“The next five years will be crucial,” Xi Jinping said Sunday, opening the 20th National Congress with a lengthy speech before a captive audience of thousands in the Great Hall of the People.
Scores of delegates, military personnel and Party functionaries arranged in neat rows were piously attentive. “The rejuvenation of the Chinese nation is now on an irreversible historical course,” Xi declared.
Xi’s grip on power is likewise on an “irreversible historical course.” Stripped of the pomp, the proceedings double as an elaborate coronation ceremony, during which Xi will (effectively) declare himself emperor. I realize that’s an impolite way to convey the gravity of the congress, but I’ll be forgiven. The idea that Xi is “receiving” a precedent-breaking third five-year term is farcical. Xi is conferring it upon himself, and unless he nods to a successor, the implication is clear enough. As one would-be US strongman famously put it, “I called him king. And he liked that.”
Xi spent nearly two hours Sunday regaling the room, his country and the world with what amounted to a forceful reiteration of his own policies on everything from Taiwan to technology to the economy to the military to pandemic containment. Amusingly, at one hour and 45 minutes, Xi’s mostly expressionless harangue was actually shorter than some experts expected.
There was no indication that China is prepared to soften the country’s zero tolerance stance on COVID, which Xi credited with “tremendously encouraging achievements in both epidemic response and economic and social development.” That depends on your definition of “achievements.” Xi’s quixotic approach to eradicating a virus with no known cure “achieved” a deep economic slowdown in the second quarter (figure below).
Data due this week is expected to show the economy rebounded in the third quarter. Key activity figures for September are due as well. With (more) apologies for ignoring decorum, you can write the numbers off as managed. This is among the most politically sensitive weeks in decades for China. The data will reflect that.
“We put the people and their lives above all else,” Xi went on to say, of COVID. “We have protected the people’s health and safety to the greatest extent possible.”
His remarks on technology will likely be the subject of intense debate in market circles, coming as they did on the heels of new US export restrictions aimed at impeding China’s ability to make advancements in AI and supercomputing.
China won’t just persevere, Xi said, it’ll win. “We will gather strength and carry out original scientific and technological research, and resolutely win the battle in key core technologies,” he insisted, emphasizing “self-reliance” in tech and pledging to accelerate “a number of major national projects.” The state (as opposed to the private sector) will lead such efforts, Xi appeared to suggest.
On Taiwan, China would prefer a “peaceful reunification,” but if not… well, that’s fine too, apparently. “We will never promise to abandon using armed force, and reserve the option of adopting any necessary measures,” he said. He was very specific about who his remarks were intended for: “This is directed solely at interference by outside forces and a few separatists seeking Taiwan independence.”
Xi is playing the long game. He’ll wait and he’ll wait some more. “Strategic patience” is China’s answer to the US’s “strategic ambiguity,” which, I’d remind readers, is becoming less ambiguous all the time. Xi was unequivocal on how this situation will ultimately be resolved, though, even as he didn’t provide a timetable. “The wheels of history are rolling on towards China’s reunification,” he said. “The complete reunification of our country must be realized.”
A spokesperson for Taiwan’s presidency responded. “We firmly reject ‘one country, two systems,'” Chang Tun-han said Sunday, citing public opinion on the island. That’s handy, because it’s not obvious that Xi is even interested in “one country, two systems” when it comes to Taiwan. That’s for Hong Kong and Macau. With Taiwan, it may be “one country, one system.”
Speaking of Hong Kong, Xi is pleased. “In the face of turbulent developments in Hong Kong, the central government exercised its overall jurisdiction [and] ensured governance by patriots,” he said. “Order has been restored.”
His remarks on the military left little doubt about the Party’s resolve. Xi vowed to “intensify military training under combat conditions across the board.” Innovation will be prioritized, and the PLA will “increase the proportion of forces with new combat capabilities.” Theory, personnel and weapons will all be “modernized faster.” In all cases, the PLA will “safeguard China’s dignity and core interests.” There was no mention of Ukraine.
As for “common prosperity,” the sometimes nebulous catch-all for Xi’s domestic agenda which has served various purposes, including the justification of a crackdown on China’s largest tech companies, Xi stuck assiduously to talking points around income distribution. Some of them sounded fine. “We will promote equality of opportunity, increase the prosperity of low-income workers and expand the size of the middle class,” he said. But then, in the very next breath: “We will keep the means of accumulating wealth well regulated.” I’d note that “well regulated” means something different in Xi’s China than it does in other nations where politicians are working to ameliorate extreme income inequality.
If there was one overarching takeaway from Xi’s crucial speech, it was that China is unswerving, undeterred and unbowed. In every conceivable context. Xi gave no indication that he might one day cede power.
Making strategic decisions that put your shareholders at risk is fine. That’s the basis of a capitalist system. But putting your nation at risk as well is unconsciable. Do Americans now need to go to war to defend decisions by Apple, AMD & Qualcom to outsource all of their logic chip needs to Taiwan?
The vaunted “Silicon Shield” is fully based upon the notion that American citizens are ready to confront China to ensure their access to iPhones. Well played by Taipei!
Ultimately, I think, the silicon shield is imaginary. It does not require much imagination to consider moves Xi might make through less direct actions to impose itself on Taiwan’s freedom and limited defensive capacity. From the US perspective, I believe the risk surrounding Taiwan is far too substantial. I do not believe Xi’s China will merely wait them out.
More and more every day, the new and evolving world and the evolving China reflect likenesses to the old. Mao and Chiang Kai-shek are not such distant memories.
If I were Xi, I would consider using the youth and technology available in my young military to impose a blockade on Taiwan. They are not far from enabling such a capability. Ships and airplanes flying around the island, combined with a lot of harsh and threatening words to anyone who would come to Taiwan’s aid would push the point of the gambit and change the landscape of the current state of affairs. The US, or any other sympathetic and interested country, would have to pause and consider a confrontation before making any moves.
“The complete reunification of our country must be realized.” Who does that sound like? I am surprised that he has not invaded Taiwan why the US is tied up with Ukraine.
He’s not an idiot. He’ll wait for the stars to align, just like he did in Hong Kong. And it won’t be naked insanity accompanied by unhinged pseudo-religious, tortured historiography (à la Putin). It’ll be opportunistic and calculated and carried out from what he (or a successor) firmly believes is a position of strength, and likely under some superficially plausible excuse. Our frame of reference is entirely different from Xi’s. 100 years isn’t a long time for China. I’m sure Xi would be fine with it if someone from the future traveled back in time and told him that the optimal window for reunification didn’t open until 75 years after his reign.
I shared a response to Derek. It differs from your view. I agree he’s not an idiot, and that the Chinese are capable of a lot of patience. But Xi seems to me to see himself as a form of the “great and powerful” Oz. I think he might consider other options as they develop. His military is only going to grow larger.
Through all of the Formosa History it has been under Chinese control at different points in history but it has never really been China.
This is the same as Putin‘s Russian history.
If it ever has been then it always is.
derek: Having visited there four years ago, I can say that Taiwan deserves to be defended as a vibrant democracy of people who have never been ruled by the CCP and do not wish to lose their independence. Many in Taiwan wish to strengthen cultural and economic ties with Japan and the US.
joesailboat: “Through all of the Formosa History it has been under Chinese control” Bullpucky. Japan ruled Taiwan from 1895 until 1945; there was no “Chinese control” during that time. Since 1945 Taiwan has been independent of CCP control. Tainan is Taiwan’s oldest urban area; it was initially established by the Dutch East India Company and is commonly known as the “Capital City” because it was the capital of Taiwan for over 200 years. (Coffin (or coffin bread, coffin board) is a Tainan speciality; I tried it in the shop where it was created.)
Misquoted
Look up the ethnic breakdown of Taiwan’s population. Less than 10% are native Taiwanese. The remainder are descendents of those who fled the mainland in 1949.
When I first visited there around 1985, there were still some native old timers who spoke bitterly of the violent and vicious way the arrogant mainlanders took over the island. There were and still are many who spoke well of the pre-war occupation of the island. Contrast that to the attitudes in the Koreas.
Edit: the pre-war occupation by Japan
joesailboat: What does “Through all of the Formosa History it has been under Chinese control at different points in history” actually mean? It is poorly worded. Your statements “all of the Formosa History” and “at different points in history” contradict one another. Having been to Taiwan as a guest of one of its premier academic centers and visiting several cities, I learned that most people feel connected with Japan, the US, southeast Asia and largely unconnected with China.
My favorite Econ professor in college was a native Chinese who graduated from the Catholic University in Peking in the mid- 1940s. When Mao forced the evacuation of Chinese who valued their freedom and escaped to Formosa under General Chaing Kai-Shek to form what they called the Republic of China established as the entity we call Taiwan today. My professor, although only in his 20s was named as the first director of the new country’s central bank. As the new government took shape he was replaced by a more experienced leader but he remained in the system until he decided to move to the US and earn a PhD. He was a CPA and an expert in international economics. I got to hear many tales of those early days and I only hope that China does not try to take the republic by force, as Putin has with the Ukraine. The current citizens will resist and much of value will be lost to the world, as it is now in the Ukraine.
The evacuation of those who wanted to continue their “freedom” to squeeze every last penny out of the already impoverished population.
Look at Chiang’s record – he was a warlord helped along by triads such as Big Eared Tu and such. Luce and the right-wing US establishment built him up as some freedom-loving Saint. That was so far from reality.
There was no democracy on the island until he and his brother died.
Based upon how easily the world looked the other way when China decided to accelerate its integration of Hong Kong (ahead of the previously agreed upon timeline); it is hard to imagine that the western world would be willing to go to war on behalf of democracy/the people of Taiwan.
However, from an economic perspective, the US is greedy and will want to protect the economic benefits that accrue to the US from Taiwan. At some point, however, keeping all “eggs in the Taiwan/Chinese basket” will result in excessive vulnerability to our economy- so decentralizing manufacturing will likely happen, even if it is inflationary.
One of the greatest risk to the US is that the Chinese ignore international intellectual property rights and steal our technology. I was extremely happy to read that Biden has imposed restrictions on selling semi conductors and chip making equipment to China. This can definitely slow the inevitable and buy valuable time to allow US manufacturing to partially relocate.
This trend is already in place:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/russellflannery/2022/10/05/taiwan-businesses-support-reduction-in-economic-ties-with-mainland–csis-survey/amp/
I have no idea how Xi will deal with China’s high unemployment rate among highly educated youth, but it seems that Xi is attempting to redirect the anger and frustration against Taiwan. It won’t take long to figure out if the Chinese obediently follow Xi- but that seems to be in their nature.
When Chaing Kai-Shek came to Taiwan, he ordered the execution of many ordinary citizens who were associated with Japan, especially educated people who had studied in Japan. Many (most?) Taiwanese citizens hated (& hate) Chaing Kai-Shek. Once he and his son were gone, the people of the country adopted democracy over time. My personal opinion is that the KMT is not loyal to the people of Taiwan and might accept rule by Beijing but the DPP represents the majority of the people of Taiwan.
It’s “splendid” to have the freedom to quibble about why violent invasion of a neighbor is really “historically okay” or to insinuate that US greed is the wrong reason to do the right thing.
Xi is a dictator and his hardline (hong kong, covid, etc) policies, on top of the overhangs from previous one-child and real estate bubble mistakes, will create many internal problems that, like Putin (declining oil oligarch in a kleptocracy), will require more and more extreme external scapegoats.
Didn’t we hear much the same arguments from Hitler when he was addressing the crowds while consolidating his power in Germany.