Sparring in Anchorage - Praising Xi for Reform - Revenue & Bond Data - 2035 Outline Assessment - HK Policy Defense

Here’s a breakdown of the key reports and pieces from the People’s Daily’s March 19, 2021, edition. I’ve also done a bit of a take from what’s happened in Anchorage today apart from the PD coverage.

Page 1: There’s been an amplification of the focus on and mention of Xi Jinping in reports published in People’s Daily leading up to and through the NPC sessions. Today, we have a long piece about reform and opening up; it extends to take up all of Page 2. The piece seems to have two objectives. First, re-emphasise to a domestic audience, particularly cadre and officials, that economic reform remains a high priority for the central leadership. Second, talk about Xi Jinping’s personal leadership of and investment in the reform process. Basically, everything that’s been achieved is because of Xi, as per the piece. 

The gist is this: “For more than 7 years, under the personal leadership and command of General Secretary Xi Jinping, the Party Central Committee has broken through the shackles of ideology and concepts, broke through the barriers of solidified interests with unprecedented determination and strength, and promoted the realization of historical changes, systemic reshaping, and overall restructuring in many fields. We have made great historical achievements in comprehensively deepening reforms.”

Here’s more: “The blueprint for reform that was outlined one by one at that time has turned into a magnificent picture of the surging tide, thousands of sails racing...This is a profound change in ideology and theory. There is no end to emancipating the mind, and no end to reform and opening up. The reform and opening up that started more than 40 years ago was a great awakening of our party, which gave birth to our party’s great creation from theory to practice. Standing at a new historical starting point, the comprehensive deepening of reforms led by the Chinese Communists in the new era has further led this great awakening to a higher level.”

And this about the present moment: “China at this time has once again come to a historical juncture concerning its future and destiny. Although it is already the second largest economy in the world, a series of deep-seated contradictions accumulated in the process of long-term rapid economic growth continue to accumulate, old problems have been solved, and new problems have emerged. More importantly, some developing problems are no longer just economic problems. They must break through the barriers of solidifying interests in more fields and at a deeper level.”

The piece also talks about Xi’s visit to Shenzhen in October 2020, when he visited Deng Xiaoping’s statue and then talks about how Xi today is leading reform like Deng did back in the day. It tells us that the Leading Group on Comprehensively Deepening Reform meets once every two months and that Xi’s exercise of power on economic policy has come through this group.

Next, a report based on data from China’s Ministry of Finance. It says that fiscal revenue for January and February rose 18.7 percent year on year, totalling to 4.18 trillion yuan (about $644.47 billion). The national fiscal expenditure from January to February this year was 3.55 trillion yuan, an increase of 10.5% year-on-year. 

On local government bonds, the data show that of the planned 3.65 trillion yuan in special bonds for local governments planned for the year, so far 418.1 billion yuan worth of bonds have been issued. These are all for refinancing. The piece adds that “at the beginning of March, the Ministry of Finance has issued some new special bond quotas of 1.770 billion yuan in advance in accordance with the procedures, and requested local governments to correspond the special bond quotas to specific projects as soon as possible.”

Page 3: There’s a lot of foreign policy-related pieces on the page, with China-US relations being central to this. Let’s begin with comments by China’s ambassador to the US, Cui Tiankai’s comments ahead of the Anchorage meeting, and I’ll intersperse PD’s coverage with what’s just been happening at Anchorage. Clearly, Cui he had little expectation of outcome from what he said was a “high-level strategic dialogue.”

Here are excerpts:

“Cui Tiankai said that the most basic and basic prerequisite for dialogue and communication between any countries is that both parties should have the spirit of equality and mutual respect. He emphasized that China has no room for compromise and retreat when it comes to China's core interests of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national unification. This is also the attitude that China will make clear in this meeting.”

“Cui Tiankai said that China does not expect a single dialogue to solve all the problems between China and the United States, so it does not have high expectations or illusions about this dialogue. He hoped that through this dialogue, the two sides could start a process of candid, constructive and rational dialogue and communication. If this can be achieved, this dialogue will be successful.”

He also went on to raise questions about the US’s credibility with its allies and team Biden’s strategy of working from a position of strength. I guess one does this when one is anxious about things actually working.

Similar sentiments were echoed by the foreign ministry’s Zhao Lijian yesterday, which are covered in PD (English version). He talked about the US’ 2+2 dialogues on East Asia, the sanctions of PRC and HK officials and added that:

“It indeed invites some serious thoughts that right before the opening of the high-level strategic dialogue, the US side has chosen to speak and act in ways that gravely disappoint China. The US side proposed to have this dialogue with China, and China accepted this proposal, a constructive gesture showing our sincerity towards resuming China-US dialogue and exchange and improving and developing China-US relations. The Chinese side will make clear its positions and concerns on relevant issues during this dialogue. All topics that can be discussed are on the table. On issues that bear on China's sovereignty, security and core interests, no one shall expect China to make any compromise or trade-offs. China is determined and resolute in safeguarding its core interests.”

He further added, “the US should work with China and enter into talks with China with a sincere and constructive attitude. It is a fool's errand that serves no purpose at all to try to set the tempo for the dialogue through ‘megaphone diplomacy’, or to gang up on China.” 

Anyway, based on the developments in Anchorage, it doesn’t seem like things have gone off well at all. The meeting between the US and Chinese delegations began a few hours ago, with incredible scenes of public sparring. Reports inform that both sides got into extended opening remarks after China’s Yang Jiechi extended his initial comments delivered before the press to some 15 minutes, something that the American side said was a violation of agreed terms and protocol. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken then asked the press to stay back, as he responded to those comments. Here’s some details from Reuters’ report:

“‘We will...discuss our deep concerns with actions by China, including in Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, cyber attacks on the United States, economic coercion of our allies,’ Blinken said in blunt public remarks. ‘Each of these actions threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability,’ he said. Yang responded with a 15-minute speech in Chinese while the U.S. side awaited translation, lashing out about what he said was the United States’ struggling democracy, poor treatment of minorities, and criticizing its foreign and trade policies. ‘The United States uses its military force and financial hegemony to carry out long arm jurisdiction and suppress other countries,’ Yang said. ‘It abuses so-called notions of national security to obstruct normal trade exchanges, and incite some countries to attack China,’ he added. ‘Let me say here that in front of the Chinese side, the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength,’ Yang said. ‘...the U.S. side was not even qualified to say such things, even 20 years or 30 years back, because this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people…’”

If you are interested, here’s the full video of what went down during this bit of the Anchorage meeting.

It’s not a coincidence amid all this that the Russian Foreign Minister is set to visit China soon. PD reports that Sergei Lavrov will be traveling to Beijing on March 22.

Two more pieces on the page, both focussing on human rights. First, a short report about Venezuela, Syria, and Belarus criticising the US’ human rights record at the UNHRC. Second, a short report about a side event organised by the Chinese Society for Human Rights Studies at the UNHRC meeting. This focussed on China’s poverty alleviation as a human rights success and South-South cooperation in this regard.

Page 4: Two pieces to note here. First, remarks by the spokesperson of the NPC’s Standing Committee, criticising US sanctioning of 14 NPC vice-chairman in connection with changes to HK’s electoral system. Second, a report on the Central Propaganda Group on Party History Study and Education’s meetings in Shanxi and Chongqing. 

Page 9: On the theory page today, there are a couple of pieces to note. First, Ma Jiantang from the Development Research Center of the State Council writes about the National Economic and Social Development and the Outline of Long-Term Goals for 2035. The piece essentially emphasises the plan’s broad objectives. It talks about China is still in a period of “strategic opportunity” despite the “turbulent” changes that are taking place in the world. It talks about the need to adhere to the “new development concept.”

On security, Ma writes that:

“The Outline attaches great importance to safe development and has a special chapter on ‘Coordinated development and safe construction of a higher level of safe China’, emphasizing the need to ‘Insist on overall national security.’ The concept of ‘putting security development into all fields and the whole process of national development’, and making specific arrangements for strengthening the national security system and capacity building, strengthening national economic security, comprehensively improving public security capabilities, and maintaining social stability and security.”

On tech, he explains that: “The Outline puts innovation at the core of the overall national development, emphasizes ‘taking scientific and technological self-reliance and self-reliance as the strategic support of national development’, and puts forward ‘the development of an action plan to strengthen the country through science and technology, and improve the new national system under the conditions of the socialist market economy. Tackling tough key core technologies to improve the overall efficiency of the innovation chain’.”

Second, Xie Ru, vice chairman of the Jiangxi Provincial Political Consultative Conference, writes that colleges and universities in the country should use “examples of poverty alleviation to teach ideological and political lessons will help demonstrate the strong leadership, organization and execution of the Communist Party of China, and demonstrate the selfless dedication and noble character of party members and cadres in poverty alleviation, so that young students can deeply understand China.” All of this serves three purposes according to Xie, i.e., help the youth develop an affinity with the CCP, build their confidence in the Chinese system and prepare youth for future action.

Page 16: On the international page today, there’s a long piece that basically talks about how changes to HK’s election system under the principle of patriots governing HK isn’t all that different from what happens in the West. The idea is to show that other countries also have used the same principle. Obviously, there’s tremendous false equivocation here. But let’s look at the examples that are cited.

So in the US case, the piece says: 

• “The United States has a ‘patriot’ requirement for all public officials, expressly prohibiting those who violate the obligation of allegiance from holding public office.”

• “U.S. law stipulates in the form of ‘negative list’ that anyone who supports the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution and government, or participates in a strike against the U.S. government, or participates in organizations engaged in related activities, is not allowed to hold office in the U.S. government.”

• “According to Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution, members of the U.S. Congress, the government, and all state administrative and judicial officials must swear allegiance to the U.S. Constitution.”

• “The improvement of the American electoral system is mainly led by the federal government, and specific election rules are adopted to ensure that ‘patriots’ are elected.” (I don’t see how they came to this conclusion. The piece also talks about legislation to curb foreign interference in elections.

• “In order to win the support of voters, all candidates have tried their best to show their patriotic enthusiasm during the election process. The public is very demanding on the rigor of candidates' patriotic speech.” (Again, this is a matter of public perception and not a legal requirement certified by some body.)

There’s similar stuff in the piece on the UK, Australia, Germany, France and Canada, and you get the drift of what’s being attempted.