An African Perspective on the CPC’s Concept of Whole Process People’s Democracy

By Moshi Israel

The Communist Party of China (CPC) has served the people of China for several decades with utmost effectiveness that should be admired everywhere. The success of the CPC is not a mere fluke, considering the complexity of China’s history and national realities. China with more than a millennium of history has had to endure civil wars and power struggles from different dynasties that exposed the common people to untold suffering. The opium wars and Western colonialism also left the once-great civilization of China on the brink of collapse. The CPC pulled China from the jaws of destruction and put the country on a path to unprecedented prosperity and success.

The People’s Republic of China is a vast country with a huge population and a diversity of cultures and ethnicities. To govern such a country, a certain political acumen and tact is required and the CPC under the leadership of President Xi has proved itself a very capable candidate to map China’s development well into the future.

President Xi introduced the concept of whole process people’s democracy back in 2012 and elaborated it as true democracy that addresses the people’s concerns and is characterised by the people’s participation in all state’s social, cultural, and economic affairs. This type of democracy is ‘whole process’ because the people engage in democratic elections, consultations, management, decision-making, and oversight in accordance with the constitution. On the other hand, it is the people’s democracy because China’s constitution labels the people as masters of the country.

The National People’s Congress (NPC) and the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) work closely with and hold two sessions in which they deliberate on the governance of the state with the people’s interests in consideration. These national bodies collaborate closely with elected grassroots officials to address issues of concern for every citizen. These grassroots committees run from the village, town, and city to the provincial level. Through them, the common person’s concerns are able to reach the highest level of the Chinese government. Moreover, the CPC despite being the dominant party of choice for most Chinese people, still works closely with a number of other political parties in China.

China has demonstrated that whereas every country should aspire to be democratic, the concept of democracy varies from one country to the next depending on their national context. Not every country is suited to the Western style of democracy. Aspects of culture, geography, history, demographics, and economics play a vital role in determining what sort of democracy a country will be. Centuries of the forced and failed Western way of democracy across the world indicate that perhaps everyone cannot be the same and being different is okay. From ancient Greece; the bedrock of democracy to Britain and the United States, democracy has come in different forms for all of these countries.

China, under the CPC, has clearly shown that democracy is not a mere jargon to be thrown around aimlessly, rather, democracy should be practiced and its results seen. China has achieved this by elevating over half of a billion people out of absolute poverty and putting China on a modernization path so effective, it has been dubbed a ‘miracle.’ Furthermore, China’s concept of democracy extends across two fronts; the domestic and the international arenas. Domestically, China has grown exponentially. On the international stage, China has spread the gospel of whole process people’s democracy with a unique Chinese socialism.

China, unlike the West, believes in and practices the concepts of mutual benefit, shared prosperity, and win-win partnerships with its international partners. Through the Belt and Road Initiative, the country has established good relations with others across the world.

African countries, as beneficiaries of China’s growth through the latter’s application of its democratic concepts on the international stage, should proactively seek to develop their own people-centered and development-oriented democratic structures. This should be based on each country’s national realities. Besides, China has always learned from other developed countries and altered these lessons to fit its national context.

Otherwise, the CPC with President Xi Jinping at the helm has produced amazing results by strategically choosing to put the development of Chinese people at the forefront. Rightly so, democracy should indeed be structured around people’s happiness. Elections and a thousand political parties do not mean much if the people are starving and underdeveloped.

Therefore, every Ugandan and every African should be asking their leaders, what sort of democracy they think they are engaging in if the people’s happiness is not a core priority. With China, we can see that political theory should be backed by strategic and patriotic practices centered on common prosperity and the right to development.

The Writer is a Senior Research Fellow at Development Watch Center.

 

Why U.S’ Democracy Summit Will Not Deliver

Why U.S’ Democracy Summit Will Not Deliver

With the U.S positioning itself as chair of “saints,” it even cherry picked who should get a seat at table during last week’s democracy summit, effectively turning it into summit of friends.  Hungarian embassy in Washington branded U.S’ decision to cherry-pick attendees and locking out others “domestic politics and disrespectful,” a claim Biden administration officials refuted.

Arguably, no matter nice and diplomatic phrases summit organisers use(d), the summit was a cobweb of politics and U.S’ libido dominandi – the insatiable desire to dominate others under pretence of promoting democracy. This is the most probable considering that to date, there are millions of Americans who don’t believe president Biden was validly elected in what resulted into January 6th Capitol insurrection.

Now that democracy summit is done, one may ask: Should the world expect much? In my view, NO! Not that I know no the difference between democracy and authoritarian regimes. I know and of course, I even have a strong preference.

However, going by history, one can predict that president Biden’s democracy summit will instead bring more chaos in the world. Firstly, the summit will arguably guide U.S’ foreign policy. Though Biden administration is new, in U.S’ history, their foreign policy hardly significantly changes irrespective of which party occupies White House.

U.S’ foreign Policy has always been shaped by Washington’s urge to dominate the world. Broadly, most so-called democracies’ foreign policy is shaped by their imperialistic ideas and despite their lectures about democracy, their interventions in name of promoting the so-called democratic values has always largely ended creating anarchy, global insecurity and at times collapse of states as we saw in Libya, Iraq, Somalia and recently Afghanistan.

If critically analysed, one can also conclude that this summit started by dividing the world into two opposing camps; one the U.S demonized as being undemocratic and anti-free world and the one it claims to lead calling itself the side advocating for a “free” world.

It is already clear that president Biden’s democracy summit has started shaping U.S’ foreign policy with tones of confrontation. It is not a surprise that less than a week after the summit, G7 foreign ministers whose countries made it Biden’s summit list met in U.K’ city of Liverpool where they sent war tone messages to countries the U.S considers undemocratic with secretary Anthony Blinken warning Russia over what the U.S calls harassing Ukraine; “we are prepared to take the kind of steps we have refrained from taking in the past.” The question one may ask is if it is a coincidence that such threats are coming shortly after the summit which created the side of honourables and dishonourables!  Is it also a coincidence that it is after this summit that both U.S and UK are sending “threatening” messages to Iran to agree to their new terms of the now shacky 2015 Iran Nukes deal the world negotiated and later abandoned by the U.S under Trump administration?

Secondly, it should be recalled that this is not the first time the U.S has championed this kind of summit. In 2000, the U.S started the so-called The Community of Democracies and indeed held a couple of conferences and going by their speeches, they were well intended as they talked about human rights. However, it later became clear that the U.S had special interests quite different from the rest which the U.S wanted to pass using their support. Indeed, just three years later, the world witnessed Iraq war which U.S and her cheerers in that group claimed wanted to save Iraqis from what they called a dictator, abuser of human rights and also save the world weapons of mass distraction which later came to be a hoax and instead caused untold suffering, destabilized the region and global peace that consequently led to birth of ISIL.

From the above, it is clear that the endgame of U.S’ democracy summits have nothing to do with creating a democratic world where human rights are respected, international norms observed or to ensure a peaceful world, not even are such summits meant to set a stage to create a world free of nuclear weapons. Aren’t the so-called bacons of democracy that are close to making Australia own nuclear weapons to be specific nuclear submarines under Washington and London supervision in their AUKUS pact? Does introduction of nukes to new countries sound like a pillar of democracy?

Away from that, political elites in the U.S consciously or otherwise confuse their own perceptions of their own country with perceptions that everyone else in the world has. They proud themselves as beacon of democracy in the world which rightly or otherwise is wrong. This is because, many people world over have quite different view of the U.S compared to what Americans themselves think of their country.

Put differently, the U.S lecturing others on the need to be democratic looks like they are confused and don’t know what is happening in their home. For example, on 8th December – just hours before democracy summit, U.S senate rejected a bipartisan bid in a 30-67 vote attempt to stop U.S from selling Saudi Arabia weapons worth over $650M despite U.S institutions alleging human rights violations in Saudi. Surely, do arms spit flowers?

While the summit ostensibly meant to champion rights of people including protecting rights of journalists was on, a court in London ruled in favour of U.S’ government request to have whistle-blower, Julian Assange extradited to the U.S to face charges of exposing U.S’ gross human rights abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S government provided diplomatic assurances to U.K in what Lords Burnett of Maldon, lord chief justice, and Lord Justice Holroyde of UK’s high court described as “solemn undertakings offered by one government to another,” while Amnesty International’s Europe director, Nils Muižnieks,  decried court’s decision that “By allowing this appeal, the high court has chosen to accept the deeply flawed diplomatic assurances given by the US that Assange would not be held in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison.” If this is not enough evidence to tell us how skewed U.S and her allies’ democracy is, then probably nothing will.

Just wonder if it is Russia or China that had committed atrocities Assange reported to the world, no doubt Assange would have won Nobel Peace Prize and arguably, president Biden would have hanged his portrait as he addressed his democracy summit. But poor Assange having exposed double standards of ‘honourables,’ he will most likely die in prison. Crime?  He told the world what democracy preachers did in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While quoting the civil rights activist, the late Congressman John Lewis, president Biden told those who attended his summit that: “Democracy is not a state, it is an act.”  “Democracy is not a state, it is an act.” He was right! Democracy should not just mean elections which largely favour the rich. Talking about democracy without involving people it is simply an abstract concept the U.S is promoting. We should not only look at democracy in American political elites’ definition. We must breakdown democracy and involve people not just during elections but always. Democracy should mean respecting human rights in its entirety including Assange’s and Snowden’s of this world. It should mean helping people irrespective of colour to develop themselves and address their challenges such including ending absolute poverty. This is what China is doing. It is called whole process democracy.

Today, the world is confronting Covid-19 pandemic. It knows no one’s political affiliation, rich or poor. Strangely, despite shortages of vaccines to support global vaccination campaigns, “beacons” of democracy continue to press for protection of vaccines patents and pressing WHO from engaging Russia, Cuba and China’s vaccine candidates. Instead of addressing such, democracy preachers continue to insist on dominating the world no matter the consequences. In Iran, due to sanctions children continue to die of curable disease due to sanctions related to so-called Iran’s failure to adhere to some countries defined democratic values. In Cuba, we see protesters on streets not demanding for rights but protesting lack of food at a time when Havana is faced with challenges of money yet president Biden is continuing to impose sanctions even tougher than Trump’s to force Havana to bow for Washington.  Therefore, these summits are not about democracy but global dominance.

Allawi Ssemanda is Executive Director Development Watch Centre; a Foreign Policy think tank.

 

 

 

DWC

Development Watch Centre

Kampala - Uganda

ADDRESS

Plot 212, RTG Plaza,3rd Floor, Office Number C7 - Hoima Road, Rubaga

CONTACT

+256 703 380252

info@dwcug.org

FOLLOW US
© DWC - All rights reserved - Cookies Policy - Privacy Policy