By Lee Seong-hyon
America's ideal strategy in dealing with China is to impede its rise without having to resort to military action. Although the coronavirus is an epidemic, from the U.S. strategic point of view, it's also fair game to use the case to undermine the Communist Party of China, and particularly, Xi Jinping, its leader. The buck ultimately stops at his post.
The key questions are: 1) How much of this is a threat to Xi Jinping's Communist system? 2) How has the U.S. responded to the situation? 3) Is the Communist Party of China (CPC) effectively preserving the popular vote of confidence?
The U.S. has launched an unprecedented public opinion warfare to induce a wave of public discontent in China, while the CPC was showing a poor response in dealing with the situation. It includes the death of Dr. Li Wenliang, who first exposed the coronavirus, an inadequate medical response system, social panic due to the prolonged isolation of residents, a growing distrust of the Chinese government and a paralysis of economic activities. These all have heightened a sense of social instability in China.
But with the CPC's "hierarchical authority" (the emperor is blameless; local authorities are to be blamed) and "hero-making and scapegoating" also in operation, the situation has yet to rise to a "meaningful" level to the Communist Party in the short run. Nevertheless, if the situation becomes mid- to long-term, it could pose a significant challenge to Xi's authority and the legitimacy of the CPC.
The U.S. government was the first in the world to announce on January 31 that it would evacuate its diplomats from Wuhan, declare a public health emergency in connection with the coronavirus crisis, and impose a temporary ban on foreign nationals who have been to China for the past two weeks from entering the U.S.
This was a use of the "cueing" psychology, i.e. with no decision made by other countries on how they should react to the coronavirus crisis, the U.S. took the above initiatives in a preemptive manner, prompting other countries to take similar action.
China accused the U.S. of "excessive" action causing "a state of panic." China's Foreign Ministry accused the United States of being the first in the world to evacuate its consulate and diplomatic mission from Wuhan and to cause public panic by banning Chinese nationals from entering the United States.
China also pointed out at that time "the U.S. has not given any real help to China," in contrast to countries such as South Korea and Japan that were sending masks and medical supplies.
In addition, China's Foreign Ministry, which is well-versed in the psychological warfare tactics required to manage public opinion in the socialist state, said, "Even the U.S. media and experts are questioning the U.S. government's actions," suggesting that the U.S.' actions were not even supported by its own people.
Overall, the U.S. has been using the virus epidemic to question the leadership of the CCP, including President Xi Jinping, pointing out the situation has worsened due to the Chinese central government's slow response and draconian media control.
The U.S. government, political leaders and the media are searching for the reasons behind China's failure to cope with the coronavirus, which they call a "China model" failure. That is, due to China's institutional factors such as the absence of freedom of press, information shutdowns to the outside world and vertical power structure; not to mention China's authoritarian leadership.
This could lead to further questioning of the legitimacy of China's regime and its state-controlled capitalist practices. In the framework of U.S.-China relations, the competition for hegemony between the U.S. and China not only includes security and the economy, but also the rivalry in the political systems, indicating that the scope and area of competition is expanding.
It is true that most Chinese people are extremely angry about the death of Dr. Li Wenliang. But due to a lack of critical political consciousness due to the long-standing socialist media brainwashing under the seven decades of the CCP's rule, many of these people are certainly unclear on what they are really angry about or at whom they should be directing their anger.
Most importantly, except for a few, hardly anyone dares to talk about these issues in China. Ideas do not reach a "critical mass" for revolution. Having said that, the variable to watch is how long the epidemic lasts.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the Sejong Institute.
 |
The key questions are: 1) How much of this is a threat to Xi Jinping's Communist system? 2) How has the U.S. responded to the situation? 3) Is the Communist Party of China (CPC) effectively preserving the popular vote of confidence?
The U.S. has launched an unprecedented public opinion warfare to induce a wave of public discontent in China, while the CPC was showing a poor response in dealing with the situation. It includes the death of Dr. Li Wenliang, who first exposed the coronavirus, an inadequate medical response system, social panic due to the prolonged isolation of residents, a growing distrust of the Chinese government and a paralysis of economic activities. These all have heightened a sense of social instability in China.
But with the CPC's "hierarchical authority" (the emperor is blameless; local authorities are to be blamed) and "hero-making and scapegoating" also in operation, the situation has yet to rise to a "meaningful" level to the Communist Party in the short run. Nevertheless, if the situation becomes mid- to long-term, it could pose a significant challenge to Xi's authority and the legitimacy of the CPC.
The U.S. government was the first in the world to announce on January 31 that it would evacuate its diplomats from Wuhan, declare a public health emergency in connection with the coronavirus crisis, and impose a temporary ban on foreign nationals who have been to China for the past two weeks from entering the U.S.
This was a use of the "cueing" psychology, i.e. with no decision made by other countries on how they should react to the coronavirus crisis, the U.S. took the above initiatives in a preemptive manner, prompting other countries to take similar action.
China accused the U.S. of "excessive" action causing "a state of panic." China's Foreign Ministry accused the United States of being the first in the world to evacuate its consulate and diplomatic mission from Wuhan and to cause public panic by banning Chinese nationals from entering the United States.
China also pointed out at that time "the U.S. has not given any real help to China," in contrast to countries such as South Korea and Japan that were sending masks and medical supplies.
In addition, China's Foreign Ministry, which is well-versed in the psychological warfare tactics required to manage public opinion in the socialist state, said, "Even the U.S. media and experts are questioning the U.S. government's actions," suggesting that the U.S.' actions were not even supported by its own people.
Overall, the U.S. has been using the virus epidemic to question the leadership of the CCP, including President Xi Jinping, pointing out the situation has worsened due to the Chinese central government's slow response and draconian media control.
The U.S. government, political leaders and the media are searching for the reasons behind China's failure to cope with the coronavirus, which they call a "China model" failure. That is, due to China's institutional factors such as the absence of freedom of press, information shutdowns to the outside world and vertical power structure; not to mention China's authoritarian leadership.
This could lead to further questioning of the legitimacy of China's regime and its state-controlled capitalist practices. In the framework of U.S.-China relations, the competition for hegemony between the U.S. and China not only includes security and the economy, but also the rivalry in the political systems, indicating that the scope and area of competition is expanding.
It is true that most Chinese people are extremely angry about the death of Dr. Li Wenliang. But due to a lack of critical political consciousness due to the long-standing socialist media brainwashing under the seven decades of the CCP's rule, many of these people are certainly unclear on what they are really angry about or at whom they should be directing their anger.
Most importantly, except for a few, hardly anyone dares to talk about these issues in China. Ideas do not reach a "critical mass" for revolution. Having said that, the variable to watch is how long the epidemic lasts.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the Sejong Institute.
![[SPECIAL REPORT] Korea should embrace cultural diversity in integrating immigrants](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/f698a6e4eff04176afcf14921004fe7d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] INFINITE's Nam Woo-hyun returns after battling with rare cancer](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/a3c3440b8dc84bce8ca94394a170fef2.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[PHOTOS] It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas](http://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/newsV2/images/santa_0001_9a339f16fb3ac.JPG/dims/resize/268/optimize)
