Jiang Zemin Era”: Legitimacy

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Southern Queensland ePrints 1 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND THE EMERGENCE OF THE “JIANG ZEMIN ERA”: LEGITIMACY AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE POLITCAL THEORY OF “NEO-CONSERVATISM” – 1989-1995 A Dissertation submitted by David Rolls, BA, Grad Dip Ed (Sec), MA In fulfillment of the requirements For the award of Doctor of Philosophy (Asian Studies) 2004 2 ABSTRACT This research addresses the establishment of the “Jiang Zemin Era” whereby Jiang Zemin, and the Chinese Communist Party, have attempted to re- legitimise the Party and have attempted to make the Party meaningful to the Chinese populace. What is fundamental to this research is how Jiang Zemin, as the “core leader” of the third generational leadership, incorporated the political thought of neo-conservatism (xin baoshouzhuyi) into the framework of Marxist- Leninist-Mao Zedong Thought (MLM) ideology in order to re-legitimise the CCP. The timeframe within the research is from Jiang’s appointment as the General Secretary of the CCP in 1989 until 1995. It is important that this was a time period whereby Jiang had to consolidate, and therefore legitimise, his “core leadership”, and provide a theoretical platform in order to bring forth his own “era”. The research is predominantly a historiographical narrative, utilising both primary and secondary sources, that examines the mechanisms Jiang utilised in order to create a strong government, with himself as the “core”, which pursued increased levels of marketisation. Indeed, after being appointed General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party in 1989, Jiang Zemin had to achieve two goals in order to sustain and legitimate his position as “the core of the third generational leadership”. First, he had to secure his position as “the core” through the creation of secured networks and alliances as well as legitimise of his “informal” 3 and “formal” positions in the CCP hierarchy. In order to achieve this, Jiang had to first create a sustainable power base in order to retain, and therefore legitimise, his formalized positions as General Secretary of the CCP, Chairman of the Chinese Military Commission and the Presidency. In addition, he needed to be able to create alliances with both allies and protégés as well as differing power factions, be they conservative/elder or reformist, and with other leading figures like Li Peng and Zhu Rongji. Second, in order to further reinforce and legitimize his position as “the core”, Jiang had to develop his own “theoretical framework” for governing the country – much as Mao and Deng had done previously. Therefore, the research also examines Jiang’s usage of the neo- conservatism as a means of not only legitimising the CCP’s ideological framework but also as a means of providing his own “guiding thought”, thus enabling him to establish his own “era”. Indeed, after establishing himself as the “core” through the aforementioned processes, Jiang had to develop such a theoretical framework that complimented Deng’s economic reforms, especially as he was designated by Deng, yet one that retained a smattering of Mao Zedong’s “Thoughts” that could be applied pragmatically during the 1990s. It can be seen that Jiang Zemin successfully incorporated the political thought of “neo-conservatism” within his platform in order to achieve these ends – including the establishment of a “Jiang Zemin Era”. This political thought, a successor to the political theory of “neo-authoritarianism”, already had several 4 adherents within the higher echelons of the CCP. Indeed, it would be Jiang’s 1995 speech, entitled “Stressing Politics”, that would signify the incorporation of neo-conservatism within Jiang’s platform of (self) legitimation that would initiate the successful implementation of a “Jiang Zemin Era”. 5 CERTIFICATE OF DISSERTATION I certify that the ideas, experimental work, results, analyses, software and conclusions reported in this dissertation are entirely my own effort, except where otherwise acknowledged. I also certify that the work is original and has not been previously submitted for any other award, except where otherwise acknowledged. ____________________ _______________ Signature of Candidate Date ENDORSEMENT ____________________ _______________ Signature of Supervisor Date ____________________ _______________ Signature of Supervisor Date 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to my primary supervisor, Professor Don McMillen, for his support over the many years. Without his guidance, wisdom, encouragement and practical support this thesis may never had eventuated. In addition, I would like to thank my second supervisor, Professor Colin Mackerras (Griffith University), for his guidance and wise comments over the years. As well, I would like to thank friends, family and my partner for supporting me in this enterprise, and more so, having faith that I could complete it. 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS One Introduction 1 Two The Political Thought of Neo-Conservatism 22 Three The Legitimisation of the CCP 53 Four Pre-Mortem Succession 85 June 1989 to October 1992 Five The “Jiang Zemin Era”: 125 Legitimisation and Consolidation Six Conclusion 171 ABBREVIATIONS 181 BIBLIOGRAPHY 182 8 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought (MLM) is still the official ideology in the People's Republic of China (PRC). However, due to the increasing modernisation of the Chinese economy, with its capitalist orientations under the banner of "socialism with Chinese characteristics", it appears that the elite political actors within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) no longer adhere to Marxist or Leninist doctrine and are no longer inspired by Mao Zedong Thought. Therefore, although MLM retains its official status as the state's ideology, MLM within contemporary China is viewed as being an “ideological vacuum”. As such, there are arguments that the CCP has lost its legitimacy to rule China. Indeed, China observers reacted to the 1989 Tiananmen Incident as an example of the CCP’s inherent lack of legitimacy. Since 1989, however, the CCP has attempted to re-legitimise the Party and has attempted to make the Party meaningful to the Chinese populace. As Fewsmith (2001, p.88) notes: “to state that ideology plays a diminished role in the present era is not to say it plays no role, a mistake frequently made”. What is evident is that the CCP has incorporated the political theory of neo- conservatism (xin baoshouzhuyi) into the framework of the MLM ideology in order the re-legitimise the CCP, especially during the tenure of Jiang Zemin’s “core leadership” of the third generational leadership1. 1 The “first generation” was based on the leadership of Mao Zedong, the “second generation” was based on the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, the third on Jiang Zemin and the current “fourth generational leadership” under Hu Jintao. 9 It could be argued that the incorporation of the political theory of neo- conservatism enabled Jiang to legitimise the Party and ensure its survival. Jiang fashioned an ideology that retained Marxism-Leninism ideals, and which could be relevant for China in the new millennium. Furthermore, as Jiang commandeered the three highest positions in China - namely General Secretary of the CCP, Chairman of the Chinese Military Commission (CMC) and the Presidency - it appeared that with the creation of this new hybrid ideology that there was an emergence of a "Jiang Zemin Era"; an era which Sinologists were heralding even before the February 1997 death of the Deng Xiaoping, the unofficial leader of China. It is important to note that there could not be a "Jiang Zemin Era" without an orchestrated platform of goals. In addition, there could not be a "Jiang Zemin Era" without an incorporation of another political discourse, albeit unofficially, within the framework of the Party's official ideology of MLM. This was necessary nominally for two reasons. First, as the appointed successor by Deng Xiaoping, Jiang could not adroitly continue Deng's fundamentally economic drive to modernisation without substantial changes. This is because without changes to Deng's pragmatic economic legacy, accusations could arise that Jiang was merely another somewhat ill-fated Hua Guofeng2. In addition, after the 1989 Tiananmen Incident, there were still some stalwarts within the CCP who were ideologically against the promotion of the 2 This statement is in reference to Mao’s last designated heir who continued to pursue Mao's ambitious, but eventually chaotic, "class struggle" until being overthrown by Deng in 1978-79. 10 economy over the furthering of China's "politicalisation". For Jiang to initially champion Deng's economic drive would alienate him from the conservative faction within the CCP thus hampering any chance of his securing any power within the factions of the CCP. Second, nor could Jiang characterise his power with a resurgence of Maoist dogma in an attempt to reinvigorate China with ideological themes reminiscent of the "class struggle" experienced during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). Purely concentrating only on Marxist politics, it was deemed, would destabilise the successful economic "open-door" and modernisation policies initiated by Deng. Furthermore, as Deng's successor, such a push to the ideological left could not be undertaken whilst Deng was still alive. Therefore, with his appointment as General Secretary in 1989, Jiang was in the perilous position of harmonising Mao's excessive "leftism", in order to appease the conservative faction within the CCP, with Deng's excessive "rightism", in order to appease the reformist faction. Indeed, it would appear that Jiang successfully oscillated between both camps during the period under study (1989 – 1995). Essentially, to institute a "Jiang Zemin Era", an ideological "balance" needed to be created that absorbed the best features of both Mao and Deng. Therefore a new political discourse was required that incorporated centralism and strong government (which were central elements of the "Mao Era") as well as establishing capitalistic-orientated economic policies and a market economy (which were central elements of the "Deng Era").

Load more