Ghosts of the future
In the wake of Gorbachev’s death, the CCP’s remembrance of his life and leadership reveals their own concerns for the fate of Chinese socialism
Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the former Soviet Union from 1985 until 1991, passed away this week. Probably best known for his "glasnost" (openness) and "perestroika" (restructuring) policies, he is credited for bringing an end to the Cold War and heralding the collapse of the Soviet Union (and also the Pizza Hut advert).
In the West, Gorbachev is widely seen as a positive figure. He was seen as personable and warm, and his endeavour to avoid bloodshed eventually led to his being conferred the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990. But elsewhere, his legacy is more disputed. Russians are divided, as many see him as the cause of economic collapse and the growing international view of Russia as politically and militarily impotent.
I didn’t know what the Chinese state’s views on Gorbachev were before reading a Global Times article that caught me off guard. As the Communist party is alive and well in China, but Communism is a bit on the iffy side, I expected ambivalence. While China hasn’t aligned with the West politically, it is more integrated with the world economically, both with authoritarian and democratic states, and is certainly more integrated than the Soviet Union ever was (and more than Russia is today). But opinions are much more divided than I had predicted.
While Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian said “Mr. Gorbachev once made positive contributions to the normalization of Sino-Soviet relations,” this is pretty much the only positive thing China has to say about him. Not only are most reviews scathing, they are also written comparatively - as if the main purpose of Gorbachev’s passing is to shed light on the successes of the PRC. Why are the Chinese media being so negative about Gorbachev? And how do the views expressed about his legacy reflect the deep-seated fears of the CCP?
“A tragic figure”
Press releases about Gorbachev discussing his life and legacy are not flattering. In fact, some of them are bordering on harsh.
“Gorbachev is naïve and immature, who represented a certain historical period of Russia (USSR) shifting between the paths of "seeking an independent way" and "embracing the West"
“Chinese observers considered him as a tragic figure who catered to the US and the West without principle, made severe mistakes in judging the international situation, and caused chaos in domestic economic order.”
“Gorbachev aimed to re-energize the stalled Soviet economy, which was riddled with inefficiency, overblown defense spending and creeping corruption. He called for urgent reorganization and modernization, but soon expanded his reform to the political and social structure of the whole nation.”
"During the period he was in the office as the top leader of the USSR, he made severe mistakes in judging both domestic and international situations, and the facts proved that the policies rolled out were catastrophic to the country.”
I think for the CCP, the fact that he failed in his grand endeavours is almost as much a failure as attempting them in the first place. That is to say, while the end of the Cold war and fall of the USSR may be seen as positives in the West, for China they represent a huge loss, and an omen. Chinese citizens (or at least those whose online opinions are state-sanctioned) seem to broadly agree with these sentiments. One Weibo user wrote that "The Soviet Union was destroyed by him and the generations after him."
Ultimately, if nothing else, Gorbachev can be used as a lesson to those who would rule the CCP: this is what you get if you blindly follow the West. “Gorbachev's behavior patterns and successes and failures at the end of the Cold War are still enough to give future generations a lot of lessons and warnings. This is probably the historical legacy left by Gorbachev.”
A spectre is haunting China - it is the spectre of collapse
In case you were in any doubt that China directly contrasts its present situation to that of the Soviet Union, one article boldly states “As a lesson for China's own governance, the Communist Party of China upholds its own socialist path with Chinese characteristics, underscoring political maturity and sobriety.” This maturity signals an independence, particularly from Western political ideology. For the CCP to survive, it must stand on its own two feet.
What the Chinese leadership probably despises most about Gorbachev is what they see as his capitulation to the West. In ending the Cold War, Gorbachev conceded defeat and opened up the country to the influence of foreign forces, something the CCP dreads more than anything. The use of the word ‘chaos’ in articles is informative also. Chaotic periods in former Chinese dynasties (yeah, I know, bear with me) were precedents for decline. That is why the CCP constantly uses words like ‘stability’ and ‘consolidation’ when referring to its own domestic political, social and economic situation.
Chinese analysts have clearly done extensive work to identify exactly why the Soviet Union collapsed, which it has taken care to reiterate in the wake of the late leader’s passing. “The problem of the formation of the system of the Soviet republics, the issue of ethnic policy, the ratio of military expenditure to GDP has been as high as 20% all the year round, which has dragged down the economy, the separation of the privileged class from the people, and the Western training of agents internally.” China is like the Soviet Union not just in politics, but also in size. With that size comes many people of different lineages, customs, and beliefs, and borders with many different countries.
Balancing the varying interests of the people with those of the nation as a political and military entity requires dedicated energy, something the Soviet Union failed to manage. “Instead of safeguarding national interests, the foreign policy was defined by the US-led West. Such immature governance left long-lasting pain for Russia until today.” The primary goal of China today is to build up its own interests at home and abroad, prevent the incursion of Westernism, and build up the party at every level. This, the CCP believes, is the best way to ensure the prosperity of the largest number of people, even if certain lineages, customs, and beliefs have to be sacrificed in the process.
In its last days, the Soviet Union was neither in nor out when it came to political ideology and social unification. “The partial democratization of Soviet society under Gorbachev led to a surge in nationalist and anti-Russian sentiment in most of the 15 Soviet republics, and the Soviet Union collapsed with dramatic speed during the latter part of 1991.” This lukewarm approach was instrumental in its downfall. One thing the CCP has perfect is the idea of a unified leadership maintained through a system of democratic centralism.
Probably the worst criticism of all is the idea that “the public was indifferent to the disintegration of the Soviet Union.” I personally believe that this is what the CCP fears most for China’s future. Not so much that the people will despise them or revolt against them, but that they will simply cease to care about them. That they’ll be too disinterested to rebel, even in their own interest. That despite the party’s best efforts, antipathetic movements like ‘lying flat’ will take hold of the masses, and their dream of rejuvenated, powerful China will be lost forever.
Clearly, Gorbachev’s passing has been used as an opportunity to reaffirm the correctness of China’s approach to internal and external affairs. But more than that, it serves as a glum reminder that even a small misstep over a period of just a couple of years could spell doom for an entire empire. After all, “Gorbachev was deceived by the West. At the critical moment, he could not save the USSR nor the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.”
Staying the course
Since taking the helm, Xi has made it clear that the party will not “encourage any systematic reforms that will threaten the leadership of the Party”. In a leaked speech from 2013, he revisited the collapse of the Soviet Union, calling out Gorbachev by name, and pointing out that the USSR lacked leadership to stand up to the West.
As mentioned in the last news roundup (a new thing I’m trying), China is focused on issues close to home: ensuring a stable economy, creating jobs for future generations, and bringing Taiwan back into the fold. A turbulent global economy, extreme weather conditions, and an increasingly unpopular covid policy has put a visible strain on the CCP’s governance. Talk of an economic crash or societal collapse are widely talked of in the Sinosphere. The Chinese people are now openly challenging authority, protesting in front of banks and even publicly hounding the police.
The 20th CPC National Congress is coming up in a few months, and all predictions point to the party maintaining its current course. Zhang Shuhua, director of the Institute of Political Sciences at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, states that “A strong and consistent leadership is the foundation of our political stability amid the major power rivalry launched by the US, as well as the foundation to ensure the country overcomes all obstacles.” While the rest of the world is in (extreme) flux, the best option is to stay the course.
Xi Jinping is a rigid and inflexible leader. When he took over in 2012, many in the West anticipated sweeping modernisation and reforms that would bring China’s governance closer to that of democratic nations. This did not happen. If anything, the reverse took place. Xi’s rule has signalled a return to socialism with Chinese characteristics, enshrined in his own Xi Jinping thought. The party constantly refers to its past, and relies on the legitimacy of its foundation and the foundation of the PRC to maintain momentum. It is this historical legacy that the CCP clings to with both hands, partly as a bludgeon to beat down any dissent and criticism, and partly as a walking stick to guide it into the future.
As Xi states in The Governance of China vol. III:
The past is a prologue. A nation or a party that forgets where it comes from will not grow and prosper.
A Marxist Party will not remain progressive and wholesome automatically over time, nor will a Party member's Party consciousness deepen merely through length of service and promotion. There is a risk that our original aspiration will fade and disappear if it is neglected. It is easy to forget why we started and where we are going; it is easy to wander off track and get lost.
Our Party was born when the nation was beset by domestic crisis and foreign aggression, so it had to fight to survive, to grow and to triumph. The closer we sail towards national rejuvenation, the more we may encounter heavy seas. We must be mindful of possible dangers in time of peace and possible crisis in time of stability, remain ever-vigilant, boost morale, and be resolved to engage in the great historic struggle with many new features.