Chinese Leadership

BEIJING -- Capping a highly choreographed transition of power, Xi Jinping formally assumed the Chinese presidency Thursday after a secret vote at the National People's Congress. The 59-year-old son of a former vice premier is the most successful of the many “princelings,” as they are called, who had been vying for power in the Chinese leadership. Xi was elected with an enviable margin of 2,952 votes in favor to one against at the congress. There were three abstentions. Under the Chinese political system, there is no formal inauguration.

BEIJING -- Capping a highly choreographed transition of power, Xi Jinping formally assumed the Chinese presidency Thursday after a secret vote at the National People's Congress. The 59-year-old son of a former vice premier is the most successful of the many “princelings,” as they are called, who had been vying for power in the Chinese leadership. Xi was elected with an enviable margin of 2,952 votes in favor to one against at the congress. There were three abstentions. Under the Chinese political system, there is no formal inauguration.

Our first reaction to China's cynical denial of the killings in Tian An Men Square is outrage. But we remind ourselves that the Big Lie is in the universal tradition of statecraft--some lies are just bigger than others and some liars more brazen. Still, how can the Chinese leadership possibly think it can get away with it, given the witnesses and evidence on film? By comparison, even the decision to fire on the demonstrators--the tragic and brutal reaction of autocrats fearing a threat to the state--seems "logical."

China on Thursday announced the smallest increase in its defense budget in years, in an apparent attempt to assuage international fears that its military is growing too powerful. Coming after almost two decades of double-digit increases, the relatively modest 7.5% boost in the budget, to $78 billion, also highlights the Chinese leadership's stated plan to channel funding to social programs. "China is committed to peace," said Li Zhaoxing, a spokesman for the National People's Congress, where the budget figures were released.

I find it difficult to describe the disgust I feel towards President Bush and Marlin Fitzwater, White House Press Secretary, after reading "Bush Acts to Ease Sino-U.S. Tension" (Part I, June 17). These two typical politicians want to salvage this relationship because of "America's once-flourishing commercial relationship with China." So what if the Chinese leadership has no qualms about ordering the wanton slaughter of its citizens; the U.S. feels it is more important to overlook these atrocities for the almighty buck!

To the rest of the world, the brazen openness of China's massacre of unarmed civilians in Beijing seems inexplicable. Foreign correspondents present in Beijing in those bloody pre-dawn hours of June 4 felt almost as though Chinese authorities were handing them a telephone and inviting them to phone home with news of the carnage. So far as is known, China made no effort to cut telephone or telex lines. Television film made its way out of the country. Chinese authorities made no attempt to round up or deport journalists before the military assault.

China on Thursday announced the smallest increase in its defense budget in years, in an apparent attempt to assuage international fears that its military is growing too powerful. Coming after almost two decades of double-digit increases, the relatively modest 7.5% boost in the budget, to $78 billion, also highlights the Chinese leadership's stated plan to channel funding to social programs. "China is committed to peace," said Li Zhaoxing, a spokesman for the National People's Congress, where the budget figures were released.

It is with some puzzlement that I finished reading former President Nixon's article on China, "China Policy: Revulsion Real, Reprisal Wrong" (Opinion, June 25). Like most Chinese, I have admired Nixon's farsightedness and courage in his historical decision to re-establish relations with China. But that farsightedness seems to be absent from Nixon's latest analysis of the situation in China and his proposed solution. Indeed, Nixon seems to create more confusion than clarity in his argument about the effect or lack of effect of any strong American reaction to the crisis in China.

Former Ambassador to China James R. Lilley had only a few months outside the Bush Administration to say what he really thought, and he grabbed the opportunity. Lilley stepped down as President Bush's envoy to Beijing in May and became, at least briefly, a private citizen. Two months later, in a speech at Penn State University, he issued a blistering denunciation of the Chinese leadership with whom he had been doing business for the previous two years.

This is a tale of hotlines. It is the story of how America tried in recent days to solve its deep-rooted problems with China through a phone call--and discovered that modern communications don't necessarily mean you can make any connection in Beijing. Less than two years ago, President Clinton and Chinese President Jiang Zemin stood side by side at their Washington summit meeting and announced that they had agreed to set up a presidential hotline.

Averting a diplomatic disaster, the United States says its trouble-prone pavilion at Expo 2010 should be ready for the opening May 1 of the international fair here. Jose H. Villarreal, a San Antonio lawyer tapped last summer by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to right the troubled project, said Wednesday that all but $8 million of the $61 million needed for the pavilion has now been raised from 34 corporate sponsors. "It would have been unimaginable for the United States to be just about the only country on Earth not to be represented in a global event of this size," said Villarreal, who holds the title of U.S. commissioner general for the expo that is expected to draw 70 million visitors from May to October.

The walls of Zhongnanhai, China's equivalent of the White House, are high, red and designed to keep prying eyes at bay. More than a year after Hu Jintao was named president and Wen Jiabao premier in modern China's first orderly transfer of power, many are still wondering who's in charge. The short answer, analysts say, is no one -- at least not fully.

A trio of elderly men stares out from billboards, paintings and statues, as political art across China heralds the upcoming change of leadership. The works depict the three men who, during their combined 53 years of rule over the People's Republic, watched the comings and goings of 11 American administrations.

The year 2001 ended with the Chinese leadership boasting a banner year of achievements: gaining membership in the World Trade Organization, winning the right to host the 2008 Olympics, qualifying for the World Cup soccer finals, hosting an Asia-Pacific summit. But the year also wrapped up with a series of events illustrating the reasons for China's fears about social instability.

This is a tale of hotlines. It is the story of how America tried in recent days to solve its deep-rooted problems with China through a phone call--and discovered that modern communications don't necessarily mean you can make any connection in Beijing. Less than two years ago, President Clinton and Chinese President Jiang Zemin stood side by side at their Washington summit meeting and announced that they had agreed to set up a presidential hotline.

Former Ambassador to China James R. Lilley had only a few months outside the Bush Administration to say what he really thought, and he grabbed the opportunity. Lilley stepped down as President Bush's envoy to Beijing in May and became, at least briefly, a private citizen. Two months later, in a speech at Penn State University, he issued a blistering denunciation of the Chinese leadership with whom he had been doing business for the previous two years.

An American visitor happened to be traveling through the sleepy Yangtze River port of Zhenjiang a week ago when he looked outside his bus window and saw about 1,000 students carrying banners and marching through the town. "Oppose Bureaucratism," one of the banners proclaimed. "Support the Students of Shanghai," said another.

After calling upon the troops of the People's Liberation Army to slaughter unarmed civilians, China's Communist Party leadership has set itself on a new course in which it will face a daunting, perhaps overwhelming, series of problems caused by its own fateful decision. The first and foremost obstacle will be to win over the support of a divided Chinese Communist Party and of China's own population. "They're going to be dealing with a sullen, resentful country on a permanent go-slow," observed one Western diplomat here.

Hoping to deliver forbidden news to a China muted by censorship, the L.A. Weekly has joined in an international press campaign that is trying to break through government restrictions by sending bogus copies of the official Communist newspaper via the fax machine to support the pro-democracy movement. A spokeswoman for the L.A. Weekly said the Nov. 9 issue will contain excerpts from what appears to be the Communist newspaper People's Daily, the Chinese government's official publication.

It is with some puzzlement that I finished reading former President Nixon's article on China, "China Policy: Revulsion Real, Reprisal Wrong" (Opinion, June 25). Like most Chinese, I have admired Nixon's farsightedness and courage in his historical decision to re-establish relations with China. But that farsightedness seems to be absent from Nixon's latest analysis of the situation in China and his proposed solution. Indeed, Nixon seems to create more confusion than clarity in his argument about the effect or lack of effect of any strong American reaction to the crisis in China.