President Xi Jinping looks certain to stay on in power beyond 2023. The final roadblock to him retaining his position as the leader of the world’s second-largest economy appears to have been removed by the ruling Communist Party of China.
In a terse 35-word statement on Sunday issued by Xinhua, the mouthpiece of China’s government, the CPC, announced:
“The Communist Party of China Central Committee proposed to remove the expression that the President and Vice-President of the People’s Republic of China shall serve no more than two consecutive terms from the country’s Constitution.”
Further details have yet to emerge. But the decision came just 24 hours before the Party’s powerful Central Committee was due to convene in Beijing for a three-day “plenum” on Monday to approve the leadership line-up for President Xi’s second term.
The proposal is expected to go before legislators at the annual full session of the National People’s Congress, which starts on March 5.
“In theory, he could serve longer than Robert Mugabe but in reality, no one is sure exactly what will happen,” Zhang Lifan, a historian and political commentator, told Reuters in a reference to Zimbabwe’s former President, who spent four decades in office before being ousted last year.
At 64, President Xi would have been required by the country’s constitution to step down after his second term expires.
The legislation was brought in during the 1990s when “Paramount Leader” Deng Xiaoping moved to avoid a repeat of the chaos which had marked Chairman Mao Zedong’s death in 1976.
Still, there have been persistent rumors within Beijing’s inner circle that President Xi would seek to extend his position beyond the traditional two terms before Sunday’s announcement.
During the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People last October, his ideology, or the “Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era,” was at the forefront of his speech.
It is now highly likely it will be enshrined in the CPC’s constitution.
“Xi Jinping has designs on a very long tenure in office — or he is doing a good impression of someone who does,” Jude Blanchette, a China politics expert with the Conference Board in Beijing, told the Financial Times. “We’re witnessing the direct dismantling of the Deng-era project to normalize Chinese politics and to guard against the return of a Mao Zedong.”
Already President Xi holds all the levers of State as General Secretary of the CPC and Chairman of the Central Military Commission.
There is also no one waiting in the wings to take over from him after spending the past five years consolidating his power over China’s government bureaucracy and armed forces with the help of a high-profile anti-corruption campaign.
At least thousands of senior officials have been arrested or forced to retire with analysts pointing out that many were direct political adversaries.
“President Xi now controls all the economic, political and military power in China and is even more powerful than Mao,” Johnny Lau Yui-siu, a political commentator, told RTHK, the public broadcasting service of Hong Kong.
Indeed, how this will unfold in the months ahead will not only determine President Xi’s fate, but the direction China will take in the next decade.
If term limits are removed Xi Ping will become the most powerful man. The claim that the President of the US is the most powerful man is only limited by term limits.
This means by 2020 no matter what Trump does the new President could undo a lot of it or add to Trump’s legacy.
As for China current and future leaders will know for sure who leads China. In a sense this change will give stability to foreign policies, for whatever policies Xi Ping strongly advocates will most likely continue for years to come.
If a one party State wasn’t bad enough, now it’s going to be a one man State!
That’s good news. If the Chinese people think Xi Jinping is the man for the forseeable future, they would be able to keep reelecting him until he’s dead. If the Chinese people think Xi Jinping is not the best leader for them for the forseeable future, they can vote him out. Win-win.
Xi is still dropping his salivaover other nations territory! Bad habits!
China is a socialist meritocracy. All major decisions are by consensus voting in the Central Committee. Power is concentrated in the Central Committee and not the President.
USA has gone mad with potty mouth brats making disastrous policies and stupid propaganda. China and the world recognises the turbulent times that possibly are ahead with USA floundering, irrational and beligerent behaviour. Wise leadership is required and China is seeking for the best option to deal with the unsettling times.
Since Deng’s Reform and Opening concludes in 2020, Xi (whose second term ends in 2020) will be responsible for setting China’s agenda for the next 40 years. He’s an honest, competent man who has done much good for China and the world and, since he is in good health, the Chinese want to keep him on long enough to see his new policies embedded and an older generation of corrupt officials replaced.
Prediction: Russia will follow suit for the same reasons.
It remains to be seen whether Xi stays on after 2022; I hope he doesn’t. There are sound reasons why Deng Xiaoping pushed for the present political structure in the late 1980’s. Unless there is an urgent reason why this srtucture needs amending, it is best to stick to it.
However, if USA does indeed endeavor to confront China’s rise on all fronts, and the security situation becomes acute, it is best that someone like Xi stays in charge than turning matters over into new hands just for the sake of formality and protocol. Let us hope that by 2022, China is too strong for the USA to even think about confronting China and the need for Xi to stay on becomes moot.
The way I like it is that he (Xi) remains 『as senior member of state』as was the case with Deng Xiao Ping, which differentiates from Mao’s till death do us part kinda iron clad grab to power on the Chinese nation.
Strategical/political descisons however must be arrive at by a descision-making-body (not congressional voting processes as in the US of course) but a descsion-making-body as in a Zhongnanhai group which is how things probably are during Jiang Zemin’s and Hu Jintao’s reins.
I for one do not buy the concept of 『 DYNASTIES 』.China would be going backwards if she accept the idea of totalianism which is what it would be if Xi remains as total authority and, from there, who knows if Xi Mingze might not be awarded the Chinese throne by Dad just as Kim Un did if Dad Xi is allowed to be God.
I feel sorry for the writers and analysts today, who feel compelled to find explanation for reality in either Western established narratives, or raking through history for some comparable answers. Why would China be hobbled by a longer serving president? This imposition of terms is a mimicry of Western system, and not necessarily beneficial for a country in any particular historic moment. As for the continuity, China has an eight member presidency, and they are collectively changed periodically to insure that new generations rise to power. But it makes little difference if the presidium will work with a president for any number of fixed years, or without a set limit. The Politbureau will continue with the practice. Chinese system is a pyramid, wide at the bottom, involving many people early on in their careers, and dempending on many factors — many related to the character of a member, they rise through ranks. In China, politician cannot become someone with a good looking face, great political machine, and plenty of money. One has to demonstrate throughout one’s career, whatever that may be, the competence, the dedication, the personality capable of working with others, and inspiring others. By the time they reach Politbureau, these are some very, very accomplished people. They are recommended by their pears to be promoted within the party. It is ridiculous to think that within one party there are no differences of oppinion. Of course, there are. The only difference is, their oppinions and alliances within party shift, on the basis of an issue, and are not beholden to a political party. The Confucian emphasis on buidling compentent leaders is the guiding light. There will be no shortage of people ready to step in the shoes of a future Presidum of Eight, and the method of deciding who will serve at the top, and for how long, is again, up to them, and the Politbureau, including many other branches of administration. This change may also mean that some heads of state may serve less then the two terms. There should be no obligatory obeisance to rules of leghth in office, if change is needed. It seems that we are constantly in search of reasons why something in China SHOULD NOT WORK WELL, even though there is a substantial track record of many achievents and the continued process of high, and sustained growth. We should occassionally ask ourselves a question, why DOES it work so well?
I am however, encouraged by American younger generation. Those that are now under eighteeen, think very different from today’s immature adults. There is a strong consensus against intereventionism, as a means of US global foreign policy. Today’s teachers — at least what I am able to observe in the wider Washington DC area, are more sophisticated, and capable of teaching well beyond curriculum. In one school, sixteen year olds are studying comparative political and economic systems of large countries, and their influence in regions. Such studies are done on China, Russia, Iran, Nigeria, India, Egypt, South Africa, for example. And the teaching and research is not tinged with the typical Washington judgemental view, but is aiming to understand the historic background for the differences in both political and economic systems.
Our reporters and analysts should learn something from the new generations. Learning is the key. Not being arrogant is the key. Not having rigid understanding of the world, and believing that we should all have same systems, and the world look like Kansas. The planet is made up of many cultures, histories that shape them. We definitely are NOT in Kansas any more.
Vikram Reddy Disrespect of others is a sure sign of paganism, that very easily descends into barbarism. No matter how igorant and misinformed one can be — and we are not experts — it is expected that we treat others with respect. That means, do offer you opinion, not just tell someone they are wrong. And especially, refrain from pagan illusions that your narrative is right, and that you are favored by gods to dismiss and insult everyone else.
Amen.
I do not think it is the right time to speculate until we know what the actual wording of the amendment of the Constitution is. I have total reservation about a life tenure. I am open minded about an age limit say 70 or 75 years of age. I do not believe in a fixed renewable term of 3 years and that there be a maximum of 2 terms. If the race horse is still winning races why ban it from racing? Seasons come and go, and even in the forests young trees take the place of the old ones. The landscape changes. And as it does, then to manage change and the everchanging times we should plan for the changing of the guards well. I do not know the answer. But I know there should be no absolute life tenure. We do not want the ghost of Mao to return. Yet Deng might not have found the right answer either. I just thought of another possibility – leave the maximum two terms in place but add a new provision for a life tenure for Xi as ‘Respected Elder Statesman Ombudsman’ with a guaranteed place in the Cabinet as prudential adviser, with only a right of veto – sort of like the Speaker of Parliament under the Westminster system.
No worry. Some of the his cronies will see that it’s fun to be at the top and will depose him in no time. This has happened again and again in Chinese history.
Mon Mah
In a world where there is no perfect system a lifetime rule is as good as a government by the electorate. Both have their shortcomings. We have hardly any government bodies that do what the electorate voted for them. Once in power they do as they please. The illusion is to call that charade a "Democracy".
In Ancient Rome the "Ceasor" would take on dictatorial powers during times of war and Rome was constantly at war. Only during peace times the Senate had any real say. So Rome used a few methods
-The Ceasor stayed in power till he died
-His power was balanced by the Senate but only during peace times
-During war the Ceasor became absolute ruler.
Heisenberg
What difference does it make in India. New Delhi is only there for power. She does a terrible job as a voice of Democracy, individual rights, freedomes, human rights. All of that New Delhi openly abuses. The only area New Delhi is useful to the world is a show of military power. So what difference does it make if New Delhi is run by a dynasty, an elected official, an appointed one or a permanent leader?
I hate it when people make God’s of themselves http://en.people.cn/n3/2018/0225/c90000-9429834.html yet all Chinese leaderships from the initial days of Qin to Tang to Song to Ming, Qing, Taiping, KMT, CCP, and everything in between, preys on that and makes Gods of themselves. This needs to change for once and for good because this power grab by dictatorial means is dangerous for the country and dangerous for Chinese progress.
Vergens VK….. You said that "they can vote him out.". How can they since there is no competition? You also used the word "reelected". No Chinese president was ever "elected", everyone was "decided". In any election there must be multiple candidates competing. Did you ever see such a cas in the Chinese system to produce the national leader? There is a big difference between election and decision. In a decision, voters choose between yes and no, without any prior competition, while in an election voters choose among personal names after competition. When the Chinese consititution uses the word election to produce the national leader, it constitutes a cheat.
China’s socialist meritocracy is unconstitutional because the Chinese constitution requires only one qualification for the president: any Chinese citizen aged 45 years or older.
There are 123 democratic countries in the world. Why you only looked at the USA? Even if only the USA, she is promoting democracy to the world while China is not. Why? if China’s socialist meritocracy is better than democracy why China is not promoting her BETTER system to the world?
And we all know that dictatorships never go wrong… As bad as politics is in the US and Europe, this could be much worse.
Michael Bagala Term limits used to be solved by assasination.
Heisenberg White Xi is not THAT bad.. all he wants is most of the Pacific Ocean and Asia. So far.
How do they vote him out?
Branka Alhamdy
I disagree Branka Stalin caused the Holodomor and ended up killing 40 million Russians and Ukrainians. He spread that nightmare deep into East Europe . When the Germans came many Eastern European nations saw them as liberators. Stalin was a monster.
Warren Lauzon
Funny but not factual. An Assassination is just that and not a "term limit"