By Frank Ching
Journalist, Commentator in Hong Kong
By almost any measure, the 60th anniversary celebrations held in Beijing on October 1 were a tremendous success, showcasing the country's military prowess, and its economic and cultural advances, and highlighting the ethnic diversity of the country.
But the celebrations also succeeded in highlighting, perhaps inadvertently, the fact that China is still not a normal country.
In the morning celebrations, with the entire Chinese leadership on display atop the Tiananmen Square rostrum, one man stood out: Hu Jintao, the country's leader.
This was not only because he is the nation's president, and the leader of the Communist Party. It was more because he was dressed differently from the other leaders, all of whom wore western-style business suits and ties.
Hu, however, wore a Chinese outfit, often referred to in the West as a ``Mao suit'' but known in China as a ``Zhongshan suit,'' named after the founder of the Chinese Republic, Sun Yatsen, who is commonly known as Sun Zhongshan. This outfit was created by him and worn by members of his government.
Interestingly enough, at the evening celebrations, Hu had changed into a western suit, like the other members of the Chinese leadership.
Why this metamorphosis?
Well, Hu appeared in the morning in his capacity as chairman of the party's Central Military Commission to review the armed forces. This is his third hat, in addition to being president and general secretary of the party.
And, it appears, the commander of the armed forces must not wear a western business suit. It doesn't look revolutionary enough.
Certainly, Hu's predecessors, Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, never wore business suits. But by the time Jiang Zemin became China's leader, it was customary for officials to wear western suits, which Jiang did on most occasions. But whenever he appeared before the troops he would discard his business suit.
There is more than sartorial preference involved. The People's Liberation Army is not a part of the Chinese government. It is part of the Chinese Communist Party. The troops are directly under the party's military commission, not the Defense Ministry.
This is one reason why Hu, while in Italy to attend the G8 meeting, had to fly home after the July 5 riots in Urumqi. As chairman of the military commission, he had to take personal command of troops to be deployed.
It is certainly not normal for a country not to have armed forces. It is also not normal for the ruling party to put itself above the state.
During the years when the Communists were leading an insurrection against the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek, they needed to have their own military.
Thus, the communists resisted efforts by the Chiang government to integrate their units into the national armed forces.
However, after the proclamation of the People's Republic of China in 1949, there was no further need for the party to behave as though it was still an insurrectionary force. The PLA should at that time have been transformed into the state's military arm.
Instead, the party kept it on as its private army, as though it was somehow in danger of losing control of the country to the defeated forces of Chiang Kai-shek in exile on Taiwan.
Similarly, in Hong Kong, which became part of China in 1997, the Communist Party still behaves like an underground party, to such an extent that party members will not openly admit their party membership.
The convener of the Executive Council, Leung Chun-ying, recently denied being a party member. The president of the Legislative Council, Tsang Yok-sing, has refused to say whether he is one.
Part of the reason why the Communist Party refuses to transform the PLA into the state's armed forces is that the party puts itself above the state. But it should understand that China cannot be a normal country as long as the party is above the state.
There is no reason for the state to be subservient to the party forever. This may have made some sense during the Maoist era, when China's goal was world communism. But now that the party has defined its role as simply to work for the betterment of the state and its people, there is no reason for keeping the party above the state and the military under the party.
After all, if the party's role is simply to work for the betterment of the state, it should be subservient to the state rather than the other way around. It is the state and its interests that should be paramount.
Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based writer whose book, ``Ancestors: 900 Years in the Life of a Chinese Family,'' has just been reissued in paperback. He can be reached at Frank.ching@gmail.com.
1 | Over 76% of South Koreans support development of nuclear weapons |
![[ANALYSIS] Pandemic awakens demand for data-driven automation](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/2b05d621a193420abef7ee24b95eab3d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
