Policy Alert #160 | March 8, 2018

The Communist Party of China (CPC) presented its recommendations for several substantive amendments to the country’s constitution to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress at the end of February 2018. Most notably, the term limits for the country’s president and vice-president were removed, leading many–both domestically and abroad–to question President Xi Jinping’s future career plans. The foreign press emphasized reports that Chinese censors were cracking down on criticism of the changes on online platforms and speculated that the Chinese press purposefully attempted to downplay the move. Although the governments of the Rising Powers have kept mum on the subject, their presses have not.

CHINA

• The official state-run People’s Daily has been busily pushing for domestic support for the proposal in its editorials over the last week. One called for “the Chinese people to closely unite around the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at the core, be guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, make new achievements and victories, and march toward the great goal of national rejuvenation.” Another editorial claimed that, “It has been proved [sic] over history that a leadership structure in which the top leader of China simultaneously serves as the President, the head of the Party, and the commander-in-chief of the military is an advantageous and adoptable strategy.” In explaining that “proper amendments” to the constitution are “necessary,” the People’s Daily contextualized the changes as part of an overall commitment to improving China: “The proposed amendments are of profound significance to fully implementing the spirit of the 19th CPC National Congress and the Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, deepening the law-based and Constitution-based governance, upholding and developing socialism with Chinese characteristics on the track of rule of law, and extensively mobilizing and organizing the people of all ethnic groups to strive for great victory of socialism with Chinese characteristics.” Additionally, it characterized Xi’s contribution to the constitution as a “guarantee that China will finish the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects by 2020, basically achieve modernization by 2035, and grow into a great modern socialist country in every dimension by mid-21st century.” The inclusion of specific year benchmarks may be a way to quell rumors that Xi plans on serving as president for life, which other Chinese publications have also dismissed or down-played.
• Many editorials were vague in their glowing support for the amendments more generally, or focused on bolstering Xi’s image by emphasizing the addition of his “Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” to the constitution. China Daily contributor Xuan Li’s piece fell into the latter category, describing Xi’s piece as “the latest development of Marxism in China, is the crystallization of the collective wisdom of the Party and Chinese people through practices.” A China Daily editorial praised “structural changes” to the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese government, but made no specific mention of the elimination of presidential term limits. A Global Times editorial noted that the changes were facilitated by the fact that “absolute authority has been established by the CPC Central Committee with Xi Jinping at the core,” but did not expressly mention the presidential term limit change.
• The nationalist Global Times focused its efforts on responding to critical foreign media response. One took aim at the privilege afforded to Western-style democracy: “[A]lthough China has stunning economic might, it has not yet become a leading power in terms of ideology and information. The most influential value system in the world now is the Western value system established by the US and Europe. It has shaped and affected quite a few Chinese people’s mind-sets. But some key parts of the Western value system are collapsing. Democracy, which has been explored and practiced by Western societies for hundreds of years, is ulcerating.” Another editorial by the Global Times described the attacks on the amendments as a symptom of fragile egos abroad: “[T]he rise of China has reached a critical point where some Westerners cannot psychologically bear it any longer. They wish to see misfortune befall the country. Even if it might hurt their own interests, they are willing to see China crumble first. Such hysteria by some people in the West will subtly influence the way their countries interact with China. It will increase the risks Beijing faces while emerging, and complicate communication between Chinese society and the outside world.”
• The independent South China Morning Post discouraged comparisons between Mao and Xi: “There is a difference between one-man rule of nearly a fifth of humanity in a closed society, and one-man rule of an outward-looking, rising global economic and military superpower. […]Xi will be taking everything on his shoulders in a nation and a world that is unrecognisable compared with Mao’s times. When things go wrong, as they do from time to time, he will have to bear the responsibility.”
• Yujing Lu, a staff writer for the SCMP, set the announcement against the longer terms served leaders in democratic countries abroad, such as Japan and Germany, while her colleague, Nectar Gan, surveyed foreign “China watchers” on their reactions and interpretations of Xi’s move.

INDIA

• Left-leaning The Hindu lamented that “Mr. Xi risks taking China back to the days of personality cults, internal power struggles and possibly chaotic successions.”
• The liberal Indian Express warned that China’s neighbors need to prepare for aggressive posturing in the region: “Xi’s consolidation of power is […] symptomatic of a structural weakness. By setting term limits under Deng, the CPC tried to send out the message that China’s politics, though not liberal or democratic, was nonetheless governed by structures. The edifice that was built by Mao, the argument went, did not need great leaders to flourish. For India, which had to deal with an aggressive China in Doklam, and manoeuvre against its rising influence in South Asia, the lack of checks and balances on Xi Jinping is a worrying sign.”
• The Pioneer, which supports Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP party, framed the announcement in terms of India’s own political system. “[..I]n India, where there is no limit to the terms a Prime Minister can serve but there is a vibrant if fractious democratic tradition extant Narendra Modi, criticized for being ‘dictatorial’, will have to pull out all the stops to win again in 2019, with the possibility of a non-Modi face to head a BJP-led coalition if the party falls short being discussed openly. China rules, anyone?”
• A Times of India editorial speculated about the connection between China’s political system and its preference in trade partners, and what that means for India’s choices in trade and security partnerships. “Perhaps China finds large democracies like India threatening and in need of restraint, while semi-autocracies like Pakistan look more manageable. If that’s how the cookie crumbles, India will have to coordinate more with the US, Japan and Western democracies. In the battle of political ideas, lines may get sharply drawn as Xi consolidates power in his hands. India will not be able to sit that one out with its erstwhile ‘non-aligned’ template.”
• In an op-ed, Senior Assistant Editor of the Economic Times Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury theorized that “[a] stronger Xi […] suggests that China may not shy away from displaying its muscular foreign and defence policy in either Indo-Pacific or Indian Ocean Region or along the Line of Actual Control, posing challenges to India’s security.” Chaudhury expressed concern with the possibility of strengthened ties between China and Pakistan, as well as China “pushing deeper” into neighboring Bhutan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.
• The pro-BJP The Pioneer featured an article by India-based French analyst Claude Arpi speculating that the decision to remove term limits was less motivated by Xi’s own political ambitions than by an internal struggle to maintain stability: “Though not always apparent, the Chinese state is terribly instable; the change from a totalitarian to a quasi dictatorship should be seen in this perspective.”
• The FirstPost, meanwhile, sampled reactions in editorials of India’s neighbors to assess the region’s feelings on the matter.

JAPAN

• The progressive Asahi Shimbun noted that domestic support for a “strong-man” model in China may have, in fact, been the result of recent dramas within Western democracies: “Unfortunately, many Western countries have long been plagued by dysfunction of politics and other problems. The United States has provided a prominent example of how a democratically elected leader can cause confusion.This grim reality has led to a proliferation of views praising the Chinese system of governing in Chinese media.” The Asahi called on Chinese leadership to nevertheless protect its citizens civil rights: “China’s leaders should pursue politics based on self-restraint in exercising their ruling power and an agenda designed to expand the citizens’ rights to speak and vote while seeking to gradually form a consensus.”
• The left-leaning Mainichi expressed skepticism that the “national oversight panel” established as part of the amendments to the Chinese constitution would be able to act as a check on “absolute power” that “will certainly become corrupt in the end.” The Mainichi warned that “If harmful effects of iron-fist rule were to appear not only in China’s domestic affairs but also in its diplomatic policy, it would intensify the country’s friction with Japan and the United States as well as its neighboring countries.”
• The Japan Times was equally doubtful in Xi’s ability to govern “a country of China’s size.” “Time will tell, but Japan and other governments must prepare to deal with a system of centralized power and a leader full of self-confidence,” the Times urged.
• “Xi’s objective is to make China a ‘great power’ on par with the United States by the middle of this century,” the conservative Yomiuri Shimbun speculated. “It is essential for neighboring countries, including Japan, to keep an eye on China’s moves that could escalate the regional tension.”
• The right-wing paper Sankei called for increased cooperation between countries that share the democratic principles enshrined in the US-Japan Alliance to protect the peace and security of the region to counter any threats posed by Xi’s expanded power.

SOUTH KOREA

• In its editorial, the conservative Dong-A Ilbo compared Xi to Yuan Shikai, a warlord appointed as Imperial Resident of Seoul by the Qing government and the first–and short lived–president of the Republic of China, whose name was one of many search terms blocked by Chinese censors following the constitution: “Yuan Shikai was notorious for his arrogance and tyranny in the late Joseon Dynasty. It is worrisome that if his specter is revived in the 21st century with Xi Jinping’s ascension to the throne, it might bring disaster to the Korean people once again.”
• JoongAng Ilbo, another conservative paper, suggested that recent Chinese violations of Korean airspace were linked to Xi’s consolidation of power. “China’s ramped-up aggression comes amid suspicion of Chinese President Xi Jinping trying to stretch his rule beyond 10 years. […] Xi has promised to build the most powerful military by 2050. This military buildup could raise tension in the region. We must respond boldly and keep a close watch on Beijing to see its intentions and build resilience against Chinese ascension,” the paper asserted.
• Seo Kyung-Ho, an editorial writer at JoongAng Ilbo, expressed his concern that “South Korea increasingly finds itself surrounded by strongmen going against the global trend of democracy,” noting that Xi joins Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il.
• The Korea Times meanwhile featured a guest op-ed by Hong Kong journalist Frank Ching who explained the threat of uncertainty the constitutional amendment has introduced, noting that the term-limits “provided greater predictability and meant that no one had to die for there to be a change in leadership. By abolishing term limits, the party is resurrecting the problem of succession. One day, Xi will be replaced. But how will that happen? Who will replace him?”

RUSSIA

• In his article for nationalist Pravda Report, Russian-American contributor Andre Vltchek claimed “Chinese democracy is alive and well” even if it does not fit a “Western multi-party/corporate model”: “There is no other country on Earth, which is changing lives of its ordinary people for better, so rapidly and with such determination. And it is happening because of the system, because of the Communist Party’s leadership, and because of the NPC [National People’s Congress]. Some people ask me: ‘Do you think China’s democracy, or the political system of Party’s leadership, and NPC can improve people’s livelihood?’ I always answer: ‘Not only they can, but they do; day by day, year by year!’”
• Government-funded RT coverage of the announcement was framed around the backlash against US President Donald Trump’s “Maybe we’ll give it a shot” comment. RT also explained that in China, the press was emphasizing that the expansion does not necessarily mean Xi will buck the tradition of retiring at 68.

BRAZIL

• Turning Xi Jinping into an emperor brings a huge challenge for Brazil and the rest of the Western countries, the newspaper Folha de Sao Paulo asserted. According to its article, the latest decision of the Communist Party of China to propose the removal of the term limit for president expresses a movement that has been under development over recent years and gives Beijing’s highest office an imperial character.  
• The left-oriented Carta Capital emphasized that the exaltation of the president Xi Jinping was the main outcome of the Party Congress held in October of 2017. The editorial added that Xi is considered the most important Chinese leader in recent decades and that there is no one who could be pointed as his substitute.

RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.