Opinion No need to envy China

But such a conclusion actually has little basis in facts. Leaving aside the issue of whether China’s one-party state was responsible for the so-called Chinese economic “miracle” (because that would require a separate column),let us look at an interesting phenomenon that most people fail to observe: instead of deriving supposed benefits from an efficient dictatorship,China actually pays considerable penalties for having a one-party regime while India receives a substantial bonus for being a democracy.

One of the most severe penalties China pays for having an autocracy is not just a lack of human rights and political freedom,but enormous financial expenditures that are wasted in the maintenance of the security of the one-party regime. Although the exact amount of spending Beijing has devoted to domestic political security (as opposed to public security) is unknown and probably impossible to calculate,such expenditures are substantial. For example,China employs a vast secret police force,complemented by an extensive network of informers (who have to be remunerated),to suppress dissent and challenge to the Communist Party’s authority. Another example is the costs of censoring the internet. In China,this effort requires spending billions of dollars in technology,staffing specialised police agencies (the so-called cyber police),hiring tens of thousands of censors,slowing down the traffic of the internet,and blocking information that may have real economic value. In contrast,as a democracy,India does not need to waste such precious resources.

On the international stage,the authoritarian penalties China pays and the democratic bonus India receives are even more obvious. Few Indians would deny that their country’s international status has risen dramatically in recent years. Leaders of all the major Western countries have visited New Delhi and vowed to establish strategic partnerships with India. Needless to say,India’s economic success and growing role in international affairs merit their attention,which has been insufficient in the past. But an undeniable factor is the desire of leading Western democracies to see India become a counter-balancer to China. Regardless of whether India actually will play such a role,India’s international status,thanks to its democratic system,has received an unprecedented boost as a result.

Contrast that with China,and you can see how China is penalised for having a one-party state despite its economic success. Whenever its leaders visit Western capitals,the occasions are invariably marred by controversy over China’s human rights abuses. Western leaders have to defend their policies of engaging China. In Washington,the differences in warmth accorded to Chinese visitors and their Indian counterparts cannot be more startling. When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh first visited the US capital in July 2005,he was given the highest honour — addressing a joint session of Congress. President George W. Bush hosted a state dinner at the White House for him. But when Chinese President Hu Jintao came to Washington in April 2006,George W. Bush treated his guest with a lunch,not a state dinner. The Americans would not even call it a “state visit” although the face-conscious Chinese insisted that Hu was making a “state visit”. Addressing a joint session of Congress? Forget it. Instead of giving the Chinese leader the honour,American Congressional leaders were competing with each other to be Washington’s leading China-basher.

Apart from such symbolic penalties,China pays real diplomatic and economic penalties because of its political regime. One might want to compare the international community’s reaction to China’s and India’s stance on climate change and energy security. In substantive terms,as large developing countries dependent on cheap fossil fuel and eager to ensure energy security,Beijing’s and New Delhi’s policies are not fundamentally different. But the response of the international community is night and day. On climate change,China is almost universally viewed as most responsible for the rise of greenhouse gasses (which is true because China has surpassed the US as the biggest emitter of such gasses) and least cooperative. By contrast,India has received much less international opprobrium. Why the different treatment? As a democracy whose government must be held accountable by its voters,India has greater legitimacy on the world stage in defending its policies. On the other hand,China’s intransigence on similar issues is linked with the nature of its political system. Since the government in Beijing is not elected,its policies are seen as lacking popular backing and legitimacy abroad.

The penalties China pays for its political regime are most visible when Chinese companies try to make significant purchases abroad. In recent years,flush with bursting foreign exchange reserves,Beijing has directed its state-owned companies to “go out” — or make acquisitions abroad. Unfortunately,the Chinese soon found that money could not buy everything in the capitalist West (contrary to Lenin’s dictum that capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with). Chinese companies have encountered strong political obstacles when they attempt to acquire Western firms. When a Chinese state-owned oil company bid for an American energy firm,Unocal,in 2005,there was such political opposition in Washington that the attempt collapsed quickly. In 2009,China’s plan to increase its stake in Rio Tinto,a huge Anglo-Australian mining concern,fizzled as well due to political opposition in Australia. The cause of Beijing’s failure is self-evident: Western politicians simply do not trust companies controlled by a one-party regime. In contrast,no Indian firm has ever encountered similar opposition when they acquire Western firms.

Of course,the real victims of China’s authoritarian penalty are the Chinese people,not the country’s ruling elites. As for India,the beneficiaries of the democratic bonus are also its people,even though most of them may not feel the effects.

The writer is a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College,US
express@expressindia.com