My comment: Please skip the first third (about developments that we already know) and start with the paragraph that says, "A political commentatorin Beijing, Chen Ziming.
(2) Tom Orlik and Bob Davis, Xi Inherits an Economy That Needs Work; Boom that started decade now risks running out of steam; China leader passes task of overhauls to his successor. Wall Street Journal, Nov 13, 2012. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB ... 14740309688964.html
two consecutive paragraphs:
"Mr Hu's administration hasn't been entirely inactive when it comes to economic overhauls. Abolition of agricultural taxes helped raise incomes for China's 650 million rural dwellers. Extension of public services—including expanding education coverage—has freed up funds for households to spend at the shops.
"Wu Yaojin, a 52-year-old farmer from Shaanxi province grows rice and other crops on his family's small plot of land. 'The agricultural tax was abolished about five years ago, four years ago we started to have medical insurance covering 80% of hospital charges and since last year we have a pension plan,' he said. 'The policies have relieved a great burden for us.'
My comment:
(a) I think it is unfair to blame the Hu administration for China's economy slowdown--and other problems. The Jiang (Zeming) administration had several advantages that the following administration does not have, such as
(i) demographics (as shown in the graphic accompanying the WSJ report--in China both the labor force and population aged 15-29 were expanding under Mr Jiang but almost flat under Mr Hu;
(ii) China's economic growth can not last forever (as no nation can); and
(iii) America's longest peacetime economic expansion under President Bill Clinton, which benefited every other nation, including China.
Further, the restructuring of state-owned enterprises and mass layoff praised by the WSJ report were pushed through by Jiang's second premier Zhu Rongji only, but not the first premier Li Peng.
(b) Everything is relative. The Ching/Qing dynasty did a terrific job, if the Western powers did not knock at China's door. In the same vein, the Hu administration achieved something--but could have done more, I guess, but we all have 20/20 hindsight. 作者: choi 时间: 11-13-2012 10:29
(3) 分析：中共十八大与微博攻防大战. BBC Chinese, Nov 13, 2012. http://www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/si ... ss_microblogs.shtml
My comment:
(a) Reading the first paragraph, I immediately could tell it was translating from an English report. I do not know why BBC does not give the credit where it is due.
(b) Here it is, the original.
Quote:
(i) "'Jiang plays the role of kingmaker,' said Willy Lam, a political analyst at the University of Hong Kong who wrote a biography of Jiang. 'He has been very effective in this factional struggle.'
The role of geriatric party figures in the secret discussions which "determine China's leadership is played down by the Communist party, which says that its leaders are picked during the congress through elections by delegates.
"Zhang Chunxian, the party chief of the restive western province of Xinjiang, who is reportedly an ally of Jiang, refused to comment when asked about the ex-president's continued influence by an AFP reporter.
"'That sounds like gossip... I don't know where you get your information from,' he said, laughing dismissively.
(ii) "'I suspect Jiang's influence might not last beyond the Congress. He is trying to pull some strings but is not a powerful figure,' said Steve Tsang, professor of contemporary Chinese studies at Britain's University of Nottingham.
My comment: There is no need to read either report, except the quotations above.