On January 21, the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals (JINF), a privately-financed think tank headquartered in Tokyo which I head, had the pleasure of hosting Ms Cui Weiping, a former professor at Beijing Film Academy and a well-known social and cultural critic. In her late 50s, Ms Cui is one of the 303 Chinese intellectuals who signed the “08 Charter,” calling for a bold reform of China’s political regime. In March 2009, she attended the “Homo Momini Human Rights Award” ceremony in Prague, representing all of the signatories to the charter, including Nobel Prize Laureate Liu Xiaobao to whom the award was given.

　　　A three-hour exchange of ideas and opinions between Professor Cui and JINF representatives convinced all of the attendees that the move towards democracy in today’s China is steadily gaining strength. “A pre-democracy” was how she described the current state of Chinese-style democratization, explaining:

　　　“The fierce anti-Japanese demonstrations staged across China last September 15 (set off by the “Senkaku incident”) were state demonstrations organized by the Chinese government. It is an undeniable fact that the government could have controlled them in any way it desired. Following this series of demonstrations, I launched a campaign to collect signatures, with an appeal that China-Japan relations be considered cooly and that the Chinese mass media report on the bilateral relations more objectively.”

　　　Mobs of angry Chinese demonstrators which Ms Cui described as a huge crowd incited uncontrollably – as though they had just returned from a war against Japan – destroyed or burned down many stores or factories owned by Aeon and other Japanese corporations. This despite the fact that these corporations had been contributing significantly to China and its people. Ms Cui declares that those riots were actually government-organized. She also pointed out that the Chinese government takes advantage of the anti-Japanese sentiments of the Chinese people as a means of diverting their grievances over worsening social contradictions that otherwise would be directed at them. They also use these sentiments as a weapon with which to attack adversaries in the power struggle within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). And yet, she further notes, there are genuine anti-Japanese activities as well at times. Based on such observations, Ms Cui stressed the need for bilateral interchanges at the private level in order to prevent the political manipulation of anti-Japanese sentiments in China.

　　　“I wish to remind you,” continued Ms Cui, “that public opinion in China today splits along two lines, one representing the government’s point of view and the other that of the private sector. The former is all about public relations and propaganda, while the latter embodies the ideas of entrepreneurs and intellectuals. There is a considerable gap between the two, and the CCP’s authority has gradually been waning within this gap.”

“The Old Regime and the Revolution”

　　　How is the Chinese people’s thinking about the CCP changing, then? Explains Ms Cui: “Private citizens, including Professor Sun Liping of Qinghua University, maintain that ‘reform’ (which the CCP has advocated over the years) must now be discarded, asserting that the word must be replaced by ‘transformation.’”

　　　Needless to say, this includes political transformation. Ms Cui notes that the CCP has been aroused to a strong sense of impending crisis by the growing calls from the public for such a change, explaining:

　　　“Three months ago, Wang Qishan, a high-ranking CCP official, instructed all CCP members to read The Old Regime and the Revolution, written by Alexis de Tocqueville, a 19^th century French political thinker and historian.”

　　　Wang (64) is a Vice Premier and Secretary of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection. It comes as a big surprise that Wang, considered to be an advocate of structural reform, has directed all party members to read this important work by the French thinker. Remarks Ms Cui emphatically:

　　　“What just happened shows that China is at a turning point for a new state system, that the legitimacy of the CCP as a political party in power is being questioned, and that the whole of the CCP from top to bottom is beginning to be awakened to a sense of impending danger as regards the stability of its own rule.”

　　　I quickly skimmed through a 566-page Japanese translation of de Tocqueville’s book – certainly not the kind of book one can easily write an incisive commentary about after giving it such a quick read. Therefore, what I felt may be far off the mark. Nonetheless, I may be permitted to speculate my impression that Wang may be trying to accelerate a great reform by issuing a stern warning about the future of the corruption-riddled CCP.

　　　In Chapter 8, de Tocqueville states that it is not surprising that a revolution occurred in France, because its leadership had failed to rectify the flaws of the feudalistic system, which had harmed the people and ignited their anger. The author also notes that, while the British nobility became social leaders by paying taxes and establishing a “nobles oblige” that emphasized courage, compassion, and high-mindedness, the French nobility, blessed with prerogatives sparing them public expenditures and duties, isolated themselves from the public. A French nobleman might become a leader in the army, but in substance he became an officer with no soldiers to follow him.

　　　If the CCP, determined not to suffer the fate of the French nobility,  decided to urge all the party members to read the de Tocqueville book, might it be proper to surmise that Xi Jinping promoted Wang to Vice Premier because, deep down, the general secretary is contemplating an implementation of a daring reform of the Chinese regime?

　　　I believe that, as Ms Cui admitted having rightly been ‘very surprised’ by Vice Premier Wang’s instructions, the CCP has a very strong sense of impending crisis. Assuming, then, that the Xi regime is seriously contemplating reform, would that really be feasible? Ms Cui openly declares China as “the worst form of capitalism and the worst form of socialism combined.” In point of fact, there is no real guarantee that China, which has managed to realize dynamic growth by managing adroitly to combine the “worst” of the two systems, can transform itself from a French-style aristocracy to a British-style aristocracy.

Needed: Rational and Intellectually Stimulating Dialogue

　　　“Chinese society is ridden with great discontent,” continues Ms Cui. “And yet, the CCP has accomplished a lot. Still, it has failed to live up to the expectations of society. It did not have to heed the voices of the people at all during Mao Zedong’s era. But now the CPP is making some effort to reach out to the people. At present, the party is devoid of strong leaders. In order to secure their positions, party leaders need to approach the public and make sincere efforts to materialize their wishes. That is why we are closely watching how the party will cope with the people’s wishes as they prepare for China’s future.”

　　　Ms Cui’s opinions struck me as amazingly candid. However, the transformation of the Chinese regime as envisioned by Ms Cui is not an overthrow of the CCP. An overthrow of the existing administration, as happened in the Arab Spring, is not among the choices envisaged by Ms Cui and her colleagues. It can safely be said that this is an idea commonly held by the current leaders of China’s latest democratization movement.

　　　Ms Cui and other reformists all advocate reform within the existing system, with continued recognition of the CCP. And yet, when the specific issue of the “Nanking Massacre” came up, I must say I was impressed by Ms Cui’s open-mindedness. The issue was brought up as part of a broader discussion of matters pertaining to the negative repercussions of China’s anti-Japanese education and fabrication of war-related history. The JINF side made the point that the number of victims in Nanking – claimed by the Chinese government to be 300,000 – should be determined through rational historical research, not on the basis of political propaganda. To this, Ms Cui responded:

　　　“I myself feel that 300,000 as the total number of the victims of the so-called ‘Nanking Massacre’ may not necessarily be based on precise statistics. I believe both the CCP and the Kuomintang are responsible for having adopted this number as a ‘fact.’ They must both be held accountable for having absolutely failed to keep the interests of their own people in mind.”

　　　Pointed out Professor Tadae Takubo of Kyorin University, who serves as deputy head of the JINF:

　　　“I have had a number of discussions with the Chinese people over the years, but I wish to stress that Ms Cui is the very first person to declare that this number of 300,000 may not necessarily be correct, and that both the CCP and the Kuomintang should be held responsible. I am deeply touched by those very courageous remarks by her.”

　　　One of the greatest achievements of the recent discussions was that the two sides could engage in such rational and intellectually stimulating dialogue. The occasion has clearly prompted Japanese participants to come to feel that China is steadily changing deep down within its society.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column 544 in the February 7, 2013 issue of The Weekly Shincho)