Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, in his memoir, wrote that it was Chernobyl, even more than his ‘perestroika,' that led the fall of the Soviet Union. Similarly, the inadequate Chinese response to prevent the spread of the novel Coronavirus and the ensuing devastation has led some to ask whether this is China’s Chernobyl moment, where a health and public safety crisis risks becoming a political crisis and a litmus test for an authoritarian system of governance.
The intense public reaction has prompted fresh enthusiasm that the Chinese people will now see the malaise of the current system. It is hoped that an exposition of the lies told by government officials, combined with a fervent desire for the free flow of information, will lead to public demands for reform.
President Xi Jinping, in a rare admission, said that the outbreak is a "major test" for the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) governance and legitimacy. Undoubtedly, the social contract in between the state and its citizens has taken a hit.
Several commentators have asked: will the death of Doctor Li Wenliang and the subsequent public response act as a catalyst for change, or will it lead to the central government tightening its grip?
In spite of such hopes, this not a Black Swan moment for China.
This isn't to say there won't be any impact. However, the kind of societal and institutional transformation that some are hoping for or predicting is unlikely. Veiled social media attacks against the central leadership, and growing disdain for the system and what it does to servants such as Doctor Li Wenliang is unlikely to translate into widespread public protests.
When Dr. Li warned of a possible health crisis, he did not go to the media with a story or post confidential information. Rather, he warned his colleagues in a group chat. This does not amount to whistleblowing, yet he was charged by the local Wuhan police for disturbing social order by spreading an "illegal rumor", for which he was forced to sign an apology letter. That a professional raising legitimate concerns amongst fellow professionals in a semi-public forum could be charged with criminal speech raised concerns amongst large sections of the Chinese population.
However, the question then becomes whether the public will view such actions as mistakes by the provincial leadership and local police forces that separate from the central government's decisionmaking, or if it views the central government as complicit. Much of this depends on how the Communist Party of China (CCP) is able to frame such events and channel popular dissent.
The CCP has traditionally always denied the existence of any legitimate and popular anger. This denial usually is usually followed the state seizing the narrative by censoring information and producing counter-narratives that pins the blame on hostile overseas separatists. However, this time, it is not only Dr. Li or even a few individuals, groups, or provinces that have been affected. The coronavirus epidemic has generated a unique nationwide reaction in that it has affected each and every province and its residents. Thus, the CCP has been forced to deploy a wide array of tactics to stifle an unprecedented public uproar, particularly after the death of Dr. Li.
In the past, the government has relied on platforms like China Global Televisions Network (CGTN) and Xinhua News Agency to tell the “China story”, but the scale of international response with the coronavirus has prompted prominent Chinese figures and diplomats to platforms like Twitter. Aimed initially to pushback against the traditional view of how China and its leadership are perceived, these channels have become crucial for communicating the reaction and responses of Chinese authorities when faced with a barrage of critical coverage about its foreign policies and domestic affairs. For example, Chinese ambassadors to the US and the UK, Cui Tiankai and Liu Xiaoming and diplomats in Pakistan like Lijian Zhao, now at the Information Department are using Twitter to “telling the story of China and spread its voice”.
In the wake of the Coronavirus outbreak and the subsequent critical coverage of Chinese response, a diplomatic blitzkrieg has been launched to preserve and even enhance China’s global image and reputation as an emerging ‘superpower.’ It has also displayed the adaptability of its response to public sentiment.
Following the widespread outrage and criticism of Chinese authorities' handling of the epidemic and Dr. Li's death, the party leadership realised that suppressing dissent and tributes to Doctor Li would only help add fuel to the fire. The party apparatus, from top to bottom, has thus joined in support of the 34-year-old doctor, hailing him as a hero and a martyr and setting up a “whistle-blower hotline in Wuhan to honour his bravery.
TV anchors that previously berated Dr. Li and seven others as rumormongers and criminals are now paying tributes to him. By appropriating his sacrifice, Beijing has successfully manipulated public discourse and anger into a tool for mass mobilization against local authorities and possibly justifying's the centre's desire to further entrench their power over 'insubordinate' local governments.
Leading Chinese newspaper Global Times, seen as the hawkish mouthpiece of the Party, did blame “overseas separatists” and dubbed it as a usual tactic that has been used in the Hong Kong protests too. However, the crux of their commentary focused on distancing the central government from the actions of provincial governments.
In a BBC interview, when asked about Doctor Li’s death and whether the Chinese state made a mistake in suppressing his warnings, Ambassador Liu promptly “corrected” the interviewer and pointed out that “it wasn’t the Chinese authorities but local authorities” that admonished the doctor. Further, he keenly emphasised that the central government has already begun investigating the matter through the now conjoined superagency of National Supervision Commission (NSC) and the Central Commission for Discipline Infection (CCDI). These bodies are tasked with finding and fix bureaucratic ills and ironically punishing those who fail to disclose information about the disease or their infection.
The CCP is thus scapegoating local governments to distance the central government from complicity and responsibility, furthering the idea that success belongs to the center and that failure is regional. Therefore, the government has tolerated public expressions of anger at local officials and has, at times, even encouraged. As a result, 33 officials in Hubei province have been punished for inadequacies. For instance, the head of the Health Commission in Huanggand was fired for incompetence. Simultaneously, local governments have fallen in line with the CCP's revisionism. For example, even though the Wuhan mayor hinted that he was restricted, or not "authorized", to disclose the severity of the outbreak, he admitted his guilt and tendered his resignation.
Thus, rather than being China's Chernobyl moment, the CCP has in fact successfully steered public discourse and anger away from itself and redirected the wrath of Chinese society at local officials, making it easier it to further entrench its iron grip and assuage popular discontent.
While questions on Xi Jinping's absence have arisen, much like Mao and Deng, he remains firmly in charge. He won't come out of this unscathed, but a man who has already made himself the supreme leader by removing term limits will not tolerate any challenge to his authority. For this reason, local authorities have repeatedly suggested that the thus far insufficient containment and rebuilding efforts were not "personally directed" by Xi, unlike other government campaigns. Instead, Xi has directed the Premier of the People's Republic of China, Li Keqian, to lead the task force to inspect efforts and visit hospitals in Wuhan a bid to rally the public and reshape popular sentiment. Hence, the possibility of China and the CCP coming out of this crisis looking better than before, at least to its domestic population, is a genuine possibility. Simultaneously, if China convinces the world that no other nation would have done a better job of containing the virus, they may also be able to preserve and enhance their international diplomatic, political, and economic legitimacy, capital, and influence.
Perhaps the ancient Chinese philosopher Han Fie Zi summed it up best when he said, "Where there are accomplishments, the ruler takes the credit for their worth; where there are errors, the ministers are held responsible for the blame; hence the ruler's name never suffers."
Reference List
Buckley, C., & Lee Myers, S. (2020). Where’s Xi? China’s Leader Commands Coronavirus Fight From Safe Heights. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/08/world/asia/xi-coronavirus-china.html
Graham-Harrison, E. (2020). Help or hindrance? How Chinese politics affected coronavirus response. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/31/help-or-hindrance-how-chinese-politics-affected-coronavirus-response
Laha, M. (2020). Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.ccpwatch.org/single-post/2020/02/06/China%E2%80%99s-Anti-Graft-Body-Joins-the-Fight-to-Control-the-Coronavirus-Narrative
Li, Y. (2020). Coronavirus Crisis Shows China’s Governance Failure. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/business/china-coronavirus-government.html
Lo, A. (2020). China deserves both blame and praise in fighting outbreak. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3048754/china-deserves-both-blame-and-praise-fighting-outbreak
McGreggor, R. (2020). How coronavirus crisis has brewed a ‘revolt of the professionals’ in China. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3048734/how-coronavirus-crisis-has-brewed-revolt-professionals-china
Wagner, D. (2020). China’s world leadership dreams fade as belt and road projects sour. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3048762/chinas-dreams-world-leadership-are-fading-its-belt-and-road
Walker, A. (2020). What's the coronavirus costing China?. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51386575
Xun, Z. (2020). Coronavirus: how health and politics have always been inextricably linked in China. Retrieved 10 February 2020, from https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-how-health-and-politics-have-always-been-inextricably-linked-in-china-130720
Image Source: VOA News