The Third Plenum of the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Central Committee took place in mid-July, focusing on the country’s future. This meeting, occurring halfway through each Central Committee’s five-year cycle, historically marks significant changes in China’s governance.
Previous Third Plenums have led to pivotal shifts in China’s policies. For example, the 11th Central Committee in 1978 opened China to foreign influences, dismantled Mao Zedong’s planned economy, and introduced Deng Xiaoping as the de facto leader. Subsequent Third Plenums, like the 14th in 1993 and the 18th in 2013, brought about reforms in economic systems, social policies, and political structures.
The recent Third Plenum in 2024 addressed pressing issues such as economic stagnation, population decline, youth unemployment, regional disparities, income inequality, and corruption. However, the resulting 50-page document appeared more as a tribute to Xi Jinping than a concrete plan for rejuvenation. While the communiqué touched on various topics like industry transfer, retirement age adjustments, maternity benefits, and rural-urban disparities, it lacked clear strategies to tackle these complex challenges.
Concerns over corruption, economic transitions, tax reforms, and social welfare remain unresolved. The government’s promises to combat corruption and promote sustainable development seem more theoretical than practical. Additionally, issues affecting religious minorities and ethnic groups received minimal attention in the Third Plenum’s discussions.
Overall, while the Third Plenum acknowledged China’s mounting problems, it fell short in providing comprehensive solutions to address the country’s complex issues. The necessity of unity throughout the nation is seen as a crucial component of China’s revitalization, leading to the systematic Sinicization of religion and the establishment of a law to advance “ethnic unity and progress.”
As anticipated, state media lauded the discussions of the Third Plenum as a significant stride towards a promising future not only for China but for the global community, largely overlooking the issue of overcapacity in Chinese industry that has impacted domestic manufacturers’ profits and sparked backlash in foreign nations. For instance, Beijing’s Global Times highlighted the visit of a delegation from the U.S.-China Business Council as proof that the Chinese market remains highly appealing. In a nuanced commentary by an economics professor at Peking University, Su Jian, it was emphasized that maintaining public confidence and fostering economic growth will require swift and proactive follow-up measures.
The effectiveness of these follow-up actions will be critical. Immediately following the conclusion of the plenum, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) took steps to stimulate the property sector by reducing the five-year loan prime rate, a key indicator for mortgages, by 10 basis points to 3.85 percent and lowering the one-year loan prime rate to 3.35 percent from 3.45 percent. The market response was lackluster, prompting foreign economists to note the PBOC’s challenge of balancing the need to boost a sluggish economy grappling with a housing crisis while maintaining a strong currency and projecting a solid long-term foundation.
Thus far, according to an editorial in Japan’s typically China-friendly Asahi, the plenum has yielded more rhetoric than tangible solutions. The editorial suggests that genuine reform entails fostering a free and dynamic economy to ensure the well-being of the nation’s populace.
Please note that the views expressed in this article are the author’s opinions and may not align with those of The Epoch Times.
Source link
