TODAY is an auspicious day in the Malaysian calendar as Buddhists celebrate Wesak Day. Buddhism, like all other religions, espouses peace and harmony among fellow men.
It is a way of life that is meaningful and to be cherished in any society, more so in a pluralistic environment, which is the hallmark of our beloved Malaysia.
Exactly 45 years ago this day, Malaysia as a young country, 12 years of age, experienced its most shameful and infamous day when brother rose against brother resulting in grief, sorrow, bloodshed and loss of life. The psyche of the nation was scarred and is a permanent blot in our history! Have we learnt?
Those who are currently below 45 years of age, or children at that time, will never be able to fathom the deths to which our country descended and the reasons behind it. If in 1966, US President Lyndon B. Johnson was shown rubber trees, in 1969 there was only carnage and untold suffering to show. Yet under able leadership, like a phoenix, Malaysia arose and showed so much more recently to President Barack Obama, 48 years on. We are proud of this.
Lessons were learnt on racial polarisation and the needs of the various communities. Malaysia progressed rapidly to what it is today, a nation which has surpassed most of its immediate neighbours in development.
Yet today, there are destructive forces prevailing which can bring our nation down to its knees in an instant. We have much to learn from religious precepts on tolerance and peace which will contribute to our future well-being.
Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said: “I think people are not learning from their past. There is no benefit in having confrontation, tension, instability. What’s the good of fighting? You kill each other but in the end what do you get?” Whatever means employed by him to keep rebel-rousers, who were out for political mileage, in check under his watch has made Malaysia what it is today.
Questions are now being raised as to what certain communities have done to merit citizenship and even referred to as trespassers. Is there a memory lapse here? Is this a rational, educated comment to make to fellow citizens borne and bred in Malaysia who are without any form of allegiance or political affection to the countries where their forefathers came from be it Indonesia, China, India, or wherever else!
All have contributed to nationbuilding in one way or the other and all save, the orang asli, are immigrants. These are undeniable facts. Let us not rewrite history based on emotion and be misled by myopic, ill-informed shamans who profess otherwise!
Perhaps this is due to ignorance and the failure of our education system in imparting history correctly. This can be easily remedied by re-education on Malaysian history. Everything needs to be rational and have limits!
All religions fully subscribe to one tenet which is non-negotiable - speak the truth!
Najib has got the correct “thinking cap” on when he says that he is the leader of all Malaysians, irrespective of race. This is the way to go for a united Malaysia. We do not need loose cannons spouting hatred and ill-will through hurtful words.
The Prime Minister has to speak louder and clearer to counter such irrational manifestations. Otherwise a heavy price will be paid in terms of our continued economic development.
The golden years of Islamic civilization, the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution were all marked by periods of peace and stability
As a nation, we should not forget what it means to be on one ship paddling together in the same direction. We have to be one cohesive force. Those who sow seeds of hatred should be ejected.
We live in a country with many religions yet our conduct in certain instances is anything but religious! All religions call for the bringing together of people irrespective of race, colour or creed to live in a harmonious relationship working for the common good.
We should not be traitors to our Creator, faith and religious beliefs.
Let this Wesak Day which falls on the 45th anniversary of that fateful day, heighten our senses to what can go so terribly wrong in beautiful Malaysia.
As Malaysian citizens we all have a part to play in burning at the stake demonic forces which are threatening to tear our peace loving, tolerant and accommodative way of life apart.
Religion must keep us together and not drive us apart. In the coming years we can be greater if only we do not shoot ourselves in the foot first. Racial and religious intolerance has to be obliterated.
Happy Wesak Day!
Contributed by WALTER SANDOSAM Kuala Lumpur
Related post:
Wishing all a blessed Wesak…
Share This
Showing posts with label History and culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History and culture. Show all posts
Tuesday, 13 May 2014
Tuesday, 20 August 2013
Why nations fail or succeed ?
This is much the East can learn from the West on economics
AUGUST is the holiday month – the time when we pause to take stock of a hectic first half year, and wonder what lies ahead.
Nestled in the hills of northern Laos, the ancient city of Luang Prabang sits around a bend in the river Mekong, isolated for centuries and renowned today as a city of 15th century Buddhist temples, protected as a Unesco Heritage site. It is a good place to catch up on one’s history to try to comprehend the uncertain future.
The recent best-seller by Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics Prof Daron Acemoglu and Harvard political scientist James Robinson, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty (Penguin 2012), argued that national failure were all due to man-made factors, more specifically, how political institutions became extractive, rather than inclusive.
Acemoglu and Robinson is provocative because they stir up the debate on why Latin American economies never quite made it, even though they are resource rich. They did not succeed despite huge wealth because their political institutions remained extractive, meaning a few hundred families or elite essentially controlled the key resources of the continent for their own benefit.
Another obvious example is the difference between North Korea, one of the poorest countries around, and South Korea, an innovative and dynamic economy capable of challenging the best of the West, by learning from the West.
The Acemoglu and Robinson book touches on a raw nerve because many in the West are unsure whether they will continue to be dominant in the years to come. They argue that China will sooner or later stop growing because the institutions there are becoming extractive. But as one review argued, it cannot be ruled out that Chinese institutions would evolve into inclusive systems. After all, China could not have succeeded without being inclusive – taking more than half a billion out of poverty
In the same genre, Stanford Professor of Classics and History, Ian Morris’ 2011 book, Why the West Rules – For Now: The Patterns of History and What They reveal about the Future, takes also the grand sweep, arguing not only about the factors of biology and sociology, but also about geography.
So instead of Acemoglu and Robinson’s dictum, “institutions, institutions and institutions”, Morris considers that it is more about “location, location, location.” He argues that biology and sociology explain the similaries in development between the East and West, but “it is geography that explains why the West rules.”
This view concurs with Asian historian Wang Gung-wu’s perceptive insight that the West developed maritime and today air and cyberspace technology and power, whereas China remains essentially a continental or land-based power. Geography does shape behaviour and perception.
Personally, I am less persuaded by what caused nations to fail than what caused them to succeed, and not just succeed for a few decades, but remain relevant for centuries.
Most people forget that the first modern economy in the world was not Portugal or Spain, or England, but Holland. Even though the Portuguese and Spaniards opened up the maritime routes to America and the Spice Islands, they remained feudal powers that never evolved the institutions to manage their colonies efficiently and professionally.
Last month in Amsterdam, I was given a copy of Marius van Nieuwkerk’s history of Dutch Golden Glory: The Financial Power of the Netherlands through the Ages (2006). This wonderful gem of a book, beautifully illustrated, attributed the rise of Holland as a conquest of man over water. As we all know, Holland has only a population of 16.6 million, in an area 20% larger than the island of Taiwan, ranked 17th in the world in terms of GDP, and 14th in terms of GDP per capita, at US$46,100 just behind the United States (US$50,000) and Japan (US$46,700), but ahead of old rivals, UK (US$38,600).
Historically, because of constant flooding in its low-lying land, the Dutch learnt to work cooperatively to build dykes, through “poldering” – constant irrigation, drainage and pumping of water. Thus, in their constant struggle against flooding and weather risks, the Dutch developed their infrastructure cooperatively, learning how to manage risks through precaution (high savings), consultation (constant feedback) and inspection (maintenance of strict standards). To do so, they built highly inclusive, flexible and innovative institutions that opened up to global trade.
Their constant struggle against water meant that the Dutch had superior shipbuilding technology, drawing on timber from the Baltic areas and arbitraging the trade with northern Europe. By 1598, the Dutch had established the first Insurance Chamber, the largest trading company by 1602 (VOC), and forerunner of the first central bank, the Amsterdam Exchange Bank in 1609, Merchants Exchange 1611, and Grain Exchange in 1616.
VOC, which had trading monopoly for the East Indies in the spice trade, was so profitable that between 1602 and 1796, the average dividend was 18.5% annually! Indeed, the Dutch were successful because they were not only good traders, but also insurers and bankers to the rest of Europe. One tends to forget that as late as 1750, 30% of the share capital of the Bank of England was owned by the Dutch.
What is remarkable about the Dutch model is not that it has not been taken over by other larger powers, but its sustainability and durability. The Dutch runs one of the largest pension funds in the world, and a recent study has shown that there are over 400 Dutch companies with over a century of history, including one that survived from1530. It goes to show that a country may be small, but through thrift, hard-work, openness, and good governance, the country could succeed despite the odds.
There is much that the East has still to learn from the West. No history is a straight line, and there is nothing inevitable about success or failure. Whether it is Abenomics or Likenomics, the key to sustainable and inclusive growth is about strong social institutions with the right checks and balances.
Think Asian by Tan Sri Andrew Sheng
Nestled in the hills of northern Laos, the ancient city of Luang Prabang sits around a bend in the river Mekong, isolated for centuries and renowned today as a city of 15th century Buddhist temples, protected as a Unesco Heritage site. It is a good place to catch up on one’s history to try to comprehend the uncertain future.
The recent best-seller by Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics Prof Daron Acemoglu and Harvard political scientist James Robinson, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty (Penguin 2012), argued that national failure were all due to man-made factors, more specifically, how political institutions became extractive, rather than inclusive.
Acemoglu and Robinson is provocative because they stir up the debate on why Latin American economies never quite made it, even though they are resource rich. They did not succeed despite huge wealth because their political institutions remained extractive, meaning a few hundred families or elite essentially controlled the key resources of the continent for their own benefit.
Another obvious example is the difference between North Korea, one of the poorest countries around, and South Korea, an innovative and dynamic economy capable of challenging the best of the West, by learning from the West.
The Acemoglu and Robinson book touches on a raw nerve because many in the West are unsure whether they will continue to be dominant in the years to come. They argue that China will sooner or later stop growing because the institutions there are becoming extractive. But as one review argued, it cannot be ruled out that Chinese institutions would evolve into inclusive systems. After all, China could not have succeeded without being inclusive – taking more than half a billion out of poverty
In the same genre, Stanford Professor of Classics and History, Ian Morris’ 2011 book, Why the West Rules – For Now: The Patterns of History and What They reveal about the Future, takes also the grand sweep, arguing not only about the factors of biology and sociology, but also about geography.
So instead of Acemoglu and Robinson’s dictum, “institutions, institutions and institutions”, Morris considers that it is more about “location, location, location.” He argues that biology and sociology explain the similaries in development between the East and West, but “it is geography that explains why the West rules.”
This view concurs with Asian historian Wang Gung-wu’s perceptive insight that the West developed maritime and today air and cyberspace technology and power, whereas China remains essentially a continental or land-based power. Geography does shape behaviour and perception.
Personally, I am less persuaded by what caused nations to fail than what caused them to succeed, and not just succeed for a few decades, but remain relevant for centuries.
Most people forget that the first modern economy in the world was not Portugal or Spain, or England, but Holland. Even though the Portuguese and Spaniards opened up the maritime routes to America and the Spice Islands, they remained feudal powers that never evolved the institutions to manage their colonies efficiently and professionally.
Last month in Amsterdam, I was given a copy of Marius van Nieuwkerk’s history of Dutch Golden Glory: The Financial Power of the Netherlands through the Ages (2006). This wonderful gem of a book, beautifully illustrated, attributed the rise of Holland as a conquest of man over water. As we all know, Holland has only a population of 16.6 million, in an area 20% larger than the island of Taiwan, ranked 17th in the world in terms of GDP, and 14th in terms of GDP per capita, at US$46,100 just behind the United States (US$50,000) and Japan (US$46,700), but ahead of old rivals, UK (US$38,600).
Historically, because of constant flooding in its low-lying land, the Dutch learnt to work cooperatively to build dykes, through “poldering” – constant irrigation, drainage and pumping of water. Thus, in their constant struggle against flooding and weather risks, the Dutch developed their infrastructure cooperatively, learning how to manage risks through precaution (high savings), consultation (constant feedback) and inspection (maintenance of strict standards). To do so, they built highly inclusive, flexible and innovative institutions that opened up to global trade.
Their constant struggle against water meant that the Dutch had superior shipbuilding technology, drawing on timber from the Baltic areas and arbitraging the trade with northern Europe. By 1598, the Dutch had established the first Insurance Chamber, the largest trading company by 1602 (VOC), and forerunner of the first central bank, the Amsterdam Exchange Bank in 1609, Merchants Exchange 1611, and Grain Exchange in 1616.
VOC, which had trading monopoly for the East Indies in the spice trade, was so profitable that between 1602 and 1796, the average dividend was 18.5% annually! Indeed, the Dutch were successful because they were not only good traders, but also insurers and bankers to the rest of Europe. One tends to forget that as late as 1750, 30% of the share capital of the Bank of England was owned by the Dutch.
What is remarkable about the Dutch model is not that it has not been taken over by other larger powers, but its sustainability and durability. The Dutch runs one of the largest pension funds in the world, and a recent study has shown that there are over 400 Dutch companies with over a century of history, including one that survived from1530. It goes to show that a country may be small, but through thrift, hard-work, openness, and good governance, the country could succeed despite the odds.
There is much that the East has still to learn from the West. No history is a straight line, and there is nothing inevitable about success or failure. Whether it is Abenomics or Likenomics, the key to sustainable and inclusive growth is about strong social institutions with the right checks and balances.
Think Asian by Tan Sri Andrew Sheng
TAN SRI ANDREW SHENG is president of the Fung Global Institute.
Wednesday, 3 July 2013
No time to be patient
Can we, Malaysians, not see the changes we so long for in our lifetime?
NELSON Mandela is dying. The world waits sombrely and respectfully for what seems to be inevitable. He has lived to a good age – he turns 95 on July 18 – and it is time to let him go. What’s more, this great man’s place in history is assured.
He is in the same league as Mahatma Gandhi and Abraham Lincoln, for what he did for his country.
Yet, I wonder: Mandela was in his Robben Island prison cell for 27 years. During that time, did he ever think he would not live to see the end of apartheid in his beloved South Africa. Perhaps he thought, “Not in my lifetime.”
“Not in my lifetime”, that’s what we say to denote the unlikelihood of something momentous or significant happening or coming to fruition within our life span.
I guess NIML (as those four words have been abbreviated in this Internet age) would have crossed the minds of cynics concerning the fight to end slavery or suffrage for women in centuries past.
“Freedom for slaves? Never, not in my lifetime?” “Vote for women? Balderdash! Surely not in my lifetime.”
In our more recent past, so many amazing things have changed or taken place that were thought quite impossible, at least NIML: The creation of the Pill that sparked the sexual revolution, men walking on the moon and the birth of the first test-tube baby.
I remember when “Made in Japan” was a byword for shoddily made products that didn’t last and China was an uptight communist state where its repressed people dressed in monochrome colours and were deprived of life’s little luxuries.
Today, Japanese-made products are synonymous with quality; Russia and China are practically unrecognisable from the USSR and China of, say, 1985.
So too South Korea, now east Asia’s poster nation. But it wasn’t too long ago it was under a repressive military dictatorship and it was only in May 1980 that the Gwangju Uprising began that nation’s transformation to liberal democracy.
Who would have thought back in the 1980s, that many Chinese nationals and Russians would become obscenely rich citizens living freely in various parts of the world; or that South Korea would rule with “soft” power through its pop culture.
Ironically, I found Korean music grating and unpleasant during the opening ceremony of the 1988 Seoul Olympic Games. Twenty-five years on, I can hum Arirang, Korea’s popular folk song, and have k-pop songs on my handphone, a Samsung Galaxy, of course.
All that in my lifetime. And I am not that old. Really.
Change is a constant throughout the ages but the current speed of it is what takes our breath away. We accept and even demand it when it involves technology, our devices and machines.
Japanese scientists are ready to send a talking robot called Kirobo into space that can communicate directly with astronauts on board the International Space Station.
Better still, researchers just announced that people with severe spinal cord injuries can walk again with ground-breaking stem cell therapy that regrows nerve fibres.
Dr Wise Young, chief executive officer of the China Spinal Cord Injury Network, was quoted as saying: “It’s the first time in human history that we can see the regeneration of the spinal cord.”
He further declared: “This will convince the doctors of the world that they do not need to tell patients ‘you will never walk again’.”
It is a pity quadriplegic Christopher Reeve, who will always be Superman to his fans, did not live to see it happen in his lifetime.
Yet, strangely enough, when it comes to change to create a better and safer society, change to weeding out corruption, change to needs-based policies, change to save our education system, change to end institutionalised racism, we seem willing to apply brakes and decelerate.
We tell ourselves, “slowly lah”, or “some things take time” and yes, even “not in our lifetime” because we believe the things we want changed are too entrenched or too rotten.
I refuse to accept that because, as I have repeatedly lamented, we don’t have the time to slow such things down. We need to change urgently and effectively or we will fall further behind other nations. What I think we need for effective change to happen is great statesmanship and selflessness from our leaders.
While Mandela is rightly honoured and revered, he could not have succeeded in ending apartheid without the support and courage of F.W. de Klerk, the now largely forgotten last white president of South Africa who freed Mandela.
Similarly, it was Mikhail Gorbachev, the last general secretary of the Soviet Union who brought political, social and economic reforms that ended both the USSR and the Cold War.
It is men in power like them who had the political will, the vision and steely courage to dismantle their untenable systems of government and set their nations on the path of a new future.
Do we have a de Klerk or Gorbachev among our leaders who will demolish race-based politics and policies, free our education system from politics and truly fight corruption and crime? A leader who will move our nation onto a new path of greatness by quickly harnessing all the talents that a multiracial Malaysia has to offer without fear or bias?
Can it happen in my lifetime? Since I have seen what was deemed impossible, NIML, the first black man elected US President, I want to believe the answer is yes, we can.
So Aunty, So What? By JUNE H.L. WONG
> The aunty likes this quote: Patience is good only when it is the shortest way to a good end; otherwise, impatience is better. Feedback: junewong@thestar.com.my or tweet @JuneHLWong
Related posts:
Rebooting the history of Chinese contributions to Malaysia
Charting the way forward for English-medium schools in Malaysia
NELSON Mandela is dying. The world waits sombrely and respectfully for what seems to be inevitable. He has lived to a good age – he turns 95 on July 18 – and it is time to let him go. What’s more, this great man’s place in history is assured.
He is in the same league as Mahatma Gandhi and Abraham Lincoln, for what he did for his country.
Yet, I wonder: Mandela was in his Robben Island prison cell for 27 years. During that time, did he ever think he would not live to see the end of apartheid in his beloved South Africa. Perhaps he thought, “Not in my lifetime.”
“Not in my lifetime”, that’s what we say to denote the unlikelihood of something momentous or significant happening or coming to fruition within our life span.
I guess NIML (as those four words have been abbreviated in this Internet age) would have crossed the minds of cynics concerning the fight to end slavery or suffrage for women in centuries past.
“Freedom for slaves? Never, not in my lifetime?” “Vote for women? Balderdash! Surely not in my lifetime.”
In our more recent past, so many amazing things have changed or taken place that were thought quite impossible, at least NIML: The creation of the Pill that sparked the sexual revolution, men walking on the moon and the birth of the first test-tube baby.
I remember when “Made in Japan” was a byword for shoddily made products that didn’t last and China was an uptight communist state where its repressed people dressed in monochrome colours and were deprived of life’s little luxuries.
Today, Japanese-made products are synonymous with quality; Russia and China are practically unrecognisable from the USSR and China of, say, 1985.
So too South Korea, now east Asia’s poster nation. But it wasn’t too long ago it was under a repressive military dictatorship and it was only in May 1980 that the Gwangju Uprising began that nation’s transformation to liberal democracy.
Who would have thought back in the 1980s, that many Chinese nationals and Russians would become obscenely rich citizens living freely in various parts of the world; or that South Korea would rule with “soft” power through its pop culture.
Ironically, I found Korean music grating and unpleasant during the opening ceremony of the 1988 Seoul Olympic Games. Twenty-five years on, I can hum Arirang, Korea’s popular folk song, and have k-pop songs on my handphone, a Samsung Galaxy, of course.
All that in my lifetime. And I am not that old. Really.
Change is a constant throughout the ages but the current speed of it is what takes our breath away. We accept and even demand it when it involves technology, our devices and machines.
Japanese scientists are ready to send a talking robot called Kirobo into space that can communicate directly with astronauts on board the International Space Station.
Better still, researchers just announced that people with severe spinal cord injuries can walk again with ground-breaking stem cell therapy that regrows nerve fibres.
Dr Wise Young, chief executive officer of the China Spinal Cord Injury Network, was quoted as saying: “It’s the first time in human history that we can see the regeneration of the spinal cord.”
He further declared: “This will convince the doctors of the world that they do not need to tell patients ‘you will never walk again’.”
It is a pity quadriplegic Christopher Reeve, who will always be Superman to his fans, did not live to see it happen in his lifetime.
Yet, strangely enough, when it comes to change to create a better and safer society, change to weeding out corruption, change to needs-based policies, change to save our education system, change to end institutionalised racism, we seem willing to apply brakes and decelerate.
We tell ourselves, “slowly lah”, or “some things take time” and yes, even “not in our lifetime” because we believe the things we want changed are too entrenched or too rotten.
I refuse to accept that because, as I have repeatedly lamented, we don’t have the time to slow such things down. We need to change urgently and effectively or we will fall further behind other nations. What I think we need for effective change to happen is great statesmanship and selflessness from our leaders.
While Mandela is rightly honoured and revered, he could not have succeeded in ending apartheid without the support and courage of F.W. de Klerk, the now largely forgotten last white president of South Africa who freed Mandela.
Similarly, it was Mikhail Gorbachev, the last general secretary of the Soviet Union who brought political, social and economic reforms that ended both the USSR and the Cold War.
It is men in power like them who had the political will, the vision and steely courage to dismantle their untenable systems of government and set their nations on the path of a new future.
Do we have a de Klerk or Gorbachev among our leaders who will demolish race-based politics and policies, free our education system from politics and truly fight corruption and crime? A leader who will move our nation onto a new path of greatness by quickly harnessing all the talents that a multiracial Malaysia has to offer without fear or bias?
Can it happen in my lifetime? Since I have seen what was deemed impossible, NIML, the first black man elected US President, I want to believe the answer is yes, we can.
So Aunty, So What? By JUNE H.L. WONG
> The aunty likes this quote: Patience is good only when it is the shortest way to a good end; otherwise, impatience is better. Feedback: junewong@thestar.com.my or tweet @JuneHLWong
Related posts:
Rebooting the history of Chinese contributions to Malaysia
Charting the way forward for English-medium schools in Malaysia
Friday, 24 May 2013
Wishing all a blessed Wesak…
All our dreams can come true, if you have the courage to change and pursue them
Today marks three important events in Siddhartha Gautama’s life – his birth, enlightenment and death. Two thousand years after his parinirvana, Gautama’s teachings still thrives because in one’s darkest hours and bleakest moments, his wisdom gives hopes, strength and joy to the sorrowful heart and tormented soul. Such is the greatness of this prince we called Buddha or the Enlightened One. Have a blessed Wesak.
May 24, 2013 by Ipohgal
- Walt Disney
Today marks three important events in Siddhartha Gautama’s life – his birth, enlightenment and death. Two thousand years after his parinirvana, Gautama’s teachings still thrives because in one’s darkest hours and bleakest moments, his wisdom gives hopes, strength and joy to the sorrowful heart and tormented soul. Such is the greatness of this prince we called Buddha or the Enlightened One. Have a blessed Wesak.
May 24, 2013 by Ipohgal
Monday, 25 March 2013
No easy path to 'Chinese dream'
China’s new President last week reaffirmed his aim to achieve the
‘Chinese dream’, but the country faces many challenges on the road to
fulfilling this dream.
LAST week saw the completion of China’s leadership transition, with Xi Jinping as the new president and Li Keqiang the new premier.
President Xi set the world speculating when he spoke of “striving to achieve the Chinese dream of great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”.
One Western newspaper commented it was a collective national dream, contrasting it, unfavourably, to the “American dream” of giving individuals equal opportunities.
But to the Chinese, the promised renaissance of the nation is a reminder of the collective humiliation during the colonial era and the “dream” to win back its previous place as a world leader in science, technology, economy and culture.
High growth in recent decades has boosted China’s economy and confidence. Nevertheless, China’s new leaders face many serious challenges ahead which need to be tackled if the “Chinese dream” is to be realised.
First is the need to fight widespread corruption. Making this his main priority, Xi warned that corruption could lead to “the collapse of the Party and the downfall of the state.”
New leaders usually vow to get rid of corruption, but few have succeeded. If Xi wins this battle, it would be a great achievement.
Second are administrative procedures and abuse of official power that cause inefficiency and injustices right down to the local level.
At his first press conference, premier Li promised to shake up the system, acknowledging the difficulties of “stirring vested interests.” He promised that a third of 1,700 items that require the approval of government departments would be cut.
Frugality is to be the new hallmark. Spending will be reduced in government offices, buildings, travel and hospitality and the savings will be redirected to social development.
Third are the complexities of running China’s large and complicated economy. China aims to grow continuously by 7-8% a year. The rest of the global economy is, however, in a bad shape.
The country has thus to shift from export-led to domestic-demand led growth, and from investment-led to consumption-led domestic growth. Implementation of this new growth strategy, which the government has accepted, is not easy.
There are also the challenges of managing the currency, the huge foreign reserves and the regulation of capital flows, with the aim of having finance serve the real economy while not becoming a source of new instability.
In foreign trade, China has been very successful in building up a powerful export machine. But growth of exports to the West is slowing due to the near-recession, and new forms of protection (such as tariff hikes using anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures) are increasingly used on Chinese imports.
At the same time, other developing countries are becoming wary of their increasing imports of cheap Chinese goods. How can China be sensitive to their concerns and strive for more balance and mutuality of benefits?
Fourth are China’s social problems. Poverty is still significant in many areas. Social disparities have worsened, with wide gaps in rich-poor and urban-rural incomes that are politically destabilising.
Redistributing income towards the lower income groups can meet two goals: reducing social inequalities and providing the demand base for consumption-led growth. The policies can include wage increases, provision of social services and income transfers to the poor.
Fifth is the need to tackle China’s environmental crises, which include emerging water scarcity, increased flooding, climate change and urban air pollution. Recent studies show the health dangers of the worsening air pollution, including links to the 2.6 million who die from cancers annually.
Many of the protests in China in recent years have been over environmental problems, including polluting industries located near communities. How can China integrate ecological concerns into its development strategy?
Sixth is China’s foreign relations. Xi last week reaffirmed China’s principle of “peaceful development” and that the country would never seek hegemony.
There is need to settle the different claims by China and other East Asian countries on the South China Sea in a proper and peaceful way and build confidence of its neighbours on this principle.
China, which is still very much a developing country in terms of per capita income and other characteristics, also need to stand with the rest of the developing world in international negotiations and relations.
At the same time, it is expected to provide preferences and special assistance to poorer countries and its investors abroad are expected to be socially and environmentally responsible.
Most difficult for China is the ability to manage foreign relations with developed countries, especially the United States. China is a rising or risen power, and viewed with some envy as a rival by those who fear losing their previous dominance.
Maintaining political stability with these powers is important; but of course this does not depend on China alone.
The above are only some of the hurdles facing China on its road to realise its dream of rejuvenation. As with any dream, it is not impossible to achieve but the road is long and difficult.
The West envious of global economy led by China
LAST week saw the completion of China’s leadership transition, with Xi Jinping as the new president and Li Keqiang the new premier.
President Xi set the world speculating when he spoke of “striving to achieve the Chinese dream of great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”.
One Western newspaper commented it was a collective national dream, contrasting it, unfavourably, to the “American dream” of giving individuals equal opportunities.
But to the Chinese, the promised renaissance of the nation is a reminder of the collective humiliation during the colonial era and the “dream” to win back its previous place as a world leader in science, technology, economy and culture.
High growth in recent decades has boosted China’s economy and confidence. Nevertheless, China’s new leaders face many serious challenges ahead which need to be tackled if the “Chinese dream” is to be realised.
First is the need to fight widespread corruption. Making this his main priority, Xi warned that corruption could lead to “the collapse of the Party and the downfall of the state.”
New leaders usually vow to get rid of corruption, but few have succeeded. If Xi wins this battle, it would be a great achievement.
Second are administrative procedures and abuse of official power that cause inefficiency and injustices right down to the local level.
At his first press conference, premier Li promised to shake up the system, acknowledging the difficulties of “stirring vested interests.” He promised that a third of 1,700 items that require the approval of government departments would be cut.
Frugality is to be the new hallmark. Spending will be reduced in government offices, buildings, travel and hospitality and the savings will be redirected to social development.
Third are the complexities of running China’s large and complicated economy. China aims to grow continuously by 7-8% a year. The rest of the global economy is, however, in a bad shape.
The country has thus to shift from export-led to domestic-demand led growth, and from investment-led to consumption-led domestic growth. Implementation of this new growth strategy, which the government has accepted, is not easy.
There are also the challenges of managing the currency, the huge foreign reserves and the regulation of capital flows, with the aim of having finance serve the real economy while not becoming a source of new instability.
In foreign trade, China has been very successful in building up a powerful export machine. But growth of exports to the West is slowing due to the near-recession, and new forms of protection (such as tariff hikes using anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures) are increasingly used on Chinese imports.
At the same time, other developing countries are becoming wary of their increasing imports of cheap Chinese goods. How can China be sensitive to their concerns and strive for more balance and mutuality of benefits?
Fourth are China’s social problems. Poverty is still significant in many areas. Social disparities have worsened, with wide gaps in rich-poor and urban-rural incomes that are politically destabilising.
Redistributing income towards the lower income groups can meet two goals: reducing social inequalities and providing the demand base for consumption-led growth. The policies can include wage increases, provision of social services and income transfers to the poor.
Fifth is the need to tackle China’s environmental crises, which include emerging water scarcity, increased flooding, climate change and urban air pollution. Recent studies show the health dangers of the worsening air pollution, including links to the 2.6 million who die from cancers annually.
Many of the protests in China in recent years have been over environmental problems, including polluting industries located near communities. How can China integrate ecological concerns into its development strategy?
Sixth is China’s foreign relations. Xi last week reaffirmed China’s principle of “peaceful development” and that the country would never seek hegemony.
There is need to settle the different claims by China and other East Asian countries on the South China Sea in a proper and peaceful way and build confidence of its neighbours on this principle.
China, which is still very much a developing country in terms of per capita income and other characteristics, also need to stand with the rest of the developing world in international negotiations and relations.
At the same time, it is expected to provide preferences and special assistance to poorer countries and its investors abroad are expected to be socially and environmentally responsible.
Most difficult for China is the ability to manage foreign relations with developed countries, especially the United States. China is a rising or risen power, and viewed with some envy as a rival by those who fear losing their previous dominance.
Maintaining political stability with these powers is important; but of course this does not depend on China alone.
The above are only some of the hurdles facing China on its road to realise its dream of rejuvenation. As with any dream, it is not impossible to achieve but the road is long and difficult.
GLOBAL TRENDS By MARTIN KHOR
Related posts:
China newly elected President Xi Jinping and Premi... President Xi: Russia ties ensure peace; foreign debut illuminates China's 'world dream'
China Dream a nightmare for others?The West envious of global economy led by China
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)