Politics

China’s online ride-hailing company Didi Chuxing was listed in the US on the eve of the Chinese Communist Party’s 100th anniversary, only for the authorities to announce a cybersecurity investigation into Didi just two days later. Along with other actions taken against major companies such as the Ant group, Zaobao correspondent Yang Danxu asks: Is there a political message for Didi and other companies?

Academic Tan Kong Yam says that the ongoing China-US competition is not a tussle between two armies or two political systems, but "a competition between the governance systems of two fast-evolving countries, under the influence of rapidly globalising technologies". In that sense, China's system possesses some great advantages. Even so, it has to bide its time and not get arrogant, if it is to navigate itself through dangerous waters and emerge the winner.

While the US frames the China threat as a fight between democracy and autocracy, the Chinese see the competition between them about governance, not ideology. As the US’s internal problems escalate, China feels the former is no longer in a position to lecture it. In the midst of the US distracting itself from real troubles on the one hand and China’s inflated confidence on the other, US-China relations may be troubled for some time yet.

Shortly after Chinese ride-hailing app Didi launched its IPO on the NYSE, the Chinese authorities announced that the company would be subjected to a cybersecurity review. Didi had earlier kept a low profile, knowing its listing was a risky move. But few expected the company to take its first hit from China and not the US. Could this be China’s way of discouraging homegrown firms from passing their profits to foreign investors? Yu Zeyuan reports.

Malaysian researchers Abdul Razak Ahmad, Kuik Cheng-Chwee and Lai Yew Meng comment that China’s deployment of People’s Liberation Army Air Force aircraft near Malaysia’s air space last month smacks of hypocrisy and creeping hegemony. They warn that Beijing may not be as benevolent as it wants smaller states to believe.

China and Myanmar are said to have a “pauk-phaw” or sibling relationship. Many people in Myanmar, however, are clear-eyed about the limits of the bond. Who are the true beneficiaries of Chinese investment in Myanmar? Why are the people protesting while the higher-ups eagerly sign huge contracts with China and other countries?

Sokvy Rim warns Cambodia against being over-reliant on China. As the saying goes, there are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests. As the US did in the past with policies that contributed to the rise of the Pol Pot regime, China could abandon Cambodia or take actions against its interests. What would Cambodia do then?

Huang Zhiping points out the irony that in many democracies, the people elect the government, but they often have little direct influence over the decisions that elected officials make. Conversely, in the Chinese system, officials are very sensitive to public opinion on Weibo, and react at lightning speed to correct wrong or bad impressions. Is this the power of the people in the true sense of the word? Could the “Weibo model” of ruling those in power be the true utopia?

As it pertains to Washington’s relations with Southeast Asia, the Biden administration is not faring much better than its predecessor. A low-hanging fruit would be the supply of Covid-19 vaccines.