PAGE 11
FEATURE woroni.com.au
25th August
Where in the world is Jiang Zemin? BRENDAN FORDE WRITER
On the 1st of July 2011, luminaries of the Chinese Communist Party gathered in Beijing to mark the 90th anniversary of the foundation of their Party. Rather than a celebration it was a sober commemoration with Hu Jintao delivering a long address. But there was one figure missing from the event: former leader Jiang Zemin. Jiang’s absence was the subject of reports and speculation from Western media outlets on the event.. On the 4th of July, a story began running that Jiang had died or was dying. The news spread quickly through blogs, drawing the attention of outside observers. Soon, censors intervened: blogs were removed, foreign news websites were blocked, and restrictions were placed on search engines. Searches for Jiang’s name and even the word “river” (which shares the same character as Jiang’s surname) were met with the regime’s standard censure response: “According to relevant policies and laws, the search results are not shown below”.
By this time, the news had spread. Media in Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea reported that Jiang had died. Shandong News website even ran a story about Jiang’s death, before having it removed. This is not the first instance of speculation on Jiang. Rumours about Jiang’s health have been circulating for some time. His attendance at the celebrations for the 60th anniversary of the foundation of the People’s Republic was noted for his apparent poor health. The last, unconfirmed public appearance of Jiang was in 2010 when he visited Sichuan where he was allegedly escorted by an ambulance. Apart from the censorship, the regime’s response has been ambiguous. Reports indicated that senior leaders had been summoned to Beijing ahead of a major announcement on the 7th of July, whilst Chinese television and radio stations were put on notice. An announcement was made under the headline “Jiang Zemin’s death ‘pure rumour’” and the state newsagency, Xinhua, circulated the a report dispelling the rumour. Another statement was issued from the Publicity Department of the Communist Party stating, “About the news that Jiang Zemin has passed away, news organisations
can’t do reports on their own, all news reports should be in accordance with news releases from Xinhua”. Why this reaction? The health of China’s leaders has long been a guarded secret. The natural inclination of the regime has been to obfuscate certain details about its leaders, both past and present. This is undeniably a factor motivating the censorship, but it does not fully explain the regime’s response. Domestically, China is operating in a highly sensitive political climate. With the leadership transition next year, Jiang would have played a significant role in the political negotiations. His influence has probably been used to advance certain candidates; there has been speculation about the relationship between Jiang and Vice-President Xi Jinping. It is possible that Jiang’s death or hospitalisation could impact the succession, hence the secrecy. Chinese citizens exercise little influence over the leadership transition process. Jiang, alive or dead, will not change that. The intended audience is not the general public but the other leaders in the regime, with the speculation surrounding Jiang being used as a political tool in leadership negotiations.
Another development may also hold some clues. One of China’s most wanted men, Lai Changxing, was recently extradited from Canada. Lai was a leading business figure from Xiamen and allegedly engaged in significant smuggling operations. The extent of Lai’s connections with the elite leadership, and Jiang in particular, cannot be completely ascertained, but Lai has threatened that he will implicate senior leaders when he returns to China. Jiang had previously threatened
that Lai would be executed if extradited, but the Chinese government has now promised that he will not face such a penalty. Perhaps the regime does not want Jiang’s death to overshadow the leadership transition, or the attempts by Xi Jinping to solidify his power. This may be a case of the regime withholding information, waiting only to release it only when they are ready.
by a wave of hushed and uncomfortable silence. Some break the silence by attempting to ask me why I study it, some make it a point to persuade me not to study it (“What will you do after you graduate?”), while others even commend me for studying it, albeit for the wrong reasons. (“Its good that you’re so carefree about your future!”) However, it seems that Malaysian society is not alone in sidelining the role history plays. Even as a history student in Australia, it is often easy to forget the importance of history and what it represents when facing the mammoth task of juggling assignments and essays. Yet there is no doubt that the study of history is extremely important. One need only type the words ‘history’ and ‘important’ into Google and lo and behold, a stream of cliché metaphors will
flood in. “It is a beacon of light, illuminating our present circumstances into the unchartered future” scribbles one blogger while another proclaims that history “charts the direction into the future”. Cheesy literary devices aside though, the importance of history is often underestimated and downplayed. Outside the confines of academia, most people only vaguely remember their encounter with history in the course of their primary and secondary schooling. In Malaysia, the government’s decision to make history a compulsory subject at high school has erupted in a furore of controversy among many people, not least the parents of students affected. Apart from glaring inaccuracies in history books targeted for inclusion in the curriculum, there is common suspicion that history
is being re-written to cast certain ethnic groups such as the Chinese and Indian migrant population in a less favourable light with their contributions to nation-building largely ignored or diminished. Worse still, some groups have accused the government of approving history books whose contents tend to denigrate these ethnic groups and cast them in unflattering stereotypes. A case in point is the Government’s curious move to make Interlok, a work of fiction, a compulsory history text. Despite widespread unease and unhappiness at the book’s inclusion, which detractors say insults Indians and Chinese and casts them in an inferior light, the Government has remained unwavering in its decision. Some say the decision of the government in making history a compulsory subject and the at-
titude of the government vis-à-vis Interlok betrays a continuing tendency towards asserting the Malays as the dominant race in the country. Although the contents of the novel have been watered down in the face of opposition, this incident serves to emphasise the importance of history in reflecting past events that guide the present and determine the future. Even in a society that has traditionally overlooked the importance of the study of the humanities and social sciences, the government, through its actions, has ironically revived interest in history.
Malaysia’s lesson in history
MARIE NGIAM WRITER
Over the summer, I made a trip to Malaysia where I had the chance to visit old friends, old places and perhaps not-so-old relatives. The countless hours spent with the latter group involved uncomfortably squirming in my seat as they interrogated me about various things such as my ability to use a stove and whether I had failed any courses. Without failure, our topics of conversation would stray into the realm of what I was studying. I would tell them that apart from law, I study history and language. It is at this point that I am met with gasps of horror followed