
China renews calls for tighter cyberspace security - lineroping
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-cyber-idUSKBN14G0GA
======
diego_moita
Xi Jinping seems to be the most effective and powerful Chinese leader since
Deng Xiaoping, maybe even since Mao Zedong. Unfortunately, it seems to be also
the most authoritarian one. His anti-corruption campaign was very effective on
eliminating internal dissent within the Chinese Communist Party. This is the
greatest control freak on the planet, more than Vladimir Putin.

This trend towards tighter control of dissent goes far beyond the internet and
it is threatening to anyone with businesses in the country. Besides, the
country desperately needs independent institutions (e.g.: courts, press and
universities) if it really wants to leave behind the economic model that
worked until now (cheap exports and infrastructure building) and embrace a
model that pulls it ahead. For such, China needs to rely more on independent
entrepreneurship and their internal market. It can't do that when the
Communist Party insists on control everything.

Most Chinese know this very well, that's why so many rich Chinese are buying
real state in Seattle, Vancouver, etc or moving their assets abroad or
trusting their children education in western universities.

Jinping is to remain in power until 2022. Probably he will remain as a shadow
godfather of the party even after that. But going his path, China risks a lot
of instability.

~~~
smallnamespace
The Communist Party is not a monolith -- policy disagreements are proxies for
factional struggles. They just don't usually play out in a very public way,
but even in China, different news sources will have a different 'spin' because
they represent different viewpoints within the Party.

Xi is well aware of the need for financial, institutional, and economic
liberalization (the government has been regularly downsizing and selling off
state-owned firms[1] as well as opening up the financial sector), but support
for these policies is not uniform within the Party because many within benefit
from the status quo.

Hence the contradiction -- in order to push forward a liberalization and anti-
corruption agenda, Xi must first suppress dissent within the Party. In the US,
we have the saying 'Only Nixon could go to China'.

It's basically walking a tightrope: if he uses authoritarian tools too
heavily, then that indirectly hurts the independent institutions that need to
be nurtured, but if he takes too light a hand, then reforms will be blocked or
delayed indefinitely at lower levels and then fail from a thousand cuts.

And if China reforms too quickly without careful planning, it risks chaos (see
former Soviet Union in the 90s). If it reforms too slowly, it will not be able
to generate the economic growth that it badly needs as the manufacturing and
real estate sectors slow down.

[1] [http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-to-allow-state-owned-
enter...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-to-allow-state-owned-enterprises-
to-sell-shares-to-public-1442138335)

~~~
diego_moita
> Xi is well aware of the need for financial, institutional, and economic
> liberalization

I am not sure about this. Since 2008 the Party seems to be panicking by
increasing social unrest on ethnic/religious issues (Tibet/Xinjiang), on
autonomy ( Hong Kong ) and, in thousands of villages and cities, on
corruption, land rights and environmental issues. But I do concede that he has
been effective in important issues (e.g.: healthcare and pensions).

China history is marked by 30-40 years of calm and tranquility that suddenly
erupt in tragic conflict (Taiping Rebellion, Republic, Communist Revolution,
Great Leap Forward & Cultural Revolution, ...) By that pattern some big
instability is overdue by now. Let's just hope it doesn't happen.

~~~
smallnamespace
The argument for liberalization is that it's the only way to continue to grow
the economy, and the Communist's Party's current legitimacy rests on lifting
hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in the last few decades.

Having won a revolution only some 70 years before, Party leaders are well
aware that power taken with consent of the people can certainly be taken away
again [1][2].

[1]
[http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1133212/tocquevilles-...](http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1133212/tocquevilles-
advice-french-revolution-captures-chinese-leaders-attention)

[2] [http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Policy-
Politics/Comm...](http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Policy-
Politics/Communist-Party-s-recommended-books-show-China-s-leadership-concerns)

------
sasas
Foreign companies are now facing the implications of this now. The penalties
for non compliance can mean managers can face detention or monetary penalties.

Now that Airbnb moved some of their infrastructure into China for data
sovereignty requirements, they may have to comply when asked to give the
Chinese government access into their infrastructure that is based in China.
I'm not talking about passive monitoring, but actual credentials. This may
hinge on if the infrastructure is classified as "critical", a very loosely
defined and ambitious term.

The implications are huge for anyone doing business in China. The risk to
intellectual property that Apple are about to face could be significant. It's
all stated in the new law which you can read here -

[http://www.chinalawtranslate.com/cybersecuritylaw/?lang=en](http://www.chinalawtranslate.com/cybersecuritylaw/?lang=en)

