by David Parmer

Spring 1975–three years after US President Richard M. Nixon’s historic visit to the PRC, and Deng Xiaoping is tasked with getting China moving again after the disruption of the Cultural Revolution.

Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai are both sick and at the end of their respective storied careers. Each, in his own way, is trying to ensure the continuity of their vision and life’s work. Key to both of their visions is Deng Xiaoping. He has been sent back to work and his task, if he is allowed to perform it, is enormous.

Deng begins by borrowing a strategy from the PLA, i.e. “consolidation.” In the military sense it means to reorganize and resupply in order to make ready for future battles. His first task was the downsizing and consolidation of the PLA itself, an organization that had lost its edge during the Cultural Revolution, falling behind technologically, becoming bloated, and engaging in scores of activities not designed to protect the country.

Next Deng looked to industry to see what could be done to turn around China’s under-performing and vital engines of production.

Since China’s road network was not first-class at the time, the burden of transportation was put on the railroads. When Deng zeroed in on this problem he became aware of several bottlenecks in the rail transportation system, specifically at Changsha, Guiyang, Baotou and Xuzhou. He focused first on Xuzhou.

Wan Li, Minister of Railways reported to Deng that the chief problem with the Xuzhou terminal was factionalism. The chief culprit was found to be Gu Binghau, head of the Xuzhou Railway bureau.

Meanwhile, from February 25 to March 5, a meeting of party secretaries in charge of industry and transport was held in Beijing. From the meeting came Central Party Document No. 9 which gave a strong mandate to resolve the railway situation, not just in Xuzhou, but nationwide.

Document No.9 placed all Xuzhou operations in the hands of Wan Li. It also declared that all factions must be abolished and that railway ministry officials be held responsible for accidents. Anyone who opposed the abolition of factions was to be considered “bourgeois,” and anyone destroying railroad property was to be considered a “counter-revolutionary.”

Next, Minister Wan Li went to Xuzhou and had Gu Binghua arrested. Meetings were held to explain the details of Document No.9, and some of the 6,000 people who had been unjustly accused in Xuzhou were released. When this uncompromising policy against factionalism was implemented (those who were opposed were warned, and if they didn’t comply transferred from their posts) traffic doubled and loading doubled. In April 1975 the railroads met their coal transportation targets for the first time in five years.

In a speech entitled “Some Problems Outstanding in the Iron and Steel Industry” on May 29, 1975, Deng himself commented on the Xuzhou situation and the issue of factionalism:

As the experience of the railway departments and of the city of Xuzhou and other areas shows, the number of those who should be made targets of attack in the struggle against factionalism is very small. Factional activities in Xuzhou were very serious, but in the end only three persons were brought under attack. The overwhelming majority, including those who were obsessed by factionalism, were redeemable. So the actual result was that the target of attack was very narrow and a great many people were helped through education. We must be determined to win in our anti-factionalist struggle.

With regard to the 6,000 people unjustly accused Deng added:

To judge by the experience gained in solving the problems in railway work and in the city of Xuzhou, carrying out Party policies is very important. In the campaign to ferret out members of the “May Sixteenth Group”, over 6,000 persons in Xuzhou came under attack. This figure is quite shocking. When so many people have been attacked, it is essential to implement the policy concerning them; otherwise, how can we arouse the enthusiasm of the masses?

Deng Xiaoping next took this model of “consolidation” and applied it to the iron and steel industry and the coal industry.

 Deng Xiaoping suffered some personal setbacks due to the Gang of Four, and was again removed from power to be finally brought back by Hua Guafeng. We can get a clear insight into his wisdom and rare talent in his handling of the Xuzhou railway incident, and a foretaste of Reform and Opening up during the Deng era.

Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Vol. 2  “Some Problems Outstanding In the Iron and Steel Industry”

“Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China” Ezra Vogel, Harvard University Press

Photo: Jim Maurer via flickr

                       by David Parmer / Tokyo

There is the distinct possibility that the president of the National Front party, Marine Le Pen will become the next president of France. Possible–and more and more likely. A trend that saw Donald Trump elected to America’s highest office, that saw Britain pull the plug on the European Union in its BREXIT vote and has seen the rise of the right in Europe just might carry her to the Elysee Palace.

Le Pen, daughter of the founder of the National Front, Jean Marie Le Pen was born in August 1968. At age 18 she joined the National Front. She studied law, received an MA in 1991 and became a practicing attorney. In 2004 she became a member of the European Parliament. Then, in 2012 she came in third in France’s presidential election after Francois Hollande and Nicholas Sarkozy. 

Marine Le Pen is considered more moderate than her father; she has done housecleaning in the National Front and eliminated its undesirable elements. She does, however, maintain the core values of her party, such as:

• She wants France to leave the Euro and the EU
• She wants France out of NATO
• She shuns the World Bank, WTO and IMF
• She is against the regularization of illegal immigrants
• She is pro-Russian

In the near future there just might be a major democracy that elects its first female president, but it won’t be the US and it won’t be in Washington, and it won’t be the Star Spangled Banner that is played when she takes the oath of office.

Photo: Blandine Le Cain via flickr

Marine Le Pen Wikipedia

                                    by David Parmer

Cuba’s long-serving president and revolutionary, Fidel Castro Ruz passed into history on November 25, 2016. Castro had been frail and in poor health, yet his death sent ripples around the world. 

What many might have been expected at one time, i.e. Castro’s passing and the improving of relations with the US may or may not happen. Or if it happens, it will happen on Cuba’s terms. One fact that militates against this scenario is the incoming Trump administration that promises to be both conservative and hardline toward America’s “enemies.”

Many Americans dream of reform and opening up in Cuba brought about by trade and tourism. However, it would be a mistake to take the passing of Castro as the end of the Cuban Revolution. Cubans have withstood the US blockade for decades, and there are no signs that they are about to buckle simply Fidel Castro is no more.

Then there is China–Cuba’s #2 trading partner after Venezuela. Reuters reported on September 24, 2016 that Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and visited the country, and he and Raul Castro had overseen the signing of 30 economic agreements to cover such areas as:

• Science
• Environment
• Industry
• Energy
• Public Health
• Agriculture

Also of interest was a Wall Street Journal article of March 18, 2016 that reported that Chinese electronics giant Huawei was involved in constructing Cuba’s Wi-Fi infrastructure. There has been no mention of a Chinese “pivot toward South America,” yet China is making some moves in that direction. And Cuba is a logical starting point.

Change will come to Cuba, particularly after Raul Castro relinquishes power in 2018 and elections take place in February of that year. But the Cuban Revolution will continue, and should the new US administration take an harsh or tough stance on Cuba, the Cubans will have not only the experience to deal with it, but there will also be many others who are prepared to do business with them, especially China.

Photo: lezumbalaberenjena via flickr

 

The 2017 meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos-Klosters Switzerland will be held from January 17-20, 2017 Next year’s meeting will have “Responsive and Responsible Leadership” as its theme. The WEF says that the aim of the conference is to:

“rededicate leaders from all walks of life to achieve common goals and drive new initiatives”

The leaders in question come from business, government, international organizations, academia and civil society.

Key issues that they will address according the WEF website are:

• The global agenda
• The international security agenda
• The economic agenda
• The regional and national agenda
• Then industry and future agenda
• The future agenda

It is clear that the participants have their work cut out for them. In an age of rising nationalism and conservative politics international cooperation must be maintained, and a global perspective that fosters the health and wealth of humankind despite the differing agendas of stakeholders must be promoted.

Our question this week is: Do you think meetings like the winter and summer Davos get-togethers really create any understanding, or foster any change? Please log in and give us your thoughts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                 by David Parmer / Tokyo

Turkey’s long-serving President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is both an enigma and an open book. The 62-year old Erdogan has been in politics since the mid-1990s when he became Mayor of Istanbul.

Erdogan remained mayor from 1994-1998 during which time he tackled several thorny issues plaguing the city including traffic and water shortages. He enacted what might be called eco-friendly solutions to long-standing problems and got things done.

In 1998 he was convicted of inciting violence and racial hatred and served four months of a 10-month sentence. In 2001 he formed the AKP party and was elected Prime Minister, a job he held for 11 years, until he was elected president in 2014.

During this time Mr. Erdogan increased the budget for education, pushed for education for women and girls, established universities and promoted the use of IT in schools. In addition, several important infrastructure projects including railways and airports were instituted.

So it seems that Mr. Erdogan would be considered one of the more enlightened leaders in his region. And based on the above maybe he was. But recent events have created a very different image of the president. Turkey is a secular Islamic country, but the president is considered much more of an Islamic conservative. Of late Mr. Erdogan has come down hard on social media and the western press. He blames the press for unfair reporting in things Turkish and things related to him. Within the country it is a crime to criticize the president.

Mr. Erdogan certainly has a lot on his plate both domestically and internationally. For years there has been an ongoing Kurdish insurgency, and a Turkish resolve to prevent the establishment of an independent Kurdistan. The PKK Kurdish party has been labeled a terrorist organization. The Turks are fighting the Kurds, and at the same time targeting Daesh inside Iraq. Mr. Edgogan also has rocky relations with Israel over the Palestinian question and solid relations with Egypt. Relations with Russia were also tense after a Turkish Air Force F-16 shot down a Russian Su-24 on the Turkish-Iraqi border on 24 November 2015. And as far as relations with the US go, Turkey (Ergogan) faults the US for harboring the president’s rival, Fethullah Gulen whom he believes is responsible for the 2016 coup attempt.

So which Recep Tayyip Erdogan do we believe: the Erdogan who builds airports and bridges and supports education including the education of girls and women and who has eco-friendly initiatives to his credit, or the would-be Sultan who lives in an enormous palace, represses the free press and uses his military to advance his agenda for Turkey. Which Erdogan is the real Erdogan? Or are they both one and the same man; an enigma and an open book?

Photo: Recep Tayyip Erdogan via flickr

 

The New York Times reported on November 13th that a new peace deal has been signed between the government of Columbia and the FARC rebels in Havana. The document signed on November 12 seeks to put the final cap on the country’s 52-year war with the FARC. Just six weeks after the peace deal was rejected by 50.2% of Columbia’s voters, it looks like a new peace deal will bring stability to the troubled nation. Leaders from around the region and around the world, including U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry praised the agreement. The sticking points, even after the new agreement, seem to hinge on the re-integration of FARC fighters into Columbian society.

Photo: President Juan Manuel Santos of Columbia, World Economic Forum via flickr

Is the Philippine’s President Rodrigo Duterte swashbuckling manner damaging the economic climate of the country and frightening outside investors? The answer seems to be “yes” and “no” and “maybe.”

If you start with “yes” the figures show investment is down by 41% this year and the peso fell to a seven-year low, and the stock market showed repeated downward movement. So Mr. Duterte’s presidency is hurting the economy, right?

Well, maybe not. CNN Money reports the Philippine economy grew by 6.9% in the first half of the year, and Moody’s rates the nation favorably citing strong consumer spending and stable inflation. More?

In fact, the novice diplomat with the rumpled style has secured loans from China to the tune of $24 billion and $17 billion from Japan private firms and $204 million from the Japanese government in loans and equipment. So maybe he has not damaged the economic climate of his country.

On the other hand, there is “maybe” he has. US investment in the Philippines is estimated to be at $4.7 billion, and then there is  a whopping $9.6 billion in overseas remittances sent annually from the US to the Philippines. Also US–Philippine trade is estimated to be around $18 billion annually. If Mr. Duterte continues with his anti-American rants and consistent anti-American policy will American money find a friendlier place to park itself?

The jury is still out on this question. Time will tell, and certainly no one will ever be bored by watching events unfold in the Philippines in 2016, 2017 and beyond.

Photo: Asain Development Bank via flickr