Clinton in China
© Jason Gottlieb
A live televised debate between Clinton and Chinese president Jiang Zemin, a live televised question and answer session with Beijing University students, and a battery of live televised statements by Clinton each served to reinforce the image of China opening to the world. Previously, the most open China had been was last October, when Jiang gave a keynote speech at the 15th Communist Party Congress, carried live on CNN. That speech, in part extolling the virtues of capitalism, was a small step toward Chinese transparency. The impromptu debate between Clinton and Jiang, broadcast live and uncensored throughout China, was the consummate giant leap.
Part of this new feeling of openness was by Chinese design. Undoubtedly, China televised these events as part of its efforts to present a new image to the world. Since Jiang Zemin has come to power, China's efforts at taking its place among the world powers have been doubled. The stakes are high: admission to the World Trade Organization have for years been hung up on questions of labor standards and human rights standards. These touchy subjects, a perennial source of discord between China and the United States, were exactly the subjects Clinton emphasized in his stay, the longest bilateral visit ever by a sitting President.
Despite all the openness, China critics had plenty to denounce. China opened the summit by denying visas, harassing dissenters, and restricting access to several journalists from Radio Free China. Furthermore, the questions from the audience seemed staged at times, accusatory of US policy and defensive of China, leading some critics to charge that the live television feeds were a setup. At the same time that China was able to prove to the world how open and democratic they had become, they were able to attempt to cast Clinton as a straw man, battering him with questions to which a Chinese audience would be sympathetic.
But Clinton is nobody's straw man. Even his critics praise his speaking style, and in the face of difficult questions, he comported himself in a manner fitting the leader of the free world. He needed to. Before the trip, Clinton had been harshly criticized for his alleged connections to illegal fundraising from Chinese nationals. Although these allegations have thus far remained mere rumor, the whispers could have been a grave distraction, pressuring Clinton to talk tougher than appropriate to prove his independence from Chinese influence. Or, even worse, he could have cancelled his trip altogether, which would have been abandoning US foreign policy to the power of rumor.
