China’s moment of reflection

AS THE once-in-five-year congress of the Chinese Communist Party is under way, the stress is on maintaining China’s rapid economic growth as a matter of “top priority”. At the same time, there is the promise to recalibrate the country’s economic model away from the slogan of “growth at all costs”, to make the growth process “more balanced and sustainable”. Without doubt, this will be a more responsible approach, but it is imperative that the process builds its momentum now. China’s economic growth in recent years has been a miracle of sorts, especially as it maintained a double digit rate for the past five years, the period when Hu has been at the helm. It must be noted that this growth was achieved over and above the pace set by his predecessor, the visionary Jiang Zemin, who pulled the nation’s economic pursuits out of its archaic Communist mindset, and gave them a stunningly capitalist orientation. China, thus, is playing a big role in globalisation and liberisation, hand-in-hand with the capitalists around the world. The bottomline, however, is that the people in general have benefited largely. In all fairness, China has used its economic resurgence to effectively tackle poverty. It did so by expanding industrial activities, resulting in the creation of millions of job opportunities, and boosting its exports to unbelievable levels. However, the cities have been the focal points of this hyper-activity, whereas the rural areas have received less attention, resulting in occasional eruption of tension and even public protests. Without doubt, Hu’s assertions about a more balanced and sustainable growth will, and should, aim at overcoming such weaknesses, and, at the same time, also address issues like pollution that have been a matter of serious concern.
More balanced growth for China should act as an example for the rest of Asia and beyond, where progress is slow, poverty the bane, and systems in a mess. China’s strength is that it has sought to combine the best aspects of the two dominant socio-economic systems — capitalism and socialism — and produced impressive results, at least on the economic front. The leadership is clear that it cannot rest on its laurels, anyway. The ultimate aim, as Hu stated, is to “realise social equity and justice”. China still has a long way to go in these respects, and considering the explosion of population there, the task at hand is not easy for even the best leadership. Alongside, China also needs to address concerns in respect of its poor human rights record, not to speak of the gulf between its systems and the democratic traditions in the developed world. Without doubt, a progressive, welfare society should be the ultimate aim of the Chinese leadership. It would mean increased emphasis, in particular, on human rights and freedom of speech.

A mountain to climb

THE Palestinians have longed for a state for nearly 60 years. Arabs and Muslims have also wanted one. So has most of the world. And now suddenly, so do the Americans. At least that is what they say. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says that it is time to establish a Palestinian state and that it is not only in the interest of Palestinians and Israelis, but in US interest as well. This is a remarkable turnaround given that the US has for years been the principal opponent (apart from the Israelis themselves) of Palestinian independence. It almost sounds too good to be true. That is the view in the Arab world where Rice commands little or no trust. They know how decisive has been the malign influence Washington has had for more than half a century on the core Middle East issue. Perhaps, experience elsewhere in the Middle East has forced Washington to realize that Israel’s way is not the right way to protect American interests in the region. Rice is, of course, quite right that a Palestinian state is in US interest. Middle East pundits have been trying to tell the Americans this for years. The absence of such a state and American appeasement of the Israelis as they heaped oppression upon the Palestinians have been the major source of anti-US sentiments in the region and the wider Muslim world. But will this declaration of support for a Palestinian state make President Bush’s planned, but far-from-certain, Middle East summit next month in Annapolis, Maryland, a success? All depends on whether the Israelis and the Abbas government can agree to a declaration of principle as the basis for the talks. The Israelis have given the distinct impression that they want to sideline the talks into generalities with no decisions and deadlines to be decided.
In the event, it seems that the Americans have sided with the Palestinians to some extent. The November conference has to be “substantive,” says Rice. Add to this Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s sudden willingness to talk about Jerusalem, one of the Palestinians’ prime demands. Whether it is the result of US pressure is unknown but the terms of diplomatic engagement are clearly shifting. Even so, there is still a mountain to climb in order to reach Annapolis. It will not be enough for Palestinian sovereignty to be accepted. Palestine has to exist as a recognized, functioning state like any other. There is no point agreeing and recognizing a state which a couple of weeks later is invaded and dismembered by the Israelis. Equally there is no point in recognizing a state that turns out to be another Somalia or Iraq at war with itself. In short, a viable Palestine involves the consent of both the Israelis and Hamas — no mean feat. Possibly, an agreement could be hammered out initially between the Israelis and the Abbas government in the West Bank with Hamas ignored. But it would not last. Palestinian aspirations for full national identity do not allow Gaza to be a permanent prison camp. A mountain to climb, indeed.

—Arab News