РЕАЛИЗАЦИЯ “КИТАЙСКОЙ МЕЧТЫ” В ПЕРИОД “ЭПОХИ СИ ЦЗИНЬПИНА”: ЧТО ОЖИДАТЬ РОССИИ?

Abstract

The essay explains the mode of China’s development in the last decade. It considers the basic content of fundamental Chinese political concepts, the logic of their emergence and structural content, as well as the main similarities and distinctions of two variants of the “China model” – a continental one in the People’s Republic of China and the island one in the Republic of China on Taiwan (or Taiwan, China). The parameters of the Chinese social state concepts, their characteristics and specifics are revealed. The author analyzes in details the Chinese development model and explains possibilities of its application in other societies. During the most difficult times of constructing the Chinese national state, the Communist Party of China (CPC), having passed through the period of ideological splits, inner-party prosecutions and physical destruction of dissent by means of political repressions, learned to accumulate and integrate stepwise progressive aspirations of the vast majority of the Chinese society using political concepts of “Reforms and Openness”, “Three Represents”, “Harmonious Development” and “Chinese Dream”. The process of accumulation and integration of societal interests in China gradually began to take place mostly without massive political violence, but on the basis of authoritarian model of political governance. On the island Taiwan as economically a more successful quasi-state, the alternative course of constructing an open competitive market system and democratizing political system with incrementally dismantled dominant party and formation of a multi-party system was taken. In the PRC, since 1978, the emphasis was placed on a democratic governance improvement within the dominant party with a support of the law, together with the struggle against corruption and formation of the modern welfare state of the gradually transformed authoritarianism. Xi Jinping put forward the “Chinese Dream” concept struggling with inner-party dissent on the choice of further development under the conditions of Chinese economy slowing down after the end of Deng Xiaoping era. The Deng era with his main precept – to develop “without leaning out” – ended with appearance of the alternative political leader on a different organizational platform (Bo Xilai) who caused the strongest political crisis and demanded a forced consolidation within the dominant party. The “Chinese Dream” concept was designed to help consolidate the political elite, increase authoritarian governance and focus on the ultimate goal – the “great revival of the Chinese nation”. Such developments demanded the restoration of traditional and elaboration of new party methods while Xi Jinping, the new leader of China, received the status of the “core leader” (hexin lingdao). The possibility to copy the Chinese model may be applicable to rather poor and small countries which can deliver resources to and receive from China in exchange a financial and technological help for the production of goods based on the lowcost local labor. However, even these poor countries may experience undoubted difficulties, and perhaps may not be able to reproduce the unique system based on an exclusive experience of Chinese historical development. It is difficult to reproduce this system in other countries or to reconstruct it successfully in post-Soviet states, because the legitimacy of the CPC is based on its military victory in the Civil War and 40 years’ successful experience of political leadership in economic reforming in unique historical circumstances of the period of unprecedented growth in the world economy based on liberal principles, after dissolution of the USSR and the bipolarity system. Having got under the amplifying influence of a successful Chinese economic development, authoritarian political systems in some other countries will be forced perhaps to adapt to the need of providing development in a more open economic environment, to respectively introduce the elements of a meritocracy, internal competition in political governance more corresponding to the international experience of economic and political reforming. At the same time, the probability is high that in Central Asia this process may form a partial dependence of these post-Soviet states on China. The preservation of full sovereignty in these countries is also not so obvious, neither is the Russian attitude to such an evolution of regional development.&nbsp