When we compare their ideologies and political systems, Pakistan and the People’s Republic of China are two absolutely different countries. Whereas Pakistan is an avowed parliamentary democracy fashioned on the British model, China follows a totalitarian form of government, a remnant of the abandoned Marxist ideology.
Today’s China is diametrically different from what it was during the period it was ruled by Mao Zedong and Zhou en Lai. During the twilight years of Mao’s life, the People’s Republic, despite having a different political system than Pakistan’s, was strikingly similar to Pakistan when it came to chaos, mayhem, and internal instability. Though for different reasons, Pakistan’s present political and economic turmoil has a canny resemblance with what happened in China during the Cultural Revolution.
Read more: China to help Pakistan modernise urban transport
Understanding the matter better
The Cultural Revolution was an ideological movement started by Mao Zedong from 1966 until Mao Zedong’s death in 1976. It aimed at preserving Chinese communism by purging remnants of capitalist and traditional elements from Chinese society and to re-impose Mao Zedong Thought (known outside China as Maoism) as the dominant ideology in the People’s Republic. The Revolution marked Mao’s return to the central position of power in China after a period of less radical leadership to recover from the failures of the Great Leap Forward, which caused the Great Chinese Famine (1959–61). However, the Cultural Revolution failed to achieve its main goals. It was characterized by violence and mayhem, resulting in deaths ranging from hundreds of thousands to millions.
In December 1978, Deng Xiaoping became the new paramount leader of China, replacing Mao’s successor Hua Guofeng. Deng was a pragmatist who gradually dismantled the Maoist policies associated with the Cultural Revolution, and brought the country back to order. Deng together with like-minded members of the Chinese Communist Party began a new phase of China by initiating the historic Reforms and Opening-Up program.
After replacing Hua Guofeng, Deng proposed the idea of correcting the mistakes of the Cultural Revolution. He called for the liberation of thoughts” and urged the party to “seek truth from facts” and abandon ideological dogma. In 1981, the Chinese Communist Party passed a resolution and declared that the Cultural Revolution was “responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the Party, the country, and the people since the founding of the People’s Republic.
Read more: US calls out Russia and China over grain crisis
How did Deng transform the Chinese system?
With a USD 17.5 trillion economies in 2021, China is, after the United States, a distant second global economic power. It ranks third in global military power. In internal security parameters, China is a relatively stable country despite the fact that its political system has, since the opening up of Chinese society, become increasingly vulnerable due to 1) the US-sponsored centrifugal tendencies, and 2) advances in information technology.
To address this problem, China has fine-tuned an already practiced pattern of governance that suits authoritarian states and provides them an alternative of sorts to democracy. This pattern is also being practiced in varying forms by Singapore, the Gulf states, and Iran. I have coined the term “Corporate Governance” for this pattern. It transforms the state into a huge corporate entity where the government is reduced to the status of an oversized board of directors and the population becomes state employees.
The system has all the trappings of democracy – the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive branch. The different institutions make all the right noises but the real power rests with the board of directors (the communist party, the royal family, or the watchdog institution of clerics in Iran’s case ). Sounds like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, with the difference that it is already being practiced. Corporate Governance differs from communism and classical dictatorships in that it is relatively benign and the populace gets a fair share of the national wealth. In this system, human rights are regulated by the state to the extent that they do not clash with the interests of the ruling elite. Cynics believe that western democracy is also a sophisticated version of corporate governance.
How can we learn from the Chinese experience?
Pakistan is fast approaching an economic meltdown generated by chronic political instability. Our economic situation is a function of decades of political brinkmanship. It can only be rectified if sanity is restored among those dwelling in the corridors of power. Switching over from a parliamentary to a presidential form of government is not the remedy because we have tried both systems, and both of them have failed in Pakistan. It is because of our tendency to abuse every political system. The Chinese recovered from the political instability caused by the Cultural Revolution by ruthlessly purging those who were undermining the Chinese State.
Read more: The privatization of Haifa Port: India 1 China 0
They didn’t spare even Mao’s widow and sentenced her to death for conspiring against the state. However, she was not executed. Next, they took stock of the situation and identified the causes of the turmoil. They finally came to the conclusion that, whereas the Communist Party would continue to play the leading role in Chinese society, the economy would have to be restructured. There is a famous dictum attributed to Deng that says “It doesn’t matter whether the cat is black or white, till the time it catches mice”.
In fragile political systems, the Deep State plays the role of an arbiter. But the Deep state can play an effective role only if it does not allow itself to involve in political gimmickry, changing its priorities and favorites according to the whims and personal interests of the ruling aristocracy.
Saleem Akhtar Malik is a Pakistan Army veteran who writes on national and international affairs, defense, military history, and military technology. He Tweets at @saleemakhtar53. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.