Author: 1111 EduPub

EduPub (Edupedia Publications Pvt Ltd) is a company dedicated to the development of the education, learning, research and innovation in the field of the research and books publication. We are pioneer in providing wide range of services to educational institutions, government agencies, individuals and corporates in the field of training and education, research and development, research and innovation. research and publication.

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel, a CRC coordinator from Gujarat, faced the following difficulty. To which there are no easy answers, but here\’s an attempt. Feel free to add your views!
Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

We have to leave the teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it?

Parimal Patel, a CRC coordinator from Gujarat, faced the following difficulty. To which there are no easy answers, but here\’s an attempt. Feel free to add your views!
Parimal Patel
Two days ago, I had a discussion in my cluster to make school history and to make school bio-data (which was made by me for my school by spending extra time in the school). Teachers liked  my idea but said that that in which time they would make it? They have had a lot of work since June. I\’m asking this question because this is only one example – but there are so many policy-makers and the worker is only one. If we want quality we have to leave teacher in the classroom, isn\’t it? Please think about it – this is a more difficult question in primary education than any other.

Subir\’s response

Parimal (and many other friends struggling with the same problem) – you are right that the worker is one and policy makers are many, and all of them are trying to get the worker to do something or the other! So what can be done? Here are a few points for you all to consider:
  • The curriculum development process is one very important way to create a framework and common understanding so that the different decision-makers and policy-makers can think in a coordinated way. In the next few months this will be shared across the state and a process to coordinate accordingly will start. In the beginning, though, you can expect a lot of struggle, since everyone will not agree on what the SRG has developed! Be prepared for different ideas all trying to occupy the same place. 
  • When we work in the field, we do have to keep in mind specific actions. At the same time, don\’t worry if the teacher does not do what you are asking for – AS LONG AS HE/SHE IS WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME OBJECTIVE. The problem arises when the objectives themselves are different (as will happen this year in the Gunotsav). 
  • The need to leave the teacher to work in the classroom is really important. We have opposite views about what is happening: some claim the teacher has got too many non-teaching tasks, and some say that the teacher is simply not spending the time in the class. Which view is the correct one? I think both are. People like me will keep on working with policy makers to ensure that non-teaching tasks are reduced, and other colleagues at field level will have to keep on working to ensure that teachers do spend the time available in the classroom. 
  • I like the idea of the school bio-data. Maybe it does not have to be done in one go. How about putting up a chart or board, and letting teachers, children, even community members add things to it when they have the time. Then, perhaps after a month, in the morning assembly this can be shared (it is not necessary to keep doing the same things in morning assembly every day!). Different classes could be given the tasks in different subjects, related to the school bio-data (in language – do the writing work; in maths – make maps, tables with data; in social studies – trace the history; in drawing – make pictures of different aspects of the school, etc.). So making it a project, spreading it over time, and connecting it with ongoing processes might help. This has to do with how we imagine different things being done. 
  • Finally, pl also read the post on \’How Teachers Change\’, and also \’How Teachers Learn\’ in my blog.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

\’What We Learn Cannot Be Burnt – \’An Afghan Neo-Literate Woman

As we work in education, it often tends to get too \’sanitized\’ – as if it is not about real people in real situations, where education has a meaning that\’s almost impossible to comprehend. Here\’s a story from Afghanistan, from a programme called Learning for Life that sought to provide initial literacy and health awareness to enable women to become CHWs (community health workers, sorely needed in the country). This story was documented in June 2005, by Judie Schiffbauer, and shared by Katy Anis.


Each morning, six days a week, 40 year old Zeba Gul wraps a light gray shawl around her head and shoulders and leaves her family’s mud-walled compound in the Afghan village of BegToot.  She follows a path that winds through dusty alleyways and then along green fields to arrive at a two-story building constructed of unbaked brick made from mud and straw.  Inside, a set of narrow stairs leads to the Learning for Life classroom, where other women are already gathered.  Removing her shoes at the doorway, she enters and lowers herself to the mat-covered floor, tucking her long legs beneath her.  
In December 2004, when the LfL health-based literacy program began in BegToot, wind whipped snow against the classroom windows, but on this fine summer day, the windows are open to admit a pleasant breeze.  The room looks out over groves of mulberry trees, for which the village is named.  Tall, creviced mountains rise high in the distance, still bearing traces of winter snow.
But the 26 women in the class are not admiring the view.  Instead, each attends to Qotsia, their 21-year-old teacher, who stands beside a small blackboard at the front of the room.  One of millions of Afghans who fled the war-torn country, Qotsia grew up as a refugee in Iran, where she received 12 years of formal education.  Now she has returned to BegToot, and the women are grateful.
 Dressed and coifed in black, Qotsia begins to write with a piece of chalk.  Carefully demonstrating each stroke, she writes a word in Dari composed of several letters from the alphabet displayed on a poster on the wall.  The dark black letters on the poster are easy to see, but six months ago, no woman in the class could have named or written a single one.  Today, hands shoot up when Qotsea asks someone to spell out and then read what she has written.  One woman rises and comes forward:  k a r u m (worm).  “Very good, Pashtoon Jan!” says Qotsia.  Pashtoon Jan smiles as her fellow learners sound out the word, repeat it in unison, and write it in their notebooks:   k a r u m.  Worms are the topic of today’s lesson.  
To the left of the blackboard, a series of drawings depicts women busy with women’s chores:  one is cleaning vegetables; one is boiling water to be stored in an earthenware jar; another is feeding a sick baby; and one is washing a child’s dirty hands.  Now the women in this Level One literacy class are going to learn how worms and a child’s dirty hands are related. 
As one of six Community Health Workers enrolled in the class, Zeba Gul already knows a lot about worms.  Their life cycle and method of transmission were explained to her when BRAC, a REACH NGO-grantee, trained her as a CHW.  But until now, Zeba Gul has never known how to spell, read or write the names of the parasites– roundworm, tapeworm, and pinworm—that sicken so many children and adults in the village. 
As Qotsia begins the lesson, Zeba Gul leans forward and points to a young woman sitting nearby: “That’s my daughter,” she whispers. “Because of this class, she is learning to read and write before her hair turns gray.”
Later, the class at an end and women lingering to talk, Zeba Gul told her story.  She was born in Paghman, but she has not always lived there.  When she was sixteen, she married and moved to Kabul with her husband to live with his family. Her daughter and several other children were born in the city.
“It was good,” says Zeba Gul.  “My husband had a small shop.  He worked hard.  In the morning, he opened the shop.  In the afternoon, he had a second job in a government building.”
Even during the dark days of war, the family chose not to leave Afghanistan for sanctuary in Pakistan or Iran.  “We stayed,” she says, remembering their struggles with a hint of pride in her voice.  “We were hard workers, and we stayed.” 
For a time after the Russians left, Zeba Gul thought the worst was behind them.  But peace did not last long.  “After that,” she said, “I wasn’t sure what the fighting was about; I know only that it did not stop.  So much fighting.”
When Zeba Gul explains that both the family’s shop and home were near Damazang in Karte Seh, the room grows very quiet.  Everyone knows that Karte Seh was virtually destroyed during the civil war.  “Ay, Khoda!” the women whisper, as Zeba Gul continues her story:
“One night, our shop was ablaze. How it burned!  And our house burned too.  Everything we had was swallowed in fire.  Oh, God.  What could we do?  We had nothing left!  So we returned to Paghman.  It was more than ten years ago.  Here, my husband is a farmer.  Thanks to Allah, he is alive.” 
Many of her listeners have been less fortunate, and the widows nod in agreement as Zeba Gul utters her prayer of gratitude.  The women in the room have known great sorrows, but it is resilience that binds them. 
“Now,” continues Zeba Gul, “I am a CHW.  And I am learning to read and write in this class.  See there: my daughter is also here! Faz l’Khoda–Give thanks to God.  What we learn cannot be burned.”  
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

\’What We Learn Cannot Be Burnt – \’An Afghan Neo-Literate Woman

As we work in education, it often tends to get too \’sanitized\’ – as if it is not about real people in real situations, where education has a meaning that\’s almost impossible to comprehend. Here\’s a story from Afghanistan, from a programme called Learning for Life that sought to provide initial literacy and health awareness to enable women to become CHWs (community health workers, sorely needed in the country). This story was documented in June 2005, by Judie Schiffbauer, and shared by Katy Anis.


Each morning, six days a week, 40 year old Zeba Gul wraps a light gray shawl around her head and shoulders and leaves her family’s mud-walled compound in the Afghan village of BegToot.  She follows a path that winds through dusty alleyways and then along green fields to arrive at a two-story building constructed of unbaked brick made from mud and straw.  Inside, a set of narrow stairs leads to the Learning for Life classroom, where other women are already gathered.  Removing her shoes at the doorway, she enters and lowers herself to the mat-covered floor, tucking her long legs beneath her.  
In December 2004, when the LfL health-based literacy program began in BegToot, wind whipped snow against the classroom windows, but on this fine summer day, the windows are open to admit a pleasant breeze.  The room looks out over groves of mulberry trees, for which the village is named.  Tall, creviced mountains rise high in the distance, still bearing traces of winter snow.
But the 26 women in the class are not admiring the view.  Instead, each attends to Qotsia, their 21-year-old teacher, who stands beside a small blackboard at the front of the room.  One of millions of Afghans who fled the war-torn country, Qotsia grew up as a refugee in Iran, where she received 12 years of formal education.  Now she has returned to BegToot, and the women are grateful.
 Dressed and coifed in black, Qotsia begins to write with a piece of chalk.  Carefully demonstrating each stroke, she writes a word in Dari composed of several letters from the alphabet displayed on a poster on the wall.  The dark black letters on the poster are easy to see, but six months ago, no woman in the class could have named or written a single one.  Today, hands shoot up when Qotsea asks someone to spell out and then read what she has written.  One woman rises and comes forward:  k a r u m (worm).  “Very good, Pashtoon Jan!” says Qotsia.  Pashtoon Jan smiles as her fellow learners sound out the word, repeat it in unison, and write it in their notebooks:   k a r u m.  Worms are the topic of today’s lesson.  
To the left of the blackboard, a series of drawings depicts women busy with women’s chores:  one is cleaning vegetables; one is boiling water to be stored in an earthenware jar; another is feeding a sick baby; and one is washing a child’s dirty hands.  Now the women in this Level One literacy class are going to learn how worms and a child’s dirty hands are related. 
As one of six Community Health Workers enrolled in the class, Zeba Gul already knows a lot about worms.  Their life cycle and method of transmission were explained to her when BRAC, a REACH NGO-grantee, trained her as a CHW.  But until now, Zeba Gul has never known how to spell, read or write the names of the parasites– roundworm, tapeworm, and pinworm—that sicken so many children and adults in the village. 
As Qotsia begins the lesson, Zeba Gul leans forward and points to a young woman sitting nearby: “That’s my daughter,” she whispers. “Because of this class, she is learning to read and write before her hair turns gray.”
Later, the class at an end and women lingering to talk, Zeba Gul told her story.  She was born in Paghman, but she has not always lived there.  When she was sixteen, she married and moved to Kabul with her husband to live with his family. Her daughter and several other children were born in the city.
“It was good,” says Zeba Gul.  “My husband had a small shop.  He worked hard.  In the morning, he opened the shop.  In the afternoon, he had a second job in a government building.”
Even during the dark days of war, the family chose not to leave Afghanistan for sanctuary in Pakistan or Iran.  “We stayed,” she says, remembering their struggles with a hint of pride in her voice.  “We were hard workers, and we stayed.” 
For a time after the Russians left, Zeba Gul thought the worst was behind them.  But peace did not last long.  “After that,” she said, “I wasn’t sure what the fighting was about; I know only that it did not stop.  So much fighting.”
When Zeba Gul explains that both the family’s shop and home were near Damazang in Karte Seh, the room grows very quiet.  Everyone knows that Karte Seh was virtually destroyed during the civil war.  “Ay, Khoda!” the women whisper, as Zeba Gul continues her story:
“One night, our shop was ablaze. How it burned!  And our house burned too.  Everything we had was swallowed in fire.  Oh, God.  What could we do?  We had nothing left!  So we returned to Paghman.  It was more than ten years ago.  Here, my husband is a farmer.  Thanks to Allah, he is alive.” 
Many of her listeners have been less fortunate, and the widows nod in agreement as Zeba Gul utters her prayer of gratitude.  The women in the room have known great sorrows, but it is resilience that binds them. 
“Now,” continues Zeba Gul, “I am a CHW.  And I am learning to read and write in this class.  See there: my daughter is also here! Faz l’Khoda–Give thanks to God.  What we learn cannot be burned.”  
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

\’What We Learn Cannot Be Burnt – \’An Afghan Neo-Literate Woman

As we work in education, it often tends to get too \’sanitized\’ – as if it is not about real people in real situations, where education has a meaning that\’s almost impossible to comprehend. Here\’s a story from Afghanistan, from a programme called Learning for Life that sought to provide initial literacy and health awareness to enable women to become CHWs (community health workers, sorely needed in the country). This story was documented in June 2005, by Judie Schiffbauer, and shared by Katy Anis.


Each morning, six days a week, 40 year old Zeba Gul wraps a light gray shawl around her head and shoulders and leaves her family’s mud-walled compound in the Afghan village of BegToot.  She follows a path that winds through dusty alleyways and then along green fields to arrive at a two-story building constructed of unbaked brick made from mud and straw.  Inside, a set of narrow stairs leads to the Learning for Life classroom, where other women are already gathered.  Removing her shoes at the doorway, she enters and lowers herself to the mat-covered floor, tucking her long legs beneath her.  
In December 2004, when the LfL health-based literacy program began in BegToot, wind whipped snow against the classroom windows, but on this fine summer day, the windows are open to admit a pleasant breeze.  The room looks out over groves of mulberry trees, for which the village is named.  Tall, creviced mountains rise high in the distance, still bearing traces of winter snow.
But the 26 women in the class are not admiring the view.  Instead, each attends to Qotsia, their 21-year-old teacher, who stands beside a small blackboard at the front of the room.  One of millions of Afghans who fled the war-torn country, Qotsia grew up as a refugee in Iran, where she received 12 years of formal education.  Now she has returned to BegToot, and the women are grateful.
 Dressed and coifed in black, Qotsia begins to write with a piece of chalk.  Carefully demonstrating each stroke, she writes a word in Dari composed of several letters from the alphabet displayed on a poster on the wall.  The dark black letters on the poster are easy to see, but six months ago, no woman in the class could have named or written a single one.  Today, hands shoot up when Qotsea asks someone to spell out and then read what she has written.  One woman rises and comes forward:  k a r u m (worm).  “Very good, Pashtoon Jan!” says Qotsia.  Pashtoon Jan smiles as her fellow learners sound out the word, repeat it in unison, and write it in their notebooks:   k a r u m.  Worms are the topic of today’s lesson.  
To the left of the blackboard, a series of drawings depicts women busy with women’s chores:  one is cleaning vegetables; one is boiling water to be stored in an earthenware jar; another is feeding a sick baby; and one is washing a child’s dirty hands.  Now the women in this Level One literacy class are going to learn how worms and a child’s dirty hands are related. 
As one of six Community Health Workers enrolled in the class, Zeba Gul already knows a lot about worms.  Their life cycle and method of transmission were explained to her when BRAC, a REACH NGO-grantee, trained her as a CHW.  But until now, Zeba Gul has never known how to spell, read or write the names of the parasites– roundworm, tapeworm, and pinworm—that sicken so many children and adults in the village. 
As Qotsia begins the lesson, Zeba Gul leans forward and points to a young woman sitting nearby: “That’s my daughter,” she whispers. “Because of this class, she is learning to read and write before her hair turns gray.”
Later, the class at an end and women lingering to talk, Zeba Gul told her story.  She was born in Paghman, but she has not always lived there.  When she was sixteen, she married and moved to Kabul with her husband to live with his family. Her daughter and several other children were born in the city.
“It was good,” says Zeba Gul.  “My husband had a small shop.  He worked hard.  In the morning, he opened the shop.  In the afternoon, he had a second job in a government building.”
Even during the dark days of war, the family chose not to leave Afghanistan for sanctuary in Pakistan or Iran.  “We stayed,” she says, remembering their struggles with a hint of pride in her voice.  “We were hard workers, and we stayed.” 
For a time after the Russians left, Zeba Gul thought the worst was behind them.  But peace did not last long.  “After that,” she said, “I wasn’t sure what the fighting was about; I know only that it did not stop.  So much fighting.”
When Zeba Gul explains that both the family’s shop and home were near Damazang in Karte Seh, the room grows very quiet.  Everyone knows that Karte Seh was virtually destroyed during the civil war.  “Ay, Khoda!” the women whisper, as Zeba Gul continues her story:
“One night, our shop was ablaze. How it burned!  And our house burned too.  Everything we had was swallowed in fire.  Oh, God.  What could we do?  We had nothing left!  So we returned to Paghman.  It was more than ten years ago.  Here, my husband is a farmer.  Thanks to Allah, he is alive.” 
Many of her listeners have been less fortunate, and the widows nod in agreement as Zeba Gul utters her prayer of gratitude.  The women in the room have known great sorrows, but it is resilience that binds them. 
“Now,” continues Zeba Gul, “I am a CHW.  And I am learning to read and write in this class.  See there: my daughter is also here! Faz l’Khoda–Give thanks to God.  What we learn cannot be burned.”  
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

Call the SNP\’s bluff


Just in case you were not following the British elections, a small earthquake happened. The Tories won, the Lib Dems were wiped out, Labour performed poorly, and UKIP performed well but got no rewards. The bigger earthquake happened north of the border where the Scottish Nationalist party (SNP) won all seats bar three in a landslide, essentially running on a plank of Scottish independence.
This blog is a politics free zone and this blogger does not comment on political matters although he has (obviously !) strong views on every matter under the sun including Scottish independence 🙂 But he can and will argue a point of view on the economics of the issue of Scotland\’s secession.
Scotland runs a much higher level of expenditure as compared to the income it generates. If it were a separate nation, it will be running a deficit of 8% of GDP, as against the UK\’s 4%. The SNP is even more to the left than Labour and wants to spend more. In the cuckooland of irresponsibility that all opposition parties operate in, this is all very possible. 
Scotland\’s economy is tiny and is heavily influenced, even now, by oil. With the current low prices of crude, Scotland\’s already iffy finances would be in dire straits if it was an independent country. But thankfully it is not and is currently being bailed out by the English tax payer.
When the referendum was held last year (and Scotland voted to narrowly stay in the UK), it was promised to the Scots that the powers to tax and spend would be devolved to the Scottish parliament. What the SNP wants is the power to tax and spend, but continue to get the bailout by the English tax payer. For a period of transition this is acceptable, but this is not a sustainable proposition. What the Tory government would probably do is to immediately devolve the powers to tax and spend, but set a graded target of deficit reduction to the UK average over , say a five year period. That is enough to turn the squeeze on any government in Scotland. Independence would start to look an increasingly unattractive proposition.
The issue of independence will never be settled on economic grounds. Everywhere in the world it is settled on emotional and political grounds, even when it is blindingly obvious that it would be a case of economic suicide. It is for the electorate to decide, although every Anglophile, including this blogger, has a view. But one thing is certain. If the UK called the bluff and handed over the management of finances to a Scottish parliament, in an election five years later, whether Scotland is an independent nation by then or not, there is no chance that the SNP will win 56 seats. Its time to make the SNP accountable.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

Call the SNP\’s bluff


Just in case you were not following the British elections, a small earthquake happened. The Tories won, the Lib Dems were wiped out, Labour performed poorly, and UKIP performed well but got no rewards. The bigger earthquake happened north of the border where the Scottish Nationalist party (SNP) won all seats bar three in a landslide, essentially running on a plank of Scottish independence.
This blog is a politics free zone and this blogger does not comment on political matters although he has (obviously !) strong views on every matter under the sun including Scottish independence 🙂 But he can and will argue a point of view on the economics of the issue of Scotland\’s secession.
Scotland runs a much higher level of expenditure as compared to the income it generates. If it were a separate nation, it will be running a deficit of 8% of GDP, as against the UK\’s 4%. The SNP is even more to the left than Labour and wants to spend more. In the cuckooland of irresponsibility that all opposition parties operate in, this is all very possible. 
Scotland\’s economy is tiny and is heavily influenced, even now, by oil. With the current low prices of crude, Scotland\’s already iffy finances would be in dire straits if it was an independent country. But thankfully it is not and is currently being bailed out by the English tax payer.
When the referendum was held last year (and Scotland voted to narrowly stay in the UK), it was promised to the Scots that the powers to tax and spend would be devolved to the Scottish parliament. What the SNP wants is the power to tax and spend, but continue to get the bailout by the English tax payer. For a period of transition this is acceptable, but this is not a sustainable proposition. What the Tory government would probably do is to immediately devolve the powers to tax and spend, but set a graded target of deficit reduction to the UK average over , say a five year period. That is enough to turn the squeeze on any government in Scotland. Independence would start to look an increasingly unattractive proposition.
The issue of independence will never be settled on economic grounds. Everywhere in the world it is settled on emotional and political grounds, even when it is blindingly obvious that it would be a case of economic suicide. It is for the electorate to decide, although every Anglophile, including this blogger, has a view. But one thing is certain. If the UK called the bluff and handed over the management of finances to a Scottish parliament, in an election five years later, whether Scotland is an independent nation by then or not, there is no chance that the SNP will win 56 seats. Its time to make the SNP accountable.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

Call the SNP\’s bluff


Just in case you were not following the British elections, a small earthquake happened. The Tories won, the Lib Dems were wiped out, Labour performed poorly, and UKIP performed well but got no rewards. The bigger earthquake happened north of the border where the Scottish Nationalist party (SNP) won all seats bar three in a landslide, essentially running on a plank of Scottish independence.
This blog is a politics free zone and this blogger does not comment on political matters although he has (obviously !) strong views on every matter under the sun including Scottish independence 🙂 But he can and will argue a point of view on the economics of the issue of Scotland\’s secession.
Scotland runs a much higher level of expenditure as compared to the income it generates. If it were a separate nation, it will be running a deficit of 8% of GDP, as against the UK\’s 4%. The SNP is even more to the left than Labour and wants to spend more. In the cuckooland of irresponsibility that all opposition parties operate in, this is all very possible. 
Scotland\’s economy is tiny and is heavily influenced, even now, by oil. With the current low prices of crude, Scotland\’s already iffy finances would be in dire straits if it was an independent country. But thankfully it is not and is currently being bailed out by the English tax payer.
When the referendum was held last year (and Scotland voted to narrowly stay in the UK), it was promised to the Scots that the powers to tax and spend would be devolved to the Scottish parliament. What the SNP wants is the power to tax and spend, but continue to get the bailout by the English tax payer. For a period of transition this is acceptable, but this is not a sustainable proposition. What the Tory government would probably do is to immediately devolve the powers to tax and spend, but set a graded target of deficit reduction to the UK average over , say a five year period. That is enough to turn the squeeze on any government in Scotland. Independence would start to look an increasingly unattractive proposition.
The issue of independence will never be settled on economic grounds. Everywhere in the world it is settled on emotional and political grounds, even when it is blindingly obvious that it would be a case of economic suicide. It is for the electorate to decide, although every Anglophile, including this blogger, has a view. But one thing is certain. If the UK called the bluff and handed over the management of finances to a Scottish parliament, in an election five years later, whether Scotland is an independent nation by then or not, there is no chance that the SNP will win 56 seats. Its time to make the SNP accountable.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

China\’s Issues

Every country faces challenges and China is no exception. But by global yardsticks, China\’s issues are less critical than what most other countries face.  It is after all the one country in the world which does not face a serious growth challenge (at least as of now).  China is however such a large country that even a seemingly minor issue is of gigantic scale and one that will affect the whole world. This is why everybody in the world ought to take a much greater interest in this country.
This post is a compendium of social, political, economic and moral issues that China faces at this point of time, in no particular order
Maintaining GDP Growth : The \”contract\” between the Communist Party and the people is a simple one – Economic growth for political control. When economic growth falters, this contract will be put under strain. There are a number of challenges to maintaining economic growth and some of them are articulated below. You can\’t grow endlessly at 8%+. The inflexion point has come.
Quantum of Debt  : China\’s debt to GDP ratio is galloping and is now above 300%. Much of the growth over the last decade has been debt fuelled. Growth will seriously falter if debt is cut. That\’s why the elusive \”soft landing\” is proving so difficult for China. Just for comparison, India\’s debt to GDP %, which I often cry about is \”only\” 130%. The United States, of course is a leader at 350% !
Income inequality : Every country faces this problem, but China faces it as bad as the US. The Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality is 0.42 (higher the number, greater the inequality). The US is 0.46. India is 0.35. China is starting to have first world problems
Ageing population : Because of the one child policy that was rigidly enforced until recently, China is rapidly ageing. It will be the first country in history to have an ageing problem before it got rich (remember, on a per capita basis, China is still middling). With a poor social security network, who is going to pay for the aged and take care of them in a decade or two. China has the peculiar problem of one grandchild for four grandparents.
Corruption : We have spoken of it in previous posts. It is a serious problem.
Environment : China faces an acute environmental problem. The government is actively tackling it, but the problem is a huge one and one that was allowed to build up to crisis levels over decades. China also faces an acute water problem (worse than India\’s). There aren\’t easy solutions. Much of the north is virtually a desert, but with teeming populations.
Restive provinces : The one thing China is absolutely terrible at is integrating people who are culturally different. 93% of China is a homogeneous Han (those who talk about diversity in China have no clue what diversity really means – come to India).  The two largest provinces Tibet and Xinjiang are restive and brutally suppressed
Rising nationalism : Very few Chinese would recognise this as an issue, but it really is. Anti foreigner sentiment is high – its easy for a large number of Chinese to be fanatically against a nation if whipped into a frenzy of perceived slights. The Chinese government is increasingly bullying in its approach – Japan (Senkaku), entire East Asia (Nine dash line), India (Doklam and Arunachal). The average citizen who only has access to government propaganda gets whipped into dangerous nationalism. The Chinese would do well to ponder over this – why do they have so few friends ?
A moral vacuum : To an outsider, this might seem to be a strange issue, but many Chinese would immediately relate to it. Firstly during the Cultural Revolution and then in the breakneck speed of economic growth, its ancient culture, beliefs and traditions have gone. Today money is the predominant (only) religion.  In other countries, religious and  social organisations provide a balance to the materialism. In China they do not exist, or if they rise, are brutally exterminated by the government (see what happened to Falun Gong). So many Chinese wonder – after money what? And they may then turn their attention to demanding a level of freedom not in consonance with what the party is comfortable with.
And so this is the real major issue that China has faced since the mid 1980s and continues to face now. What is the balance between economic freedom and growth and political and other freedoms. The first flare up came when Zhou Enlai died in 1976. The second major flare up came during the Tiananmen incident in 1989. Since then there has been an uneasy truce, but one which has never gone away. Some day it will rear its head again. How China confronts it, and who is in power in China to confront it, will have tremendous consequences for the world. 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

China\’s Issues

Every country faces challenges and China is no exception. But by global yardsticks, China\’s issues are less critical than what most other countries face.  It is after all the one country in the world which does not face a serious growth challenge (at least as of now).  China is however such a large country that even a seemingly minor issue is of gigantic scale and one that will affect the whole world. This is why everybody in the world ought to take a much greater interest in this country.
This post is a compendium of social, political, economic and moral issues that China faces at this point of time, in no particular order
Maintaining GDP Growth : The \”contract\” between the Communist Party and the people is a simple one – Economic growth for political control. When economic growth falters, this contract will be put under strain. There are a number of challenges to maintaining economic growth and some of them are articulated below. You can\’t grow endlessly at 8%+. The inflexion point has come.
Quantum of Debt  : China\’s debt to GDP ratio is galloping and is now above 300%. Much of the growth over the last decade has been debt fuelled. Growth will seriously falter if debt is cut. That\’s why the elusive \”soft landing\” is proving so difficult for China. Just for comparison, India\’s debt to GDP %, which I often cry about is \”only\” 130%. The United States, of course is a leader at 350% !
Income inequality : Every country faces this problem, but China faces it as bad as the US. The Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality is 0.42 (higher the number, greater the inequality). The US is 0.46. India is 0.35. China is starting to have first world problems
Ageing population : Because of the one child policy that was rigidly enforced until recently, China is rapidly ageing. It will be the first country in history to have an ageing problem before it got rich (remember, on a per capita basis, China is still middling). With a poor social security network, who is going to pay for the aged and take care of them in a decade or two. China has the peculiar problem of one grandchild for four grandparents.
Corruption : We have spoken of it in previous posts. It is a serious problem.
Environment : China faces an acute environmental problem. The government is actively tackling it, but the problem is a huge one and one that was allowed to build up to crisis levels over decades. China also faces an acute water problem (worse than India\’s). There aren\’t easy solutions. Much of the north is virtually a desert, but with teeming populations.
Restive provinces : The one thing China is absolutely terrible at is integrating people who are culturally different. 93% of China is a homogeneous Han (those who talk about diversity in China have no clue what diversity really means – come to India).  The two largest provinces Tibet and Xinjiang are restive and brutally suppressed
Rising nationalism : Very few Chinese would recognise this as an issue, but it really is. Anti foreigner sentiment is high – its easy for a large number of Chinese to be fanatically against a nation if whipped into a frenzy of perceived slights. The Chinese government is increasingly bullying in its approach – Japan (Senkaku), entire East Asia (Nine dash line), India (Doklam and Arunachal). The average citizen who only has access to government propaganda gets whipped into dangerous nationalism. The Chinese would do well to ponder over this – why do they have so few friends ?
A moral vacuum : To an outsider, this might seem to be a strange issue, but many Chinese would immediately relate to it. Firstly during the Cultural Revolution and then in the breakneck speed of economic growth, its ancient culture, beliefs and traditions have gone. Today money is the predominant (only) religion.  In other countries, religious and  social organisations provide a balance to the materialism. In China they do not exist, or if they rise, are brutally exterminated by the government (see what happened to Falun Gong). So many Chinese wonder – after money what? And they may then turn their attention to demanding a level of freedom not in consonance with what the party is comfortable with.
And so this is the real major issue that China has faced since the mid 1980s and continues to face now. What is the balance between economic freedom and growth and political and other freedoms. The first flare up came when Zhou Enlai died in 1976. The second major flare up came during the Tiananmen incident in 1989. Since then there has been an uneasy truce, but one which has never gone away. Some day it will rear its head again. How China confronts it, and who is in power in China to confront it, will have tremendous consequences for the world. 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

China\’s Issues

Every country faces challenges and China is no exception. But by global yardsticks, China\’s issues are less critical than what most other countries face.  It is after all the one country in the world which does not face a serious growth challenge (at least as of now).  China is however such a large country that even a seemingly minor issue is of gigantic scale and one that will affect the whole world. This is why everybody in the world ought to take a much greater interest in this country.
This post is a compendium of social, political, economic and moral issues that China faces at this point of time, in no particular order
Maintaining GDP Growth : The \”contract\” between the Communist Party and the people is a simple one – Economic growth for political control. When economic growth falters, this contract will be put under strain. There are a number of challenges to maintaining economic growth and some of them are articulated below. You can\’t grow endlessly at 8%+. The inflexion point has come.
Quantum of Debt  : China\’s debt to GDP ratio is galloping and is now above 300%. Much of the growth over the last decade has been debt fuelled. Growth will seriously falter if debt is cut. That\’s why the elusive \”soft landing\” is proving so difficult for China. Just for comparison, India\’s debt to GDP %, which I often cry about is \”only\” 130%. The United States, of course is a leader at 350% !
Income inequality : Every country faces this problem, but China faces it as bad as the US. The Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality is 0.42 (higher the number, greater the inequality). The US is 0.46. India is 0.35. China is starting to have first world problems
Ageing population : Because of the one child policy that was rigidly enforced until recently, China is rapidly ageing. It will be the first country in history to have an ageing problem before it got rich (remember, on a per capita basis, China is still middling). With a poor social security network, who is going to pay for the aged and take care of them in a decade or two. China has the peculiar problem of one grandchild for four grandparents.
Corruption : We have spoken of it in previous posts. It is a serious problem.
Environment : China faces an acute environmental problem. The government is actively tackling it, but the problem is a huge one and one that was allowed to build up to crisis levels over decades. China also faces an acute water problem (worse than India\’s). There aren\’t easy solutions. Much of the north is virtually a desert, but with teeming populations.
Restive provinces : The one thing China is absolutely terrible at is integrating people who are culturally different. 93% of China is a homogeneous Han (those who talk about diversity in China have no clue what diversity really means – come to India).  The two largest provinces Tibet and Xinjiang are restive and brutally suppressed
Rising nationalism : Very few Chinese would recognise this as an issue, but it really is. Anti foreigner sentiment is high – its easy for a large number of Chinese to be fanatically against a nation if whipped into a frenzy of perceived slights. The Chinese government is increasingly bullying in its approach – Japan (Senkaku), entire East Asia (Nine dash line), India (Doklam and Arunachal). The average citizen who only has access to government propaganda gets whipped into dangerous nationalism. The Chinese would do well to ponder over this – why do they have so few friends ?
A moral vacuum : To an outsider, this might seem to be a strange issue, but many Chinese would immediately relate to it. Firstly during the Cultural Revolution and then in the breakneck speed of economic growth, its ancient culture, beliefs and traditions have gone. Today money is the predominant (only) religion.  In other countries, religious and  social organisations provide a balance to the materialism. In China they do not exist, or if they rise, are brutally exterminated by the government (see what happened to Falun Gong). So many Chinese wonder – after money what? And they may then turn their attention to demanding a level of freedom not in consonance with what the party is comfortable with.
And so this is the real major issue that China has faced since the mid 1980s and continues to face now. What is the balance between economic freedom and growth and political and other freedoms. The first flare up came when Zhou Enlai died in 1976. The second major flare up came during the Tiananmen incident in 1989. Since then there has been an uneasy truce, but one which has never gone away. Some day it will rear its head again. How China confronts it, and who is in power in China to confront it, will have tremendous consequences for the world. 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

Bat Ye'or on C-Span

Bat Ye’or, on a C-Span rebroadcast, discussed the ominous rise of Islam in Europe and her latest book on the subject: Eurabia. This brave woman has written on Islamic history and the Islamic threat for over 3 decades.

Because of the taboo (and laws in some cases) against being critical of Islam, Europe lacks intellectual leadership. Ye’or mentioned in the Q&A, that a proper understanding of the problem must be differentiated from a xenophobic attack on the demographic group, which includes moderate assimilated Muslims. Without discussion and proper intellectual leadership, there will be an inadequate understanding of the threat of Islam by both those who dismiss it and those who distort it.

This is a woman who talks calmly, patiently, clearly and forcefully – all in the face of an unresponsive and hostile culture that doesn’t want to take its head out of the sand. The dignity of this woman is inspiring. If the C-Span broadcast is repeated, don’t miss it.

Her website: dhimmitude.org. Unfortunately, I missed her talk at Columbia University.

China\’s new lineup

Anybody who predicts what the next Standing Committee and the Politburo will be is almost certain to be wrong ! This is why most newspaper columnists are content with naming possible candidates and leaving it at that. This blogger does not care if he is proved wrong or even as a fool. There are no consequences to getting it dead wrong. So here\’s my prediction what\’s going to happen !
There are only two near certainties in this political game. One is that Xi Jinping will continue as Secretary of the Communist Party, Chairman of the Central Military Commission and as the President. The second is that Zhang Dejiang, Yu Zengsheng, Liu Yunshan and Zhang Gaoli will retire from the Standing Committee . Everything else is up for grabs.
Two of the key moves that is the subject of much speculation is what will happen to Li Keqiang the current Premier (most views are that he will stay on as Premier) and that of Wang Qishan (Xi\’s ally in the anti corruption drive, but who is crossing the informal retirement age of 68).
My guess is that Li Keqiang will be pushed out and Wang Qishan will replace him as the Premier. This is not considered likely today and if it happens, will be radical and  unexpected. If it indeed does happen, it will indicate that Xi has taken total control of the Party. My reasoning is that Li has been a disappointment as  Premier  with his management of the economy, his key job. He will also carry the can for the stock market troubles of 2015. Li belongs to the Youth League faction which has been systematically defanged. There is precedence in China of the Premier being replaced – Li Peng giving way to Zhu Rongji in 1998. Wang Qishan , as we have seen in earlier posts, is the de facto No 2 in China today.  He is an expert on the economy and if he were to be appointed Premier, he will be Xi\’s trusted lieutenant in the soft landing of the economy that is a big imperative for China. This will mean Xi is bending the retirement rule – something I am guessing he will do as a strawman for his own options 5 years from now when he will face this retirement rule himself.
I think Li Zhanshu is a shoo in for the Standing Committee. He is currently the Director of the General Office of the Party and is a right hand man of Xi.  Stacking the Standing Committee with his people will be a primary objective of Xi.
There is a good chance that Wang Yang, currently Vice Premier will be elevated to the Standing Committee. He is not a Xi loyalist  and was potentially a candidate for the Standing Committee  even the last time around. He is however efficient and strong and has quelled his reformer (read political) instincts. He has kept his head low over the last five years and for sheer ability is likely to rise.
Another likely name is Wang Huning. He is currently the head of the central policy research office. A  non controversial choice who doesn\’t belong to any faction. A theoretician whom Xi seems to rely on and is often seen on Xi\’s overseas trips as an important adviser.
If Xi is in total control of the Party and has not needed to cut any deals, then this is the likely Standing Committee – cut down to five members . Xi Jinping, Wang Qishan, Li Zhanshu, Wang Yang and Wang Huning.
If Xi however decides to stay with a seven member standing committee, then the two additional names, would be as my guess, Zhao Leji and Han Zheng. Both are \”senior\” but not powerful and therefore likely to simply make up the numbers and duly nod their heads to anything Xi says.
If my prediction is even 75% right, then it is clear that Xi is all powerful. None of these members can be a potential successor to Xi and it will also indicate that Xi is preparing to stay on after 2022 as he hasn\’t groomed a successor unlike what his predecessors Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao did.
 Just as important as who gets in, is who doesn\’t get in. The disappointed persons would be
– Li Keqiang, the current Premier. He would be the biggest casualty if he were to fall. If he doesn\’t get dropped, Xi is just being cautious not to make too many changes. Li\’s power will continue to wane and he will, at best be a bureaucrat continuing to run the economy. Real decisions will  made by Xi.
– Hu Chunhua, the current party chief of Guangdong. He is of the next generation and had been touted as a potential successor to Xi even five years ago. He has recently been making noises pledging loyalty to Xi.  His elevation to the Standing Committee will mean he is the clear front runner next time around. His non inclusion will be a strong signal that Xi intends to stay on even after 2022.
– Chen Min\’er, current party chief of Chongqing. He was just brought in there to replace the disgraced Sun Zhengcai, a potential successor to Xi who fell in a power struggle. Chen is a staunch Xi loyalist. Its unlikely that he would be nominated, but if he were, it would be a clear signal that he would take over from Xi at least nominally in 2022, while Xi holds real power from the backroom.
A team like the one I have predicted will mean the following for China
– Xi Jinping is all powerful. He will start to acquire Mao like cult status. It is only hoped that he wouldn\’t unleash horrors on the country as Mao did.
– The Party will become even more ruthless in suppressing dissent. Personal freedoms will be even more curtailed and censorship will worsen.
– The economy will be managed efficiently. Economic troubles will come but they will be managed as best as could be.
– On foreign policy China will become increasingly belligerent and muscular.  They will be difficult to deal with diplomatically and might pick up fights with other countries. The current US administration will constantly lose on anything they pick up with China.
– The anti corruption drive and the defanging of political opponents will intensify. Xi might however face a challenge when Jiang Zemin dies. Major political activity tends to happen when somebody important dies.  The two major upheavals in China happened in 1976 after Zhou Enlai died and more famously in 1989 when Hu Yaobang died which led to the Tiananmen incidents. Jiang is nowhere near as liked as Zhou or Hu were, but it may be a trigger for old timers and those who had lost out in the Xi era to maybe flex their muscles.
– Xi will stay on post 2022 and will be the main power for at least another decade. He will install one of his men as the General Secretary, but will stay on as the Chairman of the CMC and wield real power. He may even be appointed Chairman of the Party, a post that was abolished after Mao.
How wrong I am would be revealed in the days after October 18th when the line of 5 or 7, which I alluded to in the first sentence of this series of posts will walk in and be introduced.  Even if I am 50% right, I will lay claim to being a \”Zhōng guó tōng\” (China expert) !
Enough of politics. This blog will go back to plodding on business and economic matters. It will return briefly to China and politics when the actual line up is announced in end October.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

China\’s new lineup

Anybody who predicts what the next Standing Committee and the Politburo will be is almost certain to be wrong ! This is why most newspaper columnists are content with naming possible candidates and leaving it at that. This blogger does not care if he is proved wrong or even as a fool. There are no consequences to getting it dead wrong. So here\’s my prediction what\’s going to happen !
There are only two near certainties in this political game. One is that Xi Jinping will continue as Secretary of the Communist Party, Chairman of the Central Military Commission and as the President. The second is that Zhang Dejiang, Yu Zengsheng, Liu Yunshan and Zhang Gaoli will retire from the Standing Committee . Everything else is up for grabs.
Two of the key moves that is the subject of much speculation is what will happen to Li Keqiang the current Premier (most views are that he will stay on as Premier) and that of Wang Qishan (Xi\’s ally in the anti corruption drive, but who is crossing the informal retirement age of 68).
My guess is that Li Keqiang will be pushed out and Wang Qishan will replace him as the Premier. This is not considered likely today and if it happens, will be radical and  unexpected. If it indeed does happen, it will indicate that Xi has taken total control of the Party. My reasoning is that Li has been a disappointment as  Premier  with his management of the economy, his key job. He will also carry the can for the stock market troubles of 2015. Li belongs to the Youth League faction which has been systematically defanged. There is precedence in China of the Premier being replaced – Li Peng giving way to Zhu Rongji in 1998. Wang Qishan , as we have seen in earlier posts, is the de facto No 2 in China today.  He is an expert on the economy and if he were to be appointed Premier, he will be Xi\’s trusted lieutenant in the soft landing of the economy that is a big imperative for China. This will mean Xi is bending the retirement rule – something I am guessing he will do as a strawman for his own options 5 years from now when he will face this retirement rule himself.
I think Li Zhanshu is a shoo in for the Standing Committee. He is currently the Director of the General Office of the Party and is a right hand man of Xi.  Stacking the Standing Committee with his people will be a primary objective of Xi.
There is a good chance that Wang Yang, currently Vice Premier will be elevated to the Standing Committee. He is not a Xi loyalist  and was potentially a candidate for the Standing Committee  even the last time around. He is however efficient and strong and has quelled his reformer (read political) instincts. He has kept his head low over the last five years and for sheer ability is likely to rise.
Another likely name is Wang Huning. He is currently the head of the central policy research office. A  non controversial choice who doesn\’t belong to any faction. A theoretician whom Xi seems to rely on and is often seen on Xi\’s overseas trips as an important adviser.
If Xi is in total control of the Party and has not needed to cut any deals, then this is the likely Standing Committee – cut down to five members . Xi Jinping, Wang Qishan, Li Zhanshu, Wang Yang and Wang Huning.
If Xi however decides to stay with a seven member standing committee, then the two additional names, would be as my guess, Zhao Leji and Han Zheng. Both are \”senior\” but not powerful and therefore likely to simply make up the numbers and duly nod their heads to anything Xi says.
If my prediction is even 75% right, then it is clear that Xi is all powerful. None of these members can be a potential successor to Xi and it will also indicate that Xi is preparing to stay on after 2022 as he hasn\’t groomed a successor unlike what his predecessors Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao did.
 Just as important as who gets in, is who doesn\’t get in. The disappointed persons would be
– Li Keqiang, the current Premier. He would be the biggest casualty if he were to fall. If he doesn\’t get dropped, Xi is just being cautious not to make too many changes. Li\’s power will continue to wane and he will, at best be a bureaucrat continuing to run the economy. Real decisions will  made by Xi.
– Hu Chunhua, the current party chief of Guangdong. He is of the next generation and had been touted as a potential successor to Xi even five years ago. He has recently been making noises pledging loyalty to Xi.  His elevation to the Standing Committee will mean he is the clear front runner next time around. His non inclusion will be a strong signal that Xi intends to stay on even after 2022.
– Chen Min\’er, current party chief of Chongqing. He was just brought in there to replace the disgraced Sun Zhengcai, a potential successor to Xi who fell in a power struggle. Chen is a staunch Xi loyalist. Its unlikely that he would be nominated, but if he were, it would be a clear signal that he would take over from Xi at least nominally in 2022, while Xi holds real power from the backroom.
A team like the one I have predicted will mean the following for China
– Xi Jinping is all powerful. He will start to acquire Mao like cult status. It is only hoped that he wouldn\’t unleash horrors on the country as Mao did.
– The Party will become even more ruthless in suppressing dissent. Personal freedoms will be even more curtailed and censorship will worsen.
– The economy will be managed efficiently. Economic troubles will come but they will be managed as best as could be.
– On foreign policy China will become increasingly belligerent and muscular.  They will be difficult to deal with diplomatically and might pick up fights with other countries. The current US administration will constantly lose on anything they pick up with China.
– The anti corruption drive and the defanging of political opponents will intensify. Xi might however face a challenge when Jiang Zemin dies. Major political activity tends to happen when somebody important dies.  The two major upheavals in China happened in 1976 after Zhou Enlai died and more famously in 1989 when Hu Yaobang died which led to the Tiananmen incidents. Jiang is nowhere near as liked as Zhou or Hu were, but it may be a trigger for old timers and those who had lost out in the Xi era to maybe flex their muscles.
– Xi will stay on post 2022 and will be the main power for at least another decade. He will install one of his men as the General Secretary, but will stay on as the Chairman of the CMC and wield real power. He may even be appointed Chairman of the Party, a post that was abolished after Mao.
How wrong I am would be revealed in the days after October 18th when the line of 5 or 7, which I alluded to in the first sentence of this series of posts will walk in and be introduced.  Even if I am 50% right, I will lay claim to being a \”Zhōng guó tōng\” (China expert) !
Enough of politics. This blog will go back to plodding on business and economic matters. It will return briefly to China and politics when the actual line up is announced in end October.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1

China\’s new lineup

Anybody who predicts what the next Standing Committee and the Politburo will be is almost certain to be wrong ! This is why most newspaper columnists are content with naming possible candidates and leaving it at that. This blogger does not care if he is proved wrong or even as a fool. There are no consequences to getting it dead wrong. So here\’s my prediction what\’s going to happen !
There are only two near certainties in this political game. One is that Xi Jinping will continue as Secretary of the Communist Party, Chairman of the Central Military Commission and as the President. The second is that Zhang Dejiang, Yu Zengsheng, Liu Yunshan and Zhang Gaoli will retire from the Standing Committee . Everything else is up for grabs.
Two of the key moves that is the subject of much speculation is what will happen to Li Keqiang the current Premier (most views are that he will stay on as Premier) and that of Wang Qishan (Xi\’s ally in the anti corruption drive, but who is crossing the informal retirement age of 68).
My guess is that Li Keqiang will be pushed out and Wang Qishan will replace him as the Premier. This is not considered likely today and if it happens, will be radical and  unexpected. If it indeed does happen, it will indicate that Xi has taken total control of the Party. My reasoning is that Li has been a disappointment as  Premier  with his management of the economy, his key job. He will also carry the can for the stock market troubles of 2015. Li belongs to the Youth League faction which has been systematically defanged. There is precedence in China of the Premier being replaced – Li Peng giving way to Zhu Rongji in 1998. Wang Qishan , as we have seen in earlier posts, is the de facto No 2 in China today.  He is an expert on the economy and if he were to be appointed Premier, he will be Xi\’s trusted lieutenant in the soft landing of the economy that is a big imperative for China. This will mean Xi is bending the retirement rule – something I am guessing he will do as a strawman for his own options 5 years from now when he will face this retirement rule himself.
I think Li Zhanshu is a shoo in for the Standing Committee. He is currently the Director of the General Office of the Party and is a right hand man of Xi.  Stacking the Standing Committee with his people will be a primary objective of Xi.
There is a good chance that Wang Yang, currently Vice Premier will be elevated to the Standing Committee. He is not a Xi loyalist  and was potentially a candidate for the Standing Committee  even the last time around. He is however efficient and strong and has quelled his reformer (read political) instincts. He has kept his head low over the last five years and for sheer ability is likely to rise.
Another likely name is Wang Huning. He is currently the head of the central policy research office. A  non controversial choice who doesn\’t belong to any faction. A theoretician whom Xi seems to rely on and is often seen on Xi\’s overseas trips as an important adviser.
If Xi is in total control of the Party and has not needed to cut any deals, then this is the likely Standing Committee – cut down to five members . Xi Jinping, Wang Qishan, Li Zhanshu, Wang Yang and Wang Huning.
If Xi however decides to stay with a seven member standing committee, then the two additional names, would be as my guess, Zhao Leji and Han Zheng. Both are \”senior\” but not powerful and therefore likely to simply make up the numbers and duly nod their heads to anything Xi says.
If my prediction is even 75% right, then it is clear that Xi is all powerful. None of these members can be a potential successor to Xi and it will also indicate that Xi is preparing to stay on after 2022 as he hasn\’t groomed a successor unlike what his predecessors Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao did.
 Just as important as who gets in, is who doesn\’t get in. The disappointed persons would be
– Li Keqiang, the current Premier. He would be the biggest casualty if he were to fall. If he doesn\’t get dropped, Xi is just being cautious not to make too many changes. Li\’s power will continue to wane and he will, at best be a bureaucrat continuing to run the economy. Real decisions will  made by Xi.
– Hu Chunhua, the current party chief of Guangdong. He is of the next generation and had been touted as a potential successor to Xi even five years ago. He has recently been making noises pledging loyalty to Xi.  His elevation to the Standing Committee will mean he is the clear front runner next time around. His non inclusion will be a strong signal that Xi intends to stay on even after 2022.
– Chen Min\’er, current party chief of Chongqing. He was just brought in there to replace the disgraced Sun Zhengcai, a potential successor to Xi who fell in a power struggle. Chen is a staunch Xi loyalist. Its unlikely that he would be nominated, but if he were, it would be a clear signal that he would take over from Xi at least nominally in 2022, while Xi holds real power from the backroom.
A team like the one I have predicted will mean the following for China
– Xi Jinping is all powerful. He will start to acquire Mao like cult status. It is only hoped that he wouldn\’t unleash horrors on the country as Mao did.
– The Party will become even more ruthless in suppressing dissent. Personal freedoms will be even more curtailed and censorship will worsen.
– The economy will be managed efficiently. Economic troubles will come but they will be managed as best as could be.
– On foreign policy China will become increasingly belligerent and muscular.  They will be difficult to deal with diplomatically and might pick up fights with other countries. The current US administration will constantly lose on anything they pick up with China.
– The anti corruption drive and the defanging of political opponents will intensify. Xi might however face a challenge when Jiang Zemin dies. Major political activity tends to happen when somebody important dies.  The two major upheavals in China happened in 1976 after Zhou Enlai died and more famously in 1989 when Hu Yaobang died which led to the Tiananmen incidents. Jiang is nowhere near as liked as Zhou or Hu were, but it may be a trigger for old timers and those who had lost out in the Xi era to maybe flex their muscles.
– Xi will stay on post 2022 and will be the main power for at least another decade. He will install one of his men as the General Secretary, but will stay on as the Chairman of the CMC and wield real power. He may even be appointed Chairman of the Party, a post that was abolished after Mao.
How wrong I am would be revealed in the days after October 18th when the line of 5 or 7, which I alluded to in the first sentence of this series of posts will walk in and be introduced.  Even if I am 50% right, I will lay claim to being a \”Zhōng guó tōng\” (China expert) !
Enough of politics. This blog will go back to plodding on business and economic matters. It will return briefly to China and politics when the actual line up is announced in end October.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1