Western calls for greater Chinese transparency on the coronavirus reflect a clash of culture

As the US and Europe demand more information sharing, neither Beijing nor Chinese people share the Western value that transparency is intrinsic to good governance. Nor do they believe public institutions must always be subject to checks and balances

Chee Yik-wai

Published: 5:00am, 30 Apr 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

In the West it is common to portray the Chinese government as being relatively non-transparent compared to many other political institutions and organisations.

The Covid-19 pandemic has raised serious questions on whether the rest of the world is paying a price for this perceived lack of transparency. The US, in particular, has argued that it was ill-advised by the World Health Organisation, which it accused of taking the Chinese side and exercising little scrutiny over China’s initial handling of the outbreak.

Calls for China to pay for its mishandling of the outbreak have been growing from other countries such as Britain – all under the name of a lack of transparency. On the latest controversy over the origin of the virus, even German Chancellor Angela Merkel has joined the chorus pushing China to be more transparent and open.

The Chinese government does not agree with this view of the situation of course. And the overwhelming majority of Chinese ruling elites may not even care about transparency as long as there is good governance – perhaps with “Chinese characteristics” – which promises economic prosperity and improved living standards for each generation.

While there are no common objective standards used to measure transparency, China’s government has increased the amount and frequency of information it releases and expanded social competition over ideas from an economic standpoint.

The Communist Party’s development strategy, which includes its flagship Belt and Road Initiative, requires greater integration with the international economy, which has obliged policymakers to adopt more transparent practices and information management.

While one may argue that this is significantly different from those prevalent in most Western democracies, the party has made greater efforts at transparency under the rationale that increased access to accurate information generally brings more benefit to Chinese citizens and its core interests.

Coronavirus latest: US deaths top 60,000, WHO to reconvene emergency panel

From the late 1970s, reformist Chinese leaders, in particular Deng Xiaoping, acknowledged China’s economic weaknesses and understood that the modern China he inherited was not sustainable.

Historically a mighty nation, China at the time failed to attract any significant foreign capital to expand economic opportunities for its people – the party’s main measure of success.

To attract capital, Deng had to introduce the market economy, which meant regular and reliable reporting of previously guarded fiscal, demographic, geological and economic data.

This new degree of openness to the outside also meant disclosures to the Chinese public, previously denied access to timely information about the state of their economy and development policies.

What was already common in other free market economies was a giant step for China then. These adjustments to international requirements and integration with international institutions happened over 40 years amid divisive internal political debates and significant social dislocation.

Initial resistance to greater economic transparency decreased as Chinese policymakers realised that transparency could be selectively applied, to China’s competitive advantage.

The rest of the world, mostly accustomed to a Western governance perspective, tend to interact with Chinese institutions with expectations regarding access to information conditioned by their political values.

We have all heard complaints about China’s behavioural changes progressing too slowly. The mainstream Western narrative is that transparency is an intrinsic good, and that access to information, especially regarding the actions of public institutions and organisations, is an individual right.

On both philosophical and practical levels, they have an adversarial relationship with their public institutions, whose powers must be checked and balanced to ensure good governance. This is simply not how most Chinese view it.

Despite some encouraging changes in Chinese attitudes towards international agreements, including promises of greater transparency in information sharing, this uniquely Western and essentially moral foundation is not shared by many Chinese individuals or recognised as essential to the proper functioning of Chinese institutions.

Why it’s so hard for the US to work with China in fighting the pandemic

Consequently, relationships between Chinese and Western institutions are often derailed by unmatching patterns of language and behaviour arising from the starkly different assumptions about openness as a political merit.

The absence of such shared values jeopardises mutual trust and respect, especially in crucial areas where global cooperation must happen.

Granted, it would be unwise to take the words, information and interpretation of events of the Chinese state apparatus at face value; we should also look at what the government is doing behind the scenes.

This may not be common practice in the many countries where checks and balances are perceived as an ideological aspiration for effective governance.

However, this is the new normal we have to learn to accept when interpreting China’s information. Had the Trump administration taken more serious note of the Wuhan lockdown and implemented swift measures domestically to neutralise Covid-19, would the US still be the worst-hit country today?

President Donald Trump could go on raising doubts about China hiding the real numbers and how it is impossible for China to report so few deaths.

But whatever the real Chinese numbers are, they would not help the US improve its international standing or its capacity to overcome this pandemic. They would also, almost certainly, not significantly sway Chinese public opinion on the importance of institutional transparency – the ruling elite’s Achilles’ heel.

While it remains to be seen whether Covid-19 can improve transparency within China, what can certainly help is for the world to better understand Chinese culture in collectively demanding a deeper truth, and not resort to politics and dangerous race cards.

Chee Yik-wai is a Malaysia-based intercultural specialist and the co-founder of Crowdsukan focusing on sport diplomacy for peace and development

Post