were listed, 3 remained classified .
Michael Raska, a Research Fellow at the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies (IDSS), quotes Prof. Tai Ming Cheung, a leading scholar on China’s defense industries at the Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation at the University of California San Diego, suggesting that the three military megaprojects were :

• Shenguang Laser Project for Inertial Confinement Fusion:
• The Shenguang (Divine Light) laser project explores the inertial confinement fusion (ICF) as an alternative approach to attain inertial fusion energy (IFE) – a controllable, sustained nuclear fusion reaction aided by an array of high-powered lasers;
• Second Generation Beidou Satellite Navigation System
• According to Jane’s magazine, by the end of 2012, China had 16 operational Beidou satellites in orbit – six geostationary satellites, five Medium Earth Orbit spacecraft, and five satellites in Inclined Geo-Stationary Orbits covering the Asia-Pacific region. By 2020, Beidou 2 envisions a full-scale system of at least five geostationary and 30 non-geostationary satellites providing a global coverage;
• Hypersonic Vehicle Technology Project:
• Available data show that China has started developing conceptual and experimental hypersonic flight vehicle technologies such as hypersonic cruise vehicles (HCV) capable of maneuvering at Mach 5 speeds (6,150+ km/h), flying in near-space altitudes.  

Michael Raska says: “Taken together, China’s long-term strategic military programs are deeply embedded in China’s advancing civilian science and technology base, which in turn is increasingly linked to global commercial and scientific networks.”
There is no doubt that even the ‘civilian’ innovations are useful to the defence sector in China.

The Chinese impediments
China has its own problems; one is the rigidity of its bureaucracy functioning under the Communist Party. The Chinese are however serious about tackling the babudom. In April 2007, Party leaders nominated a former Audi engineer with great experience, Wan Gang, as MOST minister; it was the first non-communist party member acceding to minister rank in 35 years.
In June 2007m Wan Gang established a ‘Special Projects Office’, the equivalent of an economic zone headquarters to make sure that the megaprojects would not be buried by the bureaucracy. The megaprojects office was to evaluate applications, approve funding and closely monitor the projects. The budget for each project was specific and identified both central and local government contributions.
McGregor says: “This unprecedented high-level hands-on micromanagement demonstrates that the indigenous innovation program is the government’s highest strategic economic priority.”
Of course, the 16 megaprojects (which, as seen earlier have become 19 in 2013) have been a source of controversy and debates both in China and abroad.
Many observers believe that the present Chinese system is not congenial to innovations considering its structure and the restrictions imposed by the unique Party system.
Though Xinhua announced than more than 1.02 million scientific theses have come from Chinese scientific and technical personnel in the past decade, (the second-highest number of such theses worldwide), doubts still persist about the quality of these theses.
The Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China (under the MOST) affirms that the quality has risen: “Theses published from 2002 to 2012 have been cited a total of 6.65 million times, ranking sixth in the world. ”
The Institute adds that: “More than 7,920 scientific theses qualify as ‘highly-cited theses’, or those among the top 1 % in terms of citations, climbing one place to rank fifth”, but also admitting that Chinese scientists in 2011 published 141 theses on Nature, Science, Cell and other world-class magazines and journals, moving down a spot from 2010 to rank tenth.”
It is not easy to compete with the West in term of innovation in this domain.
On July 2012, an article in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) entitled “China as an Innovation Center? Not So Fast” warned that ‘innovations’ may take more time.
Anil K. Gupta and Haiyan Wang admitted that the Chinese ‘inputs’ in the field of innovation were very impressive, the R&D expenditure increased to 1.5% of GDP in 2010 from 1.1% in 2002, and should reach 2.5% by 2020. Its share of the world's total R&D expenditure grew to 12.3% in 2010 from 5.0% in 2002, placing it second only to the U.S., whose share remained steady at 34-35%.
But though data looks impressive, “Yet there's less here than meets the eye. Over 95% of the Chinese applications were filed domestically with the State Intellectual Property Office. The vast majority cover Chinese ‘innovations’ that make only tiny changes on existing designs.”
It does not mean that China is not trying hard to innovate. The regime gives itself the means to succeed one day.

An example of China’s re-innovation
The China Brief of the Jamestown Foundation recently mentioned China’s deployment of the world’s first operational anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) which was confirmed “with unprecedented clarity by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). The ASBM’s development path was unusual in many respects, but may increasingly represent the shape of things to come for China’s defense industry.”
The US Department of Defence annual report to Congress on China’s Military spoke of the status of China’s DF-21D ASBM: “China continues to field an ASBM based on a variant of the DF-21 (CSS 5) medium range ballistic missile that it began deploying in 2010. Known as the DF-21D, this missile provides the PLA the capability to attack large ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific. The DF-21D has a range exceeding 1,500 km and is armed with a maneuverable warhead.”
For the US DOD, “it gives the PLA the capability to attack large ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific Ocean”.
But where does this technology come from?
The same article of The China Brief answers this question. Chinese sources themselves have credited the US Pershing II missile with influencing the development of China’s DF-15C and DF-21 ballistic missiles: “Following the Pershing II’s deployment, initial ‘research work’ reportedly was completed in the early 1990s and incorporated into China’s Dongfeng (DF) missiles via a ‘warhead that possesses terminal homing guidance and maneuvering control capability’”.
When they first saw missiles of the DF series, experts realized the relation with the Pershing II. An article published in Hong Kong by a mainland-owned daily stated: “When they saw the new-type intermediate-range missile in China’s ‘Dongfeng’ family during the latest military parade held on the National Day, people would certainly like to compare it with the ‘Pershing II’ missile, wouldn’t they?” This is called re-innovation.

Can India achieve such a feat?
Especially in the defence sector, India depends in a large measure on imports. For many, the main reason is the lack of large-scale Research and Development (R&D). We shall take the example of HAL.
A few months ago, Dassault Aviation, the constructor of the Rafale selected in the MMRCA project, expressed some doubts about the capacity of HAL to absorb French technology; without even speaking about ‘innovations', can HAL ‘digest’ the French technology?
A source who has been associated for decades with HAL explained that tremendous efforts need to be made in the domain of ‘research’, if India is serious about catching up with China and the West in the domain of ‘innovation’.
Today HAL hardly does any R&D other than development connected with a production project. There is no doubt that government- or private-funded laboratories are needed for developing technologies which are comparable to the ones in the West. Unfortunately top ranked Indian students after graduation head for USA where they receive generous offers providing them satisfaction both in remuneration and the quality of work. It is these very talented young persons who need to be retained to do innovative work in Indian laboratories. This will happen only if India is able create world class laboratories and offer competitive remuneration.
Is the Indian system able to be a top-class innovator, is the question?

India’s babudom
India is suffering from the same disease as China, but despite the bureaucratic deficiencies, the leadership in Beijing has a tremendous political will (and adequate economic means) to change this scenario in the years to come; it does not seem the case in India, at least under the current political equation.
Take the case of the HAL’s HPT 32 Deepak trainer plane being discarded by the IAF, which ultimately selected (and now inducted into IAF) the Pilatus PC 7 from Switzerland. The alternative proposal from HAL for the HTT 40 (Turbo-prop trainer) was also not considered as it was still at the initial design stage. This raises serious doubts on the state of Indian research, once again without mentioning ‘innovations’. The lack of good leadership and weak design ability are some of the main HAL’s problems.
When Steve Jobs passed away, experts debated why China did not produce its own Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, or Mark Zuckerberg? One contributor to Forbes explained that the emergence of such ‘innovative’ entrepreneurs “does not blend well with China’s culture of Confucian conformity to existing norms. Throughout China’s history, the established order saved little respect for inventors, entrepreneurs, and business pioneers.”
There is some truth in this, but the Confucian conformity added to the Communist bureaucracy and the supreme importance of the Party’s diktats is today balanced by a tremendous will to ‘innovate’ in order to materialize the Chinese Dream.
The Indian Dream has unfortunately not even been formulated as yet. It is a great pity, because the ingredients (brains) are very much present.

The Chinese Dream is Over: The Seven Perils

One more article which appeared in Uday India and the Indian Defence Review, The Chinese Dream is Over: The Seven Perils.

Click here to read...

Xi goes red

A meeting of the Central Committee at Xibaipo

My article One Xi taught a lesson, another fails to learn it appeared in The Pioneer today.


Click here to read... 

President Xi Jinping has been talking a great deal of reclaiming the past glories of communism in China and building on it a new ‘dream’ for his country. What if that dream sours, like others did in the past?

The 10th Plenum of the Chinese Communist Party's 8th Central Committee was held in September 1962 in Beijing. It was to be a crucial meet not only because Mao Zedong had decided to attack ‘arrogant’ India, but because it witnessed the first purge which culminated in the Cultural Revolution a few years later.
According to Dr Li Zhisui, Mao’s private physician and author of The Private Life of Chairman Mao: “During the Plenum, Mao retook the upper hand on the Party and his old comrades. He reemphasized class struggle in order to prevent the emergence of revisionism.”
The main casualty of the Plenum was Xi Zhongxun. The Vice-Premier’s mistake was that he was too close to Marshal Peng Dehuai who had dared to criticize Mao’s Great Leap Forward in 1959; further, Xi Zhongxun was suspected to support the ‘Three Nis’, thanks to the Chinese pronunciation: Kennedy (Ken-ni-di), Nikita Khrushchev (Ni-ji-ta), Nehru (Ni-he-lu).
At the time of the Plenum, Xi Zhongxun’s son was a young boy; he was only 9 years-old. He must have been deeply traumatized when his father was sent to the wilderness of Chinese gaols for the next 16 years. Senior Xi would only be rehabilitated by his old Comrade Deng Xiaoping in 1978.
Fifty-one year later, Xi Zhongxun’s son, today China’s President and General Secretary of the Communist Party, exhorts the Chinese nation to return to the good old Communist values.
It is difficult to comprehend, but last week, Xinhua reported ‘Xi urges China to keep red’.
The new Emperor paid a visit to Xibaipo in the northern province of Hebei; it was the old revolutionary base, where from May 1948 to early 1949, the Communist leadership worked on the blueprint of the new Red China.
According to Xinhua, addressing the Party cadres, Xi Junior “urged the 85 million members of the Communist Party of China to work hard and serve the people wholeheartedly to ensure the color of red China will never change.”
Xi warned the Party cadres against the Four Decadences: formalism, bureaucratism, hedonism and extravagance.
While fighting laxity, mediocrity and corruption, Xi said the campaign should focus on self-purification, self-perfection, self-renewal and self-progression.
Xi called for "thorough inspection, overhaul and cleanup”.
He probably did not have in mind the rectification session of the 10th Plenum, when he said: “Late Chinese leader Mao Zedong's remarks on Party members' work styles prior to the founding of New China in 1949 still have far-reaching ideological and historical significance.”
His recent leitmotiv has been: “If every CPC member and every grass-roots organ …do a good job, the Party will be strong, the country will be strong and people will be strong. Thus, the Party's rule will have a solid foundation."
The President asked the senior provincial officials to take the lead in the ‘Campaign on Mass Line Education and Practice’; Mao Zedong used the word, ‘mass line’ to explain the need for the Party to stay in touch with the ‘masses’.
President Xi’s point is that if the Party is unable to do this, it will die. The ‘chaos’ so feared by the old emperors will then follow. At the same time, he does not want to blindly follow the ‘western’ style of democracy which would, according to him, destroy the ‘Chinese characteristics’ of the Middle Kingdom. He probably believes that the Indian model is not efficient enough.
The new drive is not limited to the cadres, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) too have to “nurture the core values of the contemporary revolutionary soldier” and have to do “a better job in educating, nurturing and molding the soldier’s character”.
This mass line scheme follows a campaign calling for a Chinese Dream, the catchword of the new Chinese leadership. The People's Daily explains Xi’s Dream: “The Chinese dream is a dream for development.” The leadership today believes that China has become the stabilizer of the world economy and following the international financial crisis, its new engine.
For the new President: “The Chinese dream is a dream for harmony. Unfair and unreasonable old international order which has not been fundamentally changed is the most important cause of world chaos and dilemma.”
That is not all, the Chinese dream is a dream for cooperation and finally a dream for peace: “China stands for peace settlement for global disputes and issues and the new security concept of mutual trust, mutual benefit and cooperation.”
The South China Morning Post quotes Prof. Wang Yukai of the Chinese Academy of Governance agreeing with Xi: “The key to the Party's rule is to improve its capacity to rule and maintain its internal vitality.”
That sounds nice. Chinese like it so much that hundreds of think-tanks, universities, national and regional institutions have started studying ‘The Dream’ and begun publishing comments and dissertations on it.
Even the PLA is praising the Dream. The People's Liberation Daily has even gone a step further: “it is like seeing a ship's mast in the sea, like seeing the radiant sun rise in the east”. The Editor added: "It is the dogma of my belief, the cosmic truth. ...The dream is more important than anything …it is like water that carries the ship; like the wind that sustains the wings.”
It is rare for the Chinese Army to have glimpses of the 'cosmic truth'.
Is it this 'cosmic' experience which guided some Chinese jawans to the Depsang Plain, near Daulat Beg Oldi in the rarefied altitude of Ladakh or in Chumar, when some of them stole ‘dysfunctional’ surveillance cameras from the Indian side of the LAC?
After the Ladakh incidents, one could ask is this dream good for India?
But some voices already doubt the new campaign. Li Haiqing, a Communist Party historian at the Central Party School writes in Study Times, the School newspaper: “The mass line is not an effective substitute that can realise the function of democracy.”
This reminds me of the thoughts of Dr. Li, when looking at the flat ECG of the Great Helmsman who had just passed away: “In the beginning, I had adulated Mao. He was China’s savior, the country messiah. But this had long since passed. My dream of a new China, where all men would be equal and exploitation ended, had been shattered years before. I had no faith in the Communist party, of which I was still a member; [today], an era has ended, Mao’s time has passed.”
President Xi wants to revive the past, it seems a pipedream.
The problem is that if the Dream turns sour, it may have serious consequences for China as well as its neighbours. India should watch carefully.

The Chinese Dream and the Cosmic Truth

From the Economist's cover

The People's Daily recently provided  more details on China's Dream, so dear to President Xi Jinping.
The Daily first explained why a Dream:

The concept of Chinese dream has been widely spread for some time. In the context of weak economic recovery, complicated security situation and accelerated adjustment of international order, the world needs dreams indeed. The reason Chinese dream has caught close attention is that it complies with the history trend and echoes the world expectation.

But who is this Dream for? 
The mouthpiece of the Communist Party answers that it is for peace, for the world. It says:

The Chinese dream is a dream for peace. Adhering to the peaceful development is China’s choice of the times. China stands for peace settlement for global disputes and issues and the new security concept of mutual trust, mutual benefit, equal and cooperation. The country strives for development under peaceful global circumstance and promotes world peace by self-development. China has actively participated in the dialogue and cooperation for international security. It has contributed to world peace.

But there is more in the Chinese Dream. It is for the people and their well-being: Read this:

The Chinese dream is a dream for development. Chinese people focus on development and have made brilliant progress since the Reform and Opening-up. China has become the stabilizer and new engine, especially since the breakout of the international financial crisis. Data from the IMF show China has contributed one fourth of global economy growth with a one tenth global economic aggregate. Chinese people promote the world economic recovery by their hard work, which is the best interpretation of human being’s common dream - development.　　

Let all the countries of the world could work together, prophetically asserts the Dream:

The Chinese dream is a dream for cooperation. The interrelation and interdependency of countries have deepened largely, and cooperation and mutual benefits have become a common view. China pushes forward pragmatic cooperation with other countries and adheres to providing help to developing countries. The country has always taken dialogue and negotiation as the best means to resolve differences, committing to create a new way to coexistence. China’s road of cooperation is getting more and more reorganization in the world.

Let us all live in Harmony: China and the rest of the world, dreams the new President:

The Chinese dream is a dream for harmony. Unfair and unreasonable old international order which has not been fundamentally changed is the most important cause of world chaos and dilemma. China advocates equality, mutual trust, tolerance and mutual learning cooperation and win-win spirit in the international relations, respects diversity and development of human civilization, actively involves in promoting the establishment of a just and reasonable new international political and economic order. It has committed to building a harmonious world with lasting peace and common prosperity. Chinese dream reflects the inevitable requirement for sustainable development of human society, opportunities for more countries. Under the background of globalization, the Chinese dream belongs to the world. During the close cooperation with the other countries, the Chinese dream will surely step forward with the world dream.

If you now believe in the Chinese Dream, I will advise you, not to read the following article, you may end up confused.

Post-script: The People's Liberation Daily, the PLA publication has gone a step further in praising the Dream. 
The Daily said that the Chinese Dream "is like seeing a ship's mast in the sea, like seeing the radiant sun rise in the east". 
The Editor added: "It is the dogma of my belief, the cosmic truth. ...The dream is more important than anything." 
The Chinese Army is told: "Belief is like water that carries the ship; belief is like wind that sustains the wings."
It is rare for the Chinese Army to have glimpses of the 'cosmic truth'. 
The 'cosmic' experience must have occurred in the Depsang Plains, near Daulat Beg Oldi in the altitude of Ladakh. The Indian jawans did not see the 'cosmic truth', it was too cold for them.

Beijing's increasingly heavy-handed response to maintain stability
May 22, 2013
South China Morning Post
Chang Ping says two recent heavy-handed displays of power to quell relatively minor protests show the authorities are ramping up efforts to maintain stability, and would not hesitate to quash any sign of dissent
Before the Wenchuan earthquake in 2008, the most serious public incident in Chengdu was the protest against the setting up of a petrochemical plant in the suburbs of Pengzhou city. People answered blog calls and gathered "for a peaceful stroll" on May 4. That followed a number of anti-pollution protests in Xiamen.
A large number of police officers were on hand at the protest site, dispersing any passers-by who looked likely to linger for an assembly. City authorities and businesses also called meetings with employees, warning them that they would be sacked and punished if they were absent from work that day. As a result, the protest was quashed.
The Wenchuan quake happened just eight days later, killing more than 88,000 people. Despite the sadness, the people were glad that the site for the planned Pengzhou petrochemical facility had been badly damaged and the project would most likely be scrapped. Certainly, they did not expect the project to return five years later. Another "peaceful stroll" seemed to be on the cards on May 4 this year.
The difference today, from five years ago, was marked. This time, the authorities took much stronger measures. Chengdu authorities organised a drill for some 170,000 people to promote social stability. All the streets and alleys around the planned protest were packed with uniformed and plainclothes police officers as well as all manner of people ready to defend "order".
It was a weekend but schools stayed open and all private and public offices were open for overtime. Meanwhile, people buying surgical masks had to register their names first; shopkeepers were asked to report purchases. Rights activists either went "missing" or were kept in custody. I phoned a female acquaintance who had taken part in the "tofu schools" investigation after the Wenchuan quake and found that she was being watched and monitored by four policemen. This protest was over even faster than the one five years ago.
On May 3, Yuan Liya, a young woman from Anhui, plunged to her death from the multi-storey Jingwen wholesale clothing market in the Fengtai district of Beijing. Police said it was suicide.
Her family asked for surveillance videos to be checked, but police refused. Blog rumours began to circulate claiming she had jumped to her death as she tried to resist being gang raped by security guards. On May 8, protesters gathered outside the market and demanded a thorough police investigation. The response they got was the arrival of a shockingly large contingent of anti-riot police, armed officers, military vehicles and helicopters. Some people even claimed to have seen heavy artillery being delivered. It was almost like a war zone in the southern section of the capital.
A friend with a non-governmental organisation in Beijing told me she suggested they should pay attention to this gathering of civilian protesters. But before they could even decide what to do next, police had arrived at their office. The fact is that this proactive NGO is under constant surveillance and monitoring.
My conversations with some people involved in the two cases have led me to doubt several ideas currently in vogue about the authorities.
First, it is generally thought that the government authorities are plagued by internal chaos, with corruption and bureaucracy rife in their ranks, which is adversely affecting their efficiency.
This certainly seems to be the case whenever they are called on to deal with livelihood problems. But, when it comes to ensuring the safety of the ruling class, miraculously, the system works like clockwork.
For years, the public at large and academics believed that strongman politics had ended with the death of Deng Xiaoping, and that there would be no one bold enough to give the order to "fire" on protesters in the event of another June 4 incident occurring. But we must question that belief when artillery and helicopters are immediately deployed in a minor case involving the death of a young woman.
Should another June 4 occur, it seems that today there would be no intra-party struggle or moral conflict to be resolved; the gunfire might just begin sooner, and the violence be more forceful. In addition, since it became known that the Communist Party has for years been spending billions of yuan annually on efforts to maintain social stability, the media, both at home and abroad, has questioned the ability of the state to sustain this, simply in financial terms.
The fact is that with repeated crackdowns by the authorities eroding people's courage to resist, the party may not need to raise its budget that drastically to maintain stability. And when law-enforcement officers seek to maintain stability at all costs, shirking their other duties such as maintaining law and order and helping the people, what is the cost? With only this to gauge their performance, there is no proper mechanism to hold them responsible. Added to this, without scrutiny and monitoring in the court of public opinion, authorities find it all too easy to impose taxes, both directly and in other ways.
Chang Ping is a current affairs commentator writing on politics, society and culture. This commentary is translated from Chinese