Blogs For Victory

Gordon Chang takes a stab at it in Forbes:

…the riots of the last few days show just how vulnerable that Chinese state is, even in the face of apparently weak opponents. For one thing, according to one report, the disturbances came completely out of the blue for many. “There were no warning signs about the riots,” said Tang Yan, a 21-year-old drug store employee who fled rampaging Uighurs in Urumqi. “No one expected it.” What started as a silent, peaceful demonstration–over the failure of authorities to investigate the murders of Uighur factory workers in faraway Guangdong province–somehow turned into savagery in the streets of Urumqi’s capital.

The chronology of events on Sunday is unclear, but it appears the gathering became a riot when police began to beat the protesters, even girls. There are, at this moment, so many grievances against the central government and the Communist Party that almost anything can spark an insurrection. And that’s especially true when security forces overreact, as they appeared to do on Sunday…

…The Chinese regime can fail because, as we are seeing in Xinjiang, the Party is losing hearts and minds, and, as Havel suggests, a ruling organization is vulnerable when that happens. In most other parts of China, ethnic tensions are not a factor, but the Communist Party has other problems. Almost nobody believes in its ideology, and everyone can see its failings as a ruling organization. Outside of minority-inhabited areas, few actively oppose it, but few anywhere enthusiastically support it. The Party stays in place largely due to apathy, fear and a failure to imagine that China can be better.

So this is a dangerous time for the one-party state. For three decades, its primary basis of legitimacy has been the continual delivery of prosperity. In the current economic downturn, however, it has been arguing that it deserves to remain in power for other reasons. As the Party tries to change the basis of its support, it puts its future at risk.

That last bit is the most important – the sole claim to legitimacy on the part of the Chinese government is the de-facto deal struck in 1989: “leave us in power, and we’ll make you rich”. Official predictions are for 8% growth in 2009 and the word is that China is doing just peachy keen swell hunky dory no problem at all…while exports fell by 26% in May. If you believe that China’s economy is strong or that any of the figures published by the Chinese are factual, then I’ve got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. Its a house of cards, and its probably already come tumbling down – kept quiet by the determination of the Chinese authorities to hide the bad news combined with a strong desire by Western institutions heavily invested in China to keep up the pretense that their Chinese assets are still valuable. I don’t quite view things as the author does – or, perhaps, I’m just take a step further back.

The sight of one of your countrymen being savaged by a hated, foreign oppressor is an excellent spark to civil unrest, but my view always is that people who feel their basic needs are cared for will not revolt. The importation of Han Chinese in to Xinjiang which is close to making the Uighurs a minority in their own land isn’t likely being done at all fairly. I know, how do you “fairly” destroy a society – well, of course, you don’t. But the “unfair” part of this is that the Hans are likely taking the best jobs and the best places to live – with, to be sure, provision made for the locals. But now that the global economy is imploding and China’s economy teeters on the verge of complete meltdown, I’ll bet there are far less jobs in Xinjiang than there used to be…and the people keeping them are likely to be Han. And thus you’ve got Uighurs about who have nothing to lose and who start a fight, which results in an over-reaction, which results in a nearly revolutionary situation spreading like wildfire.

This is all supposition on my part – but supposition based upon a clear knowledge of the way these things have worked throughout history. The “social contract” has broken down in Xinjiang – the Chinese government is no longer able to deliver the goods…and the goods are naturally being withheld from the outlying areas first in order that Peking and the major Chinese coastal cities (where all those prying foreigners live) are spared any great impoverishment and resultant political instability. Curiously enough, we’re partly to blame for this – our borrowing binge is forcing China to buy more of our bonds lest the bonds they have in hand become devalued…but China isn’t really making any money, so they have to take it from somewhere…and if the Chinese apparatchik has a choice between taking it from Big Party Boss or Despised Minority, where do you think the axe will fall?

How long can China keep afloat? Naturally, the Chinese government hopes it can keep a lid on things until the economy turns around…if the economy turns around. While I still see plenty of cheer leading in business reporting, the facts remain grim and even those predicting an end to the recession at the end of this year are stating that US unemployment will go to and remain above 10% for some time. That many unemployed Americans just can’t buy a lot of Chinese exports. The race is on – will China’s cash run out or will the recession end first? If the recession ends first, then China can weather the storm…if the cash runs out, then all bets are off.