Brett Daniel Shehadey
Special Contributor for In Homeland Security
Chinese President Xi Jinping has just created a new national security body called the National Security Commission.
President Xi has already asserted control of the National Military Commission that leads the armed forces. This position was once held by predecessor Secretary-Generals of the CCP and last week took over a reform commission giving him total control of the economy. Xi now controls everything as if he was the sole emperor: the Party, the economy, the military, and the security planning environment. Even his predecessors could not boast such direct and official command.
The new National Security Commission (or National Security Council) is another attempt at mimicry; resembling a photocopy of the long established US National Security Council as well as other presidential forms of government. The NSC and the Commission closely advises the President on security matters and creates the national security strategy for the nation.
Still, the US should not be concerned, but flattered. Mimicry is a sign of endearment, not rivalry. Right?
Official Chinese interest in the Washington model was not unheard of in US national security circles. Chinese government representatives have informed the press that the Commission is focused domestically and for foreign states not to worry.
The President of the People’s Republic of China is the [first] Chairman of the Commission just like the NSC is chaired by the President of the United States of America.
It is a formal informative and advisory body on national security issues and policies.
Membership includes heads of military, intelligence and law enforcement; just like the NSC.
Minor differences are largely structural. The Commission answers to the Central Committee’s Politburo, rather than attending Congressional oversight.
Major differences, is that the China’s NSC will not be separated into a foreign a domestic security body, like the American NSC and the HSC. The Commission is being directed at the Chinese people domestically and internally. While this may be comparative of the US Homeland Security Council (HSC) in part, the implications are for greater political and national policing are grim. The targets will not include the sacred right-wingers of China’s complicated inner politics, who are the conservative Neo-Maoists, but the designated terrorists, separatists and extremists of the Party elites.
Unlike in the US, the one party faction in power will not have the legal obstacles to consolidate rule and reign. There is no systemic outlet to give any opposition a voice when abuses register against groups and peoples. It represents the darkest possible prospect for the US trend of centralizing national security even further into the national security staff and the temptation to combine the NSC with the HSC, as China is doing in one fail swoop.
The scariest sounding thing in the red world is the sound of “social governance” which is what this has officially been labeled. This will mean neutralizing liberals within China and creating the infrastructure of a genuine police state, similar to the US potential police state, without rule of law and political freedoms.
To the Chinese authorities, this is merely another centralizing effort of their larger “scientific development” concept of running society and public policy. Chinese elites see burgeoning instabilities and social competitors and the new system is intended to root out any human obstacles to these socio-political designs: many of which are good improvements in theory and principle, but are centrally planned, coerced or cleverly executed.
The concept of Socialism with Chinese characteristics is no more than a central undemocratic socialism with American characteristics. In spite of this dark path, it should be noted that the Beijing very much wants to be like Washington- not just copy it. This should put all factions that gain control of Washington on edge to the grim parallels of what could if unchecked happen here.
Many do forget that China has a reverse course in unpopular and scarred programs too; specially when they can be seen as inefficient and counterproductive. The recent closure of Mao-era political prison camps and the partial ending of the one-child policy are positive steps. China should get rewarded for be doing better by the international community and in these instances. They should continue to get bad press for the things that harm the rights and dignity of their people and will in fact turn out counterproductive.
Unfortunately, the direction that China insists on going is a highly central, paternal, command structured government. If China faces more instability now, it is likely the result of bad policies and authoritarian tendencies.
The success of Mexico’s once sole party, the PRE, is an example of how the CCP could effectively stay in business and reemerge as the dominant party of power later on with greater relevance. This would mean allowing political alternatives and free speech. The creation of a new security council will not magically solve anything. In fact, it will likely cause more problems as they find it easier to crack down on “terrorists” and “separatists” and “extremists.”
Like all nations, China does best empirically when it adheres to the Dao, rather than an imperial Confucian concoction of some Neo-Maoism. As with its massive and undisputed economic success, the less it does and the less it gets in the way, the more enjoyment, happiness, harmony and progress will be distributed among its people.
Applying this above logic to politics is not a structural recommendation but will be an eventual means to survival and progress. All alternatives to this more Daoist model of democratic governance will fail when the hardest times strikes in the over-centralized central command structure in the future; and as they always do in a tightly planned and regulated system. Giving the people money and services for social harmony- that too- will only last so long as they are prosperous. The people need to vent emotions through civil warfare in the ballots, in campaigns, rallies, slogans and elections.
Comments are closed.