The document discusses China's anti-corruption campaign and argues that it must be relentless to be effective. It notes that corruption has become deeply ingrained in Chinese society and institutions. While the campaign has widespread public support, some argue it could damage the government's image or hurt the economy. However, the document counters that allowing corruption to continue would more surely undermine public trust and institutions. It asserts the campaign must demonstrate zero tolerance for corruption through tough actions against both high-level "tigers" and low-level "flies".
The document discusses China's anti-corruption campaign and argues that it must be relentless to be effective. It notes that corruption has become deeply ingrained in Chinese society and institutions. While the campaign has widespread public support, some argue it could damage the government's image or hurt the economy. However, the document counters that allowing corruption to continue would more surely undermine public trust and institutions. It asserts the campaign must demonstrate zero tolerance for corruption through tough actions against both high-level "tigers" and low-level "flies".
The document discusses China's anti-corruption campaign and argues that it must be relentless to be effective. It notes that corruption has become deeply ingrained in Chinese society and institutions. While the campaign has widespread public support, some argue it could damage the government's image or hurt the economy. However, the document counters that allowing corruption to continue would more surely undermine public trust and institutions. It asserts the campaign must demonstrate zero tolerance for corruption through tough actions against both high-level "tigers" and low-level "flies".
The document discusses China's anti-corruption campaign and argues that it must be relentless to be effective. It notes that corruption has become deeply ingrained in Chinese society and institutions. While the campaign has widespread public support, some argue it could damage the government's image or hurt the economy. However, the document counters that allowing corruption to continue would more surely undermine public trust and institutions. It asserts the campaign must demonstrate zero tolerance for corruption through tough actions against both high-level "tigers" and low-level "flies".
The military and information control are key parts of the Chinese government, and exposing the rot in these sectors will understandably shake public trust. The cases of Gu Junshan and Guo Zhenxi, for example, show just how deep the problem goes. In the military, especially, corruption can be deadly. Leaders from Deng Xiaoping to Jiang Zemin , Hu Jintao and now Xi Jinping have prioritised the armed forces. They understand that a corrupt army can be easily defeated. To root out corruption, moral education plays a part. But the most effective means is to build institutions that bring power under scrutiny. Official discipline must be enforced through a system of supervision, accountability and transparency. Some people have suggested that while the West relies on the rule of law to curb corruption, China should rely on politics. This is wrong. Corrupt officials like Chen Xitong and Chen Liangyu were clever enough to say the right things about opposing corruption, while doing everything wrong. Su Rong, for example, even wrote an article last year demanding stronger enforcement of party discipline. Errant officials must have their knuckles rapped. N o one is off limits in the governments campaign against corruption. CCTV financial news channel director Guo Zhenxi was put under investigation late last month, three months after the sacking of security vice-minister Li Dongsheng, who also worked for the state broadcaster. In late March, Gu Junshan , a former deputy logistics chief of the Peoples Liberation Army, was indicted for embezzlement and bribery, among other charges. This month, the government announced that Su Rong , vice-chairman of the Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference, was being investigated for disciplinary violations, the most senior serving official to be investigated so far. A few days later, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection reported on its website that Ling Zhengce , the vice-chairman of Shanxis political advisory body, was also under investigation. The fall from grace of one official after another demonstrates the governments determination to net both tigers and flies. No organisation or individual should be untouchable, because corruption is pervasive. As these and other cases show, the malaise has reached into every nook and cranny in Chinese society, and collusion between the corrupt is commonplace. As long as the oversight of power remains lax, corruption will flourish. By coming down hard on perpetrators, the government is building up public confidence in its law enforcement. It also sends a warning to other corrupt officials. The ferocity of the crackdown under the current government has been unprecedented in recent times. Although supported by most Chinese, the campaign has its doubters nonetheless. Some said cleaning up government is good, but only up to a point, or we risk damaging the image of party and government. Others have voiced fears that a sustained crackdown would hurt economic development. Yet others have absurdly suggested that the crackdown would encourage inaptitude, because officials who are afraid of being held responsible for making a mistake would try to do as little as possible. These arguments are all indefensible. People who argue thus may have good intentions but such twisted reasoning can be easily hijacked and used to shield the corrupt. To be sure, revelations of corruption in high places may for a while lower some peoples trust in the government. But corrupt dealings are a fact, whether or not they have been exposed. Allowing them to fester and rot away Chinas public institutions is actually the surer way to erode public confidence. So the fight against corruption cannot be half- hearted. The government must demonstrate its zero tolerance for corruption through its actions. This is the best way to burnish the leaderships image. Chinas economic growth is slowing. No doubt businesses in the fine dining, hotel and entertainment industries are hurting because of the corruption crackdown. But should they have flourished to such a degree in the first place? Many of these companies thrive on dirty money; one could argue that the economy would be better off without them. Anti-graft officers should get even tougher, in fact. When times were good, the problems of overcapacity, high debt and credit risks were easily covered up by the boom. With the focus now on belt-tightening and restructuring, exposing the problems is the first step towards solving them. Its vital for the government to build a just and fair society to ensure China meets its development and reform goals. And cracking down on the No one can be above the law in Chinas anti-corruption campaign Hu Shuli says Beijing must leave no stone unturned if it wishes to build credibility and send a warning to errant officials to clean up their act Allowing corruption to fester is the surer way to erode public confidence Thursday, June 26, 2014 A13 > CONTACT US Agree or disagree with the opinions on this page? Write to us at letters@scmp.com. If you have an idea for an opinion article, email it to oped@scmp.com T he history books misinform us that the cold war finished around 1990. Last month, Western sanctions on Ukraine provoked Russian Prime Min- ister Dmitry Medvedev to compare the current situation with the cold war era. The fact that President Vladimir Putin played down such a comparison should make us more inclined to see its validity. In reality, the cold war has never stopped bubbling up (most obviously on the Korean penin- sula), and now Russias imperial resur- gence has set new precedents that Beijing could seek to emulate. We tend to think a cold war requires, specifically, two antagonistic leading powers, like the US and the USSR in the last century. However, when George Orwell coined the term cold war in 1945, he had three great empires in mind: China would emerge as the third super state. The tri-polar nature of the current world order Russia, China and the US (plus its glued-on allies) includes some cold war hallmarks yet also adds one or two new motifs. We still have economic sanctions, the retaliatory expulsion of diplomats (such as by the US in response to Russian interference in Ukraine) and perilously close fly-bys (Chinese fighter jets buzzing up to Japanese reconnais- sance aircraft) akin to those between the US and USSR in the cold war movie, Top Gun. What is new is the development of cyberspying, aptly topped off with the triangulated defection of Edward Snow- den. Now the most widely known spy in history excluding James Bond Snow- den turned traitor on the US government and, before defecting to Russia, he fled first to China (he would not have chosen Hong Kong were it not in the Peoples Republic). Spying may be more of a desk job than it once was, but the fact you can spy from home, thousands of miles from danger, encourages more espionage than could have possibly occurred during the cold war. The US has accused China and Russia of cyberspying but of course all three are at it in abundance, which is only natural in the circumstances. The rise of communist China threatens US hegemony, and Rus- sias authoritarian democracy presents an alternative model to any so-called consen- sus Washingtons or Beijings. The current Sino-Russian entente, from the recent gas deal, their common stance over Syria and friendly relations with Iran, through to Beijings willingness to overlook Moscows contravention in Ukraine of the core principle upon which Chinese foreign policy is based that of noninterference echoes the cold war, or at least its early phase. When China became the USSRs communist kid broth- er in 1949, it admired its elder siblings bravery and bravado and disregarded its indiscretions. The brothers later drifted apart. Yet, before China came of age in the 1990s, the USSRs nervous breakdown (1989-91) was a shocking familial embar- rassment. But now the Russian although not, as some commentators allude to, the Soviet empire is striking back. Dont be fooled by media suggestions of a rapprochement with Ukraine by Putin: he is the consum- mate realist leader, adept at the zero-sum game, the rules of which together with his own KGB career were forged during the cold war era. Moscows boldness and its desire to draw closer to Beijing as an ally can only embolden China in its quest to restore its own place in the world, including in the East and South China Seas. Russia sets the example on how to obtain territorial objec- tives. In early March, Western media wide- ly reported that Putin had no intention of annexing Crimea. For example, regarding the then forthcoming referendum, The Independent newspaper in the UK stated that greater autonomy and indepen- dence may both be on the ballot paper. But not reunification with Russia. Two weeks later, knowing neither Ukraine nor Nato would retaliate with force, Putin annexed the gas- and oil-rich Crimean peninsula. Putin had achieved his primary objective, and China was left wondering why its own territorial claims seem so intractable. In the old cold war, public allegiance was more clearly defined, at least on the Wests side of the fence. If you were North American or Western European, for instance, in general, your allegiance to the US may have reasonably been assumed. Today, there are more obvious signs of dissension within the West. For example, many Americans and many more Euro- peans see Snowden as a heroic figure for acting against the megalomaniac US authorities. And throughout Europe including in former Soviet-controlled nations such as Hungary nationalist politicians, whose standing rose in the recent European Union elections, profess sincere admira- tion for Putin. Interestingly, Putins fan base also includes a growing band of US Republicans, and, of course, many citizens and leaders in China. So its a paradoxical neo-cold-war world. Theres far less fear that this cold war will turn nuclear, but no fear disputes whether in east Europe or East Asia will resolve themselves without the use of aggressive cold war tactics. Is China cur- rently just warming up? Paul Letters is a political commentator and writer. See paulletters.com Moscows boldness can only embolden China in its quest to restore its own place in the world Paul Letters looks at todays tri-polar global order and finds the claims of extensive spying, economic sanctions, diplomatic expulsions and provocative fly-bys all rather familiar Cold war redux L aw and politics are not supposed to mix, but it is often difficult to separate one from the other. Over the years, Hong Kongs legal community has played an important role in defending the rule of law and, in doing so, commenting on politically sensitive issues. Tomorrow, some members of the profession will take part in a rare protest march, the third of its kind since the handover. This time, the march is in support of judicial independence in light of the central governments recent white paper on Hong Kong. The document raised concerns by classifying judges as administrators with a basic political requirement to love the country. The protest gives lawyers a chance to signal their support for the independence of our judges, a hallmark of the one country, two systems concept. It will be attended by barristers and solicitors, but their respective professional organisations have reacted very differently to the controversy. The Bar Association, representing barristers, responded swiftly and sharply to the white paper, issuing a strong statement defending the rule of law and judicial independence. In contrast, Ambrose Lam San-keung, president of the Law Society, representing solicitors, said he saw the white paper as apositive document that reaffirmed the judiciarys independence. His comments have, not surprisingly, sparked a backlash by some solicitors and Lam is now facing a no-confidence motion. It is not the first time the two bodies have differed. When the Law Society issued a paper on legal aspects of the universal suffrage debate, Lam refused to comment on questions such as whether the public could recommend candidates for election or whether there should be a cap on the number of candidates, saying he did not want to be drawn into a political wrestling match. (The Bar had stated there was no legal impediment to public recommendation.) Concerns about commenting on political issues have not, however, prevented Lam from condemning the Occupy Central movement, calling on the US to reveal its snooping operations in Hong Kong, or speaking out on Sino-Vietnamese tensions. There is a perception that solicitors, many of whom work for law firms doing business on the mainland, are reluctant to say anything that might offend the central government, while barristers are more willing to speak out. But it is dangerous to generalise, as the reaction of some solicitors to Lams comments on the white paper shows. Not all barristers support the Bar Associations often outspoken stance and not all solicitors agree with the position adopted by the Law Society. I doubt, however, that any would disagree with supporting the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. The Bar and Law Society can make a valuable contribution to public debates on sensitive issues that touch on the law. Their expertise and perceived objectivity means their views can carry great weight. They should speak out in defence of our legal system when it appears to be under threat. After all, if lawyers are not going to stand up for the rule of law, who will? Cliff Buddle is the Posts editor, special projects Vital defence Cliff Buddle says the legal community must continue to speak out on sensitive issues, such as the white paper, to help protect the rule of law W hen the Jakarta police entered a toy warehouse in April, they were not shopping for their children. In what was the countrys biggest drug bust of the past two years, 90kg of high-purity crystal methamphetamine was uncovered. The investigation implicated an organised crime ring stretching from Hong Kong to Malaysia and Indonesia. At around the same time, Malaysian authorities arrested a group of Iranians for trafficking 22kg of crystal meth into the country; and just lately, Thailand discovered 600,000 speed pills produced in Myanmar and smuggled across the border by a major criminal network. While these operations provide yet more evidence of the threat of organised crime networks operating in Asia, none is as illuminating as a recent drug seizure in Boshe village in Guangdong. In a single operation five months ago, Chinese officers raided a drug lab containing over three tonnes of crystal meth and arrested 182 people, including senior village leaders. Linked to numerous trafficking networks across the region, the drugs in the lab were worth millions of dollars. Amazing as it may seem, this remarkably large operation in Guangdong is only the tip of the iceberg. The money generated by transnational organised crime in East Asia has recently been estimated very conservatively to reach a staggering US$90 billion per year. While this includes money generated from crime such as the trade in counterfeit goods and fraudulent medicines, illegal wood products and protected species, and the trafficking of men, women and children, the value of the drug economy constitutes the largest amount, at about US$32 billion a year. Some drugs like heroin can be traced back to a specific geographic location near the Mekong River, in what is traditionally known as the Golden Triangle, while other synthetic drugs are now manufactured in almost every country in Asia. Law enforcement struggles to protect long and porous borders in the region. As regional integration accelerates in the coming years, the movement of people, goods and money will increase and so too will the challenges. The power of illegal money flows that are larger than the size of some national economies can hardly be overstated. Not surprisingly, this money is used to bribe officials, perpetuating and expanding corruption throughout the region. Adding to the problem, weak enforcement of laws deters foreign investment and undermines domestic businesses confronted with unfair competition from those that break the law with impunity. The human impact is even more worrisome, as the trade and consumption of drugs rip families apart, overwhelm criminal justice systems and create significant health risks. Efforts to integrate the region are admirable and should be supported. But while the positive effects of these developments on economic growth are well known, the flipside of how criminal networks will benefit is often not given enough attention. Such networks not only transcend borders but take advantage of their weaknesses. Failure to seriously address the problem of transnational organised crime and trafficking risks undermining the many benefits of regional integration. An ambitious shared agenda and joint approach is crucial to confront this growing challenge. By opening up to sustained cooperation and effective regional coordination, Asia may just live up to its promise as a leading region in the 21st century. Jeremy Douglas is the regional representative for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Asias more open borders must stay closed to criminals Jeremy Douglas warns of drug syndicates profiting from integration The power of illegal money flows larger than national economies cant be overstated This article is provided by Caixin Media, and the Chinese version of it was first published in Century Weekly magazine. www.caixin.com