Hu Wei: The Time History Has Left China Is Running Out

On December 13, 1978, Deng Xiaoping delivered a speech titled “Emancipate The Mind, Seek Truth From Facts, And Move Forward As One” at the closing ceremony of the CCP Central Committee Work Conference, which lasted for more than a month. On December 15, China and the United States signed a communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations. Three days later, on December 18, the 3^rd Plenum of Chinese Communist Party’s （CCP）11^th National Congress was held in Beijing, and on December 22, its  communiqué was released.

Hu writes, “In recent years, I wrote a commentary on each and every anniversary of the 3^rd Plenum. This year marks the 45th anniversary, which should have been given special attention, yet I find it difficult to express my thoughts. However, facing the world’s changes unseen in a hundred years, I still want to say a few words about some major issues, although I can’t claim I can write down all I know and reserve nothing. This is my last commentary commemorating the Third Plenary Session, and I hope these words have not been spoken in vain.”

Hu Wei, a famous Chinese political scientist, wrote the commentary below. In March 2022, Hu Wei wrote a commentary criticizing China’s position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The article, “Possible Outcomes of the Russo-Ukrainian War and China’s Choice”, has attracted global attention.  In March this year, Hu Wei offered another assessment of the consequences of the Russo-Ukraine war for China. (For more information on this commentary entitled “失去的将无法挽回：俄乌战争一周年有感”, please click here.

“Mao’s Approach, Deng’s Application” or “Deng’s Approach, Mao’s Application”

The greatest significance of the 3^rd Plenum was that it marked the reorientation of CCP‘s political, ideological, organizational, and diplomatic policies , and initiated the era of reform and opening up, propelling China to make great strides in catching up with the times. However, in recent years, there has been significant divergence within and outside the CCP regarding the need for continued reform and opening up. This debate has been particularly focused on how to treat the political legacies of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, as the essence of reform and opening up was essentially a repudiation of Mao’s theory of continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Cultural Revolution that he launched after the founding of the People’s Republic of China. This led to the establishment of Deng Xiaoping Theory and its practices of reform, opening up, and the construction of modern socialism. Given that these two theories and practices are diametrically opposed, choosing between them has become a major political issue for the current leadership of the CCP. Undoubtedly, as the two most important political figures in the CCP, the legacies of both Mao and Deng need to be inherited in some form. However, the crucial question is whether to adopt “Mao’s Form, Deng’s Use” or “Deng’s Form, Mao’s Use.”

Regarding these two options, I am in favor of “Deng’s Approach, Mao’s Application” because I am a faithful supporter of reform and opening up. I have discussed the reasons for this extensively in the past, so I will not elaborate here. In 2021 and 2022, I wrote three commemorative articles – “Always Unswervingly Adhere to the Policies of the Third Plenum and the Path of Reform and Opening Up,” “How Should We Understand Reform and Opening Up Today?” and “What is the Path of the 3^rd Plenum?” Here, I just want to briefly summarize the key points of these three articles:

First, the “Chinese-style modernization path,” “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” “reform and opening-up path,” “peaceful development path,” and the “correct path to realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” proposed by the CCP at different times, are not five separate paths but a “five-in-one” single path. The essence and core of this path is reform and opening up. Without reform and opening up, there would be no socialism with Chinese characteristics or Chinese-style modernization, let alone the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. Peaceful development is both a precondition and a goal of reform and opening up.

Second, reform and opening up have specific connotations. “Reform” is about breaking the rigidity of traditional socialism, and “opening up” means abandoning the closed nature of traditional socialism, aimed at moving away from the old path characterized by the opposition between socialism and capitalism internationally, and a highly centralized political, economic, and cultural system domestically. Any deviation back to this old path is not only not reform and opening up but a betrayal of it. We must be vigilant against using the banner of reform and opening up to return to this old path.

Third, reform and opening up established the correct political, ideological, organizational, and diplomatic policies for the CCP. These policies have corrected the long-standing left-leaning errors in the international socialist movement and the history of the CCP, completely distinguishing themselves from the “old closed and rigid path” or the “Soviet model.” Only by adhering to these routes can we truly maintain the path of reform and opening up and thereby steadfastly follow the “five-in-one” Chinese path.

In my opinion, this is the core content of adhering to “Deng’s Approach.” As for “Mao’s Application,” it exceeds the scope of commemorating the 3^rd Plenum, so I refrain from discussing it here.

How To Handle the Relationship with The West, Especially the U.S.

Reform and opening up represent a unity of internal reform and external opening. The essence of this opening up is moving closer towards the West, leveraging Western capital, technology, and talent to develop one’s own. The so-called “closure” before reform and opening up was not a closure to the entire external world but specifically to the Western world. At that time, China was always open to Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Therefore, the key to reform and opening up lies in opening the doors to the Western world.

In March 1978, Deng Xiaoping pointed out, “Independence does not mean self-seclusion, and self-reliance does not mean rejecting others blindly.” Regarding China’s modernization, Deng attached great importance to opening up, proposing that “the current world is an open world” and “China’s development cannot be separated from the world.” Deng emphasized, “Opening up is of great significance; no country can develop in isolation or self-seclusion, nor can it progress without international exchanges, without introducing advanced experience, science and technology, and capital from developed countries.”

Opening up to the outside world inevitably requires a favorable international environment, which means making significant judgments and choices on the issues of war and peace. Logically, reform and opening up are inseparably linked with peaceful development. Therefore, after careful observation and objective analysis, Deng challenged the estimate that a world war was inevitable, believing that the growth of peace factors in the world exceeded that of war factors, and it was possible to strive for a longer period of peace. Based on this, Deng proposed that “peace and development are the two major themes of the current era,” changing the previous era’s judgment of war and revolution. Under the theme of peace and development, maintaining good relations with the United States and other Western countries is paramount. Only in this way can China fundamentally maintain its national sovereignty and security and use Western power for its development. That’s why Deng not only strived for Sino-US diplomatic relations while brewing reform and opening up but also promptly proposed the foreign policy of “keeping a low profile” in 1989 when Sino-US relations faced significant challenges, striving to maintain the overall situation of the development of Sino-US relations. China joined the WTO in the new century, laying the fundamental external conditions for China’s rise and winning a critical strategic opportunity for development.

After the political turmoil in the spring and summer of 1989, in response to doubts at home and abroad, including within the CCP, about whether China’s reform and opening up could continue, Deng Xiaoping pointed out in a conversation with central leaders in June 1989: “Now the international community is worried that we will back pedal. We need to do a few things to show that our policy of reform and opening up remains unchanged and that we will further reform and open up.” He also called for “raising the flag of further opening up.” How to raise the flag of further opening up? Deng candidly said, “Shanghai is our trump card,” thus initiating the development and opening of Shanghai Pudong. Deng meaningfully remarked: “Shenzhen faces Hong Kong, Zhuhai faces Macau, Xiamen faces Taiwan, but Pudong is different; it faces the Pacific Ocean, Europe, America, and the whole world.”

Whether moving towards  modernization, the world, and the future, or regressing to tradition, self-seclusion, and absolutism, is the litmus test for judging whether to continue reform and opening up. Among them, how to handle relations with the West, especially the United States, is a key prerequisite for the success of China’s modernization. Many people always believe that the U.S. seeks to destroy China, which does not conform to the historical facts of reform and opening up and contradicts Deng’s initial judgment about war and peace. Even if the U.S. harbors such intentions, they should be resolved rather than intensified. If we oppose everything the U.S. supports and support everything against the U.S., Sino-US relations will definitely not improve. The deterioration of current Sino-US relations deserves deep reflection, and how to escape the “Thucydides Trap” requires greater wisdom.

Whether China Can Integrate into the New Technological Revolution Determines its Future Destiny

China’s primary goal in catching up with the times is to match the economic and technological levels of the developed countries in the West. One crucial reason for managing China’s relations with the West, especially with the United States, is to integrate into the Western-dominated world trade system and ride on the wave of technological revolutions.

After the formal establishment of Sino-US diplomatic relations on January 1, 1979, Deng Xiaoping immediately seized the opportunity to seek American support. The day after establishing diplomatic relations, he said while meeting a visiting delegation from the U.S. House of Representatives: “Sino-US trade has broad prospects, with the United States leading in global technological advancement, more competitive than some countries, including Japan. But there are still some obstacles. Since the two countries have normalized relations, these obstacles should be removed.” Subsequently, during Deng’s visit to the U.S., China and the U.S. exchanged views on resolving the issue of assets frozen by each other, signing long-term trade, aviation, and maritime agreements. Particularly, Deng repeatedly mentioned the issue of most-favored-nation (MFN) treatment, telling American guests that if the MFN issue is not resolved, China’s ability to repay will be limited, and MFN treatment is not only a need of China but also the U.S. and the U.S. needs it no less than China. Under the urging of Deng and the Chinese government, the Sino-US trade agreement came into effect on February 1, 1980, a significant event in the history of Sino-US relations, after which bilateral trade grew rapidly.

After resolving the MFN issue with the U.S., Deng began to address the issue of U.S. government restrictions on technology entering China. On September 8, 1982, Deng met with former U.S. President Richard Nixon and said, “During my visit to the U.S., we signed a scientific and technological cooperation agreement, but since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the U.S., the U.S. has not transferred any significantly advanced technology to us… The U.S. had long placed China in the ‘Y’ category, the second to last in the 26-letter alphabet.” Deng sought to change this unfavorable situation quickly. Subsequently, the U.S. successively relaxed restrictions on the export of high-tech products to China, exporting defense and high-tech products worth $500 million to China in 1982. On June 21, 1983, the U.S. government officially announced new regulations on technology transfer to China, moving China into the “V” category and China was now a member of the friendly non-allied countries. Deng astutely continued to work with visiting American politicians. When meeting with U.S. Democratic Senator Henry Jackson, he pointed out: “There are two issues in Sino-US relations: one is the Taiwan issue; the other is technology transfer. On the technology transfer issue, there has been some relaxation by the U.S., which we welcome.” He also said, “On the technology transfer issue, what matters is what kind of friends China and the U.S. can be, whether they will be ordinary friends or relatively good friends.” After U.S. President Ronald Reagan visited China in 1984, the U.S. promised to expedite the approval of technology product exports and technology license transfers to China, leading to a positive interaction in Sino-U.S. scientific and technological exchanges.

Science and technology are primary productive forces. The fundamental reason China has been able to catch up with the times since reform and opening up is that it has seized the historical opportunity of the third technological revolution led by the U.S. and kept pace with Western countries. During the first and second technological revolutions, China was either on the sidelines or far behind, leading to its prolonged poverty and weakness. Currently, the fourth technological revolution is emerging, still led by the U.S., marked by general artificial intelligence, controlled nuclear fusion, superchips, superconductivity, etc. The speed of current technological advances is astonishingly fast and can potentially trigger societal and even species revolutions. The depth and breadth of its significance and impact far exceed the previous three technological revolutions, and disruptive outcomes are expected in the next 20 years. Whether China can continue to integrate into and catch up with this round of technological revolution is key to whether it can build a modernized powerful nation and even find its footing in today’s world. This is a grave challenge; the consequences of either actively or passively exiting the race are unimaginable. The future of global configuration, international balance of power, war and peace, and even the human way of life will be shaped by this fourth technological revolution.

All that needs to be said has been said, and the time history has left us is not much. All of this depends on whether China can truly advance reform and opening up to a new level. If the CCP needs self-revolution, this is indeed an area where it can be very active..