Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Weird homes

Home is where the heart is, no matter what unusual form that home may take.  Slideshow 

Photo

The drone wars

The frontlines of America's covert drone program.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

China's new leader: harbinger of reform or another conservative?

Related Topics

1 of 4. China's then Vice-President Xi Jinping stands during a trade agreement ceremony between the two countries at Dublin Castle in Dublin, Ireland in this February 19, 2012 file photo.

Credit: Reuters/David Moir/Files

BEIJING | Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:02pm EST

BEIJING (Reuters) - When Xi Jinping became the new leader of China's Communist Party two months ago, hopes were high for reform in the giant nation. But despite what appears to be sensitive handling of a strike by journalists and a challenge to Beijing's tight control of the press, signs of change seem tentative.

Xi's commitment to reform, or lack of it, will come into sharper focus over the next few months, in particular after he officially assumes the presidency in March at a session of the National People's Congress, the country's rubber-stamp parliament.

Among the key signposts that analysts say could give Chinese citizens and global investors a sense of the new government's commitment to change: whether the resolution of a standoff at a prominent newspaper leads to an easing of press restrictions; whether the government moves quickly to address the rights of China's migrant workers; and whether Xi follows through on ending the country's notorious "re-education through labor" camps.

Xi himself has fanned expectations of change with rhetoric about "national rejuvenation," vows to crack down on corruption and a down-to-earth public style that stands in contrast to the remote, forbidding demeanor of his predecessors.

From a trip to Guangdong province akin to Deng Xiaoping's famous "southern tour" in 1992 - which re-ignited China's economic opening - to a speech calling for the rule of law in mid-December on the 30th anniversary of China's constitution, Xi has kindled hopes that he might pursue a broad swath of reforms -- economic, legal and political.

"It is evident that the new leaders want to get things done and have done things differently from previous administrations," said a source with close ties to the leaders.

But to date, for all the ostensible desire for change, Xi and the new leaders have precious little to show for it. China has one of the most regimented political systems in the world, and the writ of the Communist Party remains supreme.

At the November party congress in which Xi and his team were officially unveiled, there was talk of reform. But maintaining stability was the over-arching theme.

Xi's defenders argue that expectations of swift, significant change are premature. His prime minister, Li Keqiang, doesn't officially form a government until the parliament session in March.

For now, ambiguity prevails. "In intellectual debate, both the left and the right, conservatives and liberals, think Xi Jinping will be on their side", says Cheng Li, a China expert at the Brookings Institution.

"But in half a year, or one year, I think one group will be disappointed."

Skeptics say there are few convincing signs of even impending change.

"There is a scent of this (reform). Everyone has detected the aroma. But if you ask, is there really rain? Is there really wind? I don't think so," said Chen Ziming, an independent political commentator in Beijing.

ONE GLIMMER

Resolving the strike at the Southern Weekly newspaper in Guangdong, one of China's most respected and liberal, provided a glimmer of reform even as it was clouded in uncertainty.

The protest was against Propaganda Ministry officials who allegedly rewrote an editorial the paper had prepared that called on the government to respect the rights of individuals under China's constitution into one that praised the party.

Sources told Reuters that after the intervention of new Guangdong party secretary Hu Chunhua, the situation was resolved with an agreement from the Propaganda Ministry that it would no longer censor the paper's articles before they are published.

Some analysts believe the decision is an isolated one and holds little long-term significance. But if the agreement holds, it will be a step toward loosening what has been a suffocating censorship regime.

It is unlikely Hu acted without at least the party Politburo's tacit awareness. To what extent, if any, the Southern Weekly episode might herald a somewhat more independent press will now be scrutinized intensely.

OTHER SIGNPOSTS

There are other potential areas for change.

One is the so called "hukou" household registration system, that effectively prevents millions of China's migrant workers and their families from receiving health care and schooling in the wealthier regions where they work. Such services are only provided to people in the areas where they were registered at the time of birth.

If the central government is serious about improving the rights of migrants - to which it has long given lip service - it will at the same time have to change the way local governments now finance themselves, which is currently mainly through land sales to real estate developers.

Without creating a broader and more consistent tax base, economists say local governments will not be able to afford the extra costs associated with real hukou reform.

If the central government begins to push provinces to move on local fiscal reform, it will likely be a signal that it also may eventually get serious about change to the hukou system.

Those changes will be complex. For that reason, if Xi and Li are "serious", said University of California San Diego economist Barry Naughton, "reform in this respect has to be started right now."

The new government already appears to be moving on China's notorious re-education through labor (RETL) system, which allows police to detain people for up to four years without an open trial, in contravention of China's constitution.

Meng Jianzhu, a former minister of public security in Beijing and now the head of the political and legal committee of the National People's Congress, said recently that the NPC seeks "the end of the use of RETL."

Human rights advocates are watching closely whether the government follows through and eliminates the "re-education" system.

As long as the re-education through labor system isn't replaced by something similar, said Sophie Richardson, China Director at Human Rights Watch, "the decision would be an indisputable step towards establishing the rule of law in China."

Taken together these are straws in the wind, "subtle changes but not a coincidence," said the source with ties to the leadership. Xi's goal may be to promote moderate change while maintaining stability.

"Stability still prevails over all else," the source said.

The trick now for Xi is making sure the changes the new leadership allows aren't so subtle that few feel them, but will not risk the stability that is paramount for them.

(Editing by Bill Powell and Raju Gopalakrishnan)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
DeanMJackson wrote:
The caption reads, “China’s new leader: harbinger of reform or another conservative?”

There is no such political animal as a “conservative” or “liberal” Communist. A Communist is a Communist, as a Nazi is a Nazi. A Communist’s sole political agenda in this age is the neutralization of the United States, hence Communists will adopt disinformation policies to steer Western audiences into thinking there is such a political animal as a “liberal” Communist with a reform agenda. This fake “reform agenda” then takes on a life of its own leading to the planned for “collapse” of the Communist government. We witnessed such a disinformation operation with the fraudulent collapse of the USSR in 1991:

“Behind the impressive smokescreen of pseudo-democracy, pseudo-capitalism and pseudo-reform, this Russian-Chinese ‘cooperation-blackmail’ strategy is irreconcilably hostile to the West. Again, this is no mere presumption. It was explicitly confirmed in May 1994 to Clark Bowers, a member of an official US Republican delegation to Peking, by Mr Mo Xiusong, Vice Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, who is believed to be the highest-ranking Chinese Communist official ever to have answered questions put to him by a knowledgeable Western expert on Communism:

BOWERS: Is the long-term aim of the Chinese Communist Party still world Communism?

Mo XIUSONG: Yes, of course. That is the reason we exist.” – The Perestroika Deception (1995), by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn.

Jan 10, 2013 11:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Azza9 wrote:
@Dean
You do know what conservative means right? I’m not talking about the warped American political definition of the word either.

Essentially conservatism is a term used for a political ideology or mindset that wants to preserve the way things where (for better or worse). So if the status quo has been for a long time an environment of pure communism. Then a political party/ figure who wants to keep it that way is a conservative and a communist.

So a conservative communist in a semantic sense actually can exist. This is a world story mate and you have to assume it’s using a global context.

True fact; Australia’s conservative right wing party is called the “Liberal Party”. While your average US Republican would still consider them commie. They are essentially Australia’s Republicans, wrap thou head around that.

Moral of the story; Sometimes words are misused and start to mean different things to different groups.
Then again conservative can also mean one who wants to conserve a resource I.e Government funds, But can also alpply to you average lefty greeny hippie as they want to conserve environment.

As for the rest of your rant it made me a bit wall eyed so I didn’t quite read it well… Would an accurate summery be ‘Commies are Evil and still want to take over the world’?

Jan 11, 2013 12:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
DeanMJackson wrote:
Azza9 says, “So if the status quo has been for a long time an environment of pure communism. Then a political party/ figure who wants to keep it that way is a conservative and a communist.”

Azza9, you’re missing the point. When you read or listen to Communist officials speaking, you must translate from the Marxist terminology used. Words such as “reforms”, “liberals”, “conservatives”, “peace”, etc. have different meanings to Communists than to us in the non-Communist world.

“Peace” to a Communist means when the West is finally neutralized, because naturally that is only when peace can arrive since it is the ethical duty of Communists to achieve world domination.

Communist parties, by definition, exist to bring about the domination of the world for what they see as a noble purpose. Communists don’t believe themselves to be evil, they believe the West is holding back Marx’s Communist Commonweal from coming into existence, therefore to ensure that Marx’s vision will materialize, naturally Communists need to be in control of the political and especially the economic institutions of the world. How man Marx’s vision become a reality, Communists say, if the West is constantly sabotaging the economies of the world via their central bank manipulations, which cause endemic economic dislocations?

You see, Marx said that the Communist State would evolve out of “advanced” Capitalism. Well, if Capitalism is constantly suffering periodic dislocations thanks to the West, how can the Communist Commonweal materialize, Communist practitioners say.

Marx on the necessity of Capitalism:

“Marx sharply stresses the bad sides of capitalist production, but with equal emphasis clearly proves that this social form was necessary to develop the productive forces of society to a level which will make possible an equal development worthy of human beings for ALL members of society. All earlier forms of society were too poor for this” — Friedrich Engels, “Marx’s Capital,” Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Selected Works, Volume I, pp. 468-469.

Jan 11, 2013 1:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.