Organizer and Chair: Michael J. Sullivan, University of Wisconsin
Discussant: Carol Lee Hamrin, U.S. Department of State
As the Deng Xiaoping era draws inexorably to a close, politicians, policy advisors and political actors in China are engaged in discussions about the "problems" either inherent in reform or that have developed as by-products of reform. Topics of discussion range from the lack of political liberties to the social inequalities resulting from reform. Since the 1989 crackdown on the democracy movement, one diverse group of political actors has been engaged in efforts to roll back Dengist reforms. Although most scholarly attention has focused on the actual changes in Chinese society and on the possibility of a more rapid opening of Chinese society, these groups of conservative and neoconservative political actors are proposing different solutions to China's domestic and foreign "problems." Their talk of "de-Dengification" closely resembles the "de-Maoification" that followed the passing of Chairman Mao. These groups' emergence in the waning years of the Deng era raise important theoretical and empirical questions on past reform experiences and future economic and political trends.
The members of this panel have worked together on the initial emergence and significance of neoconservatism over the past seven years. The focus on this proposed panel differs from our efforts in the past. We strive to expand our analyses to encompass broader political and social phenomena. The focus in the past addressed neoconservatism's influence in relation to the first decade of Dengist reforms and to the defeat of liberal reformers in the late 1980s, especially after the crackdown on the 1989 democracy movement. Stanley Rosen has written articles and papers on the emergence of neoconservatism. He has been fundamental in providing English translations of many neoconservative and conservative writings. Joseph Fewsmith has addressed the impact of neoconservatism in elite political and policy circles in making economic reform policy in his recently published book and in scholarly journals, like Asian Survey. Michael Sullivan recently completed an entire dissertation on the emergence of neoconservative-type thought in the Dengist era and has published several articles in journals like World Affairs, on the subject. Matei-Petru Mihalc, a current Ph.D candidate at Harvard University, has research the intellectual significance of neoconservatism in contemporary China. He relies on his research on East Asian conservative thought and his own experiences growing up in Romania's Leninist state to analyze conservative thought in post-Mao China.
In contrast to our previous research of neoconservatism, we seek to examine the phenomenon of neoconservatism in broader contexts. Our purpose is to take stock of this on-going trend by examining the continuing influence of neoconservatism in Chinese political, intellectual and societal circles. We specifically focus on the political and social conditions that have produced neoconservatism, the varieties of neoconservatism that have emerged, and the degree of its impact on Chinese domestic and foreign policies. Joseph Fewsmith examines the much understood social and political reasons on why conservative and neoconservative thought could receive support in post-Mao China. Stanley Rosen expands his research on neoconservative thinkers to explore how neoconservative thinking retains less coherent unity than it did when it emerged as a dominant political discourse in the late 1980s and in the early 1990s. Using a case study approach on one dominant strain, his paper will explore the multifaceted political and social factors influencing China's neoconservative thinkers. Michael Sullivan and Matei-Petru Mihalc examine how Chinese neoconservative thought is becoming linked to broader political and social phenomena. Michael Sullivan explores the possible impact neoconservative thought has had on Chinese domestic and foreign policies on human rights. Tracing the changes in China's human rights stance during the Deng era, he seeks to demonstrate the growing reliance on neoconservative-type discourse to formulate and legitimize China's human rights policies. Matei-Petru Mihalc seeks to examine the linkages between the prevalent conservative trends in Chinese modern and contemporary intellectual thought with the emergence of conservative and neoconservative thought.
These four papers will compose a panel that will be of interest to scholars of China and Asia alike. As the debates on the success or failure of post-Mao reforms continue to heat up in China and throughout the world, these papers will add an important insight into how Chinese political actors themselves are perceiving the dilemmas of reform.
Is There a Coherent "Neoconservative" Agenda in China? An Analysis of
the Views of Suspected Participants
Stanley Rosen, University of Southern California
This paper will examine the views of those Chinese thinkers who have often been labeled "neoconservatives" by Western analysts of Chinese politics. Taking a series of contentious issues currently under debate in China-e.g., social and regional inequalities, the future of the special economic zones, the "floating population," center-provincial relations, China's role in the world, the threat of "colonial culture," nationalism and the inheritance of China's past, and so forth-the paper will assess the consistency of arguments by such debate participants as Xiao Gongqin, Wang Xiaodong, Wang Shan, Wang Huning and Hu Angang. The analysis will be drawn from documentary material (the writings of these individuals and others in the open and internal press) and interviews conducted in China.
The Social Legacy of Reform: How Fertile is the Ground for Neoconservatism?
Joseph Fewsmith, Boston University
The paper proposes to address the social legacy of reform by looking more systematically at such factors as inequality that so-called neoconservative thinkers say that they want to address. In particular, it will look at social cleavages and what groups might find one or another variety of neoconservatism attractive. Can we identify particular social groups that feel vulnerable, and, if so, are such groups likely to be mobilizable? Are there cross-cutting factors that enhance social stability and therefore undermine the potential appeal of neoconservatism?
This paper intends to address these concerns over time (if inequality is increasing, has the rate of increase risen?) and comparatively (what comparisons with other rapidly changing societies can we draw to assess China's situation?). In addition, this paper will also try to address, at least to a limited extent, the prescriptions that neoconservatives have proposed. The intention here is not just to look at their feasibility, but also to look for an evolution in neoconservative thought. Are neoconservatives becoming more specific about their proposed solutions?
Together these approaches should be useful in assessing the staying power and trajectory of neoconservative thought. Is neoconservatism a peripheral trend of thought that is likely to evaporate quickly, or is it likely to be a long-term trend that will affect China's political evolution?
Conservative Reform and China's Human Rights Policy in the 1990s
Michael J. Sullivan, University of Wisconsin
The paper analyzes the impact that domestic conservative reform has had on China's domestic and foreign policies on human rights in the 1990s. Relying on my research on the rise of developmentalist discourses (e.g., neo-authoritarianism and neoconservatism) and on shifts in China's human rights policy, this paper seeks to demonstrate that the Chinese government increasingly relies on a culturally based developmentalist discourse to frame its domestic and foreign policies on human rights. This developmentalism, as many Western scholars did in the 1950s and 1960s, holds that economic growth and political order have priority over human rights concerns and political democracy. China, it is contended, has yet to reach the level of economic and social development to warrant the application of political and civil human rights standards.
What is significant about this emerging developmentalist discourse as it relates to China's human rights policy concerns how it has been gaining increasing predominance at a time when the influence of Maoist and Dengist socialist discourses has quickly waned. My paper argues that despite claims to universal notions of economic development, this developmentalist discourse is being used by the Chinese government to legitimize conservative strategies for reform and to recast conservative cultural arguments to reject domestic and international pressures to improve China's human rights practices.
Conservatism and Neoconservatism: Contemporary Intellectual Trends in Historical
and Comparative Perspective
Matei-Petru Mihalc, Harvard University
Much attention has been focused on the emergence of Chinese nationalism in recent years. Nationalism has certainly been an increasingly important force in many facets of Chinese politics and society. Even so, many scholars treat nationalism as a distinct entity, which ignores the cross-cutting ties it may have with other political and intellectual trends. Any study of Chinese nationalism should not divert our attention from the increasing importance of conservatism in contemporary Chinese thought. Indeed, much nationalist thought is implicitly or explicitly rooted in a conservative moral critique of modernity. This paper will explore contemporary Chinese conservatism in historical and comparative perspective by looking at its continuity with previous expressions of conservative thought in modern China and its commonalities with conservative thinkers in other East Asian and post-Leninist countries. Doing so will demonstrate that contemporary Chinese nationalism has deep roots in a powerful strain of conservative thought.