It's all scientific, but is it?
By Senior China Analyst Willy Wo-Lap Lam
 |
The Politburo has failed to get a good grasp of the national situation -- the basis of scientific policymaking.
Story Tools
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
|
Follow the news that matters to you. Create your own alert to be notified on topics you're interested in.
Or, visit Popular Alerts for suggestions.
|
|
HONG KONG, China (CNN) -- The 15-month-old administration of President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao is staking its reputation on the success of a brand-new "concept of scientific development."
As Wen put it in a speech to the Central Chinese Communist Party (CCP) School over the weekend, the novel approach meant "economic and social development that are comprehensive, well-coordinated and sustainable" -- as well as "development that has [the welfare of] human beings in mind."
The so-called scientific theory of development is closely linked to the now-famous "five syntheses and coordination" unveiled by Hu and Wen at a major CCP Central Committee meeting last October.
This was a reference to well-balanced development between cities and villages; between different regions; between economic growth and social benefits; between man and nature; and between domestic growth and the open-door policy.
In particular, as Wen, deemed "the people's premier," has reiterated, Beijing must ensure the 900 million peasants -- as well as disadvantaged sectors such as the urban jobless -- do not feel left behind in the country's modernization drive.
A key aspect of "scientific development" is to afford the villages as well as the rural central and western provinces opportunities to close the gap with the coastal cities.
While addressing the Central CCP School last week, Vice President Zeng Qinghong criticized certain cadres' obsession with mere GDP growth.
Zeng argued that "we must use a scientific spirit and a scientific methodology" to look at economic growth and national progress.
In other words, while measuring China's wealth, "software elements" such as educational standards, public health, and respect for the law must be given as much weight as increases in manufacturing and exports.
Before assessing this fresh approach to modernization, it is important to note that the Hu-Wen team's policy orientations are a reaction against the aberrations of ex-president Jiang Zemin and ex-premier Zhu Rongji.
Firstly, both Jiang and Zhu, who have close ties to Shanghai, put too much resources and emphasis on the Gold Coast.
Secondly, since there were practically no spokesmen of rural China within the old leadership, the agricultural sector as well as western provinces were given the short shift.
Upon retiring from the cabinet last year, the usually arrogant Zhu admitted his biggest mistake was neglecting the peasants' welfare.
And the Hu-Wen leadership's new-found interest in "developmental software" such as education, public health and the environment has been reinforced by the nation's near-disastrous brush with the SARS and avian-flu epidemics the past year.
However, the big question remains: How scientific are the Fourth-Generation leadership's outlook and game plan?
A key to President Hu's statecraft is that even without the trappings of Western-style politics such as multi-party and parliamentary democracy, the CCP leadership can still get it right regarding economic and social policies.
In a Politburo meeting last July, Hu underscored the imperative of "observing the world, China and the CCP under the guidance of scientific theory."
The president also indicated that the scientific spirit would prod cadres into "making breakthroughs in theory, institutions, science and technology as well as culture."
One way that the Hu-Wen team is promoting scientific decision-making is to pick the brains of think tanks and senior academics and professionals.
For example, in the first year after Hu came to power, the Politburo and the State Council organized 12 seminars where professors and experts from different fields expatiated on areas ranging from law and history to agriculture and technology.
And suggestions from the academics ranging from augmenting rural income to whittling down "administrative detention and punishment" have been adopted.
Good grasp?
|
China has officially 100 million rural looking for emplyoment in cities.
|
It cannot be said, however, that the Politburo has a good grasp of the national situation, the basis of scientific policymaking.
As both Zhu and Wen admitted, local-level cadres routinely file embellished reports to Beijing to earn promotions.
Owing to tight censorship of the press and the Web sites, bold souls who dare tell Beijing the truth such as famed Internet essayist Du Daobin are often behind bars.
And there is ample evidence that heavy political and ideological baggage is weighing on the scientific spirit.
Top-level decision-making -- and distribution of resources -- is skewed in favor of powerful interest blocs such as the People's Liberation Army, which has a lopsidedly large share of CCP leadership slots.
Workers and farmers, however, have few representatives at the top; nor are they allowed to form organizations such as trade unions.
Moreover, the Hu-led Politburo has felt duty-bound to pay homage to the contributions former party and state chiefs Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin had made to a "scientific" theory of economic and social advancement.
Thus, Premier Wen stressed last week that "the scientific strategy of development is in line with the important views" on the subject laid down by the three CCP titans.
While Deng was instrumental in shepherding the economy down the semi-capitalist road, the contributions of Jiang, and in particular, Chairman Mao, were most dubious.
Mao's influence on the economy was disastrous. And at least in the first three or four years after assuming power in 1989, Jiang rolled back many of Deng's reforms.
As the intellectuals of the May Fourth (1919) Movement indicated, China can't go very far down the scientific path in the absence of democracy.
