Often treated separately, the Chinese and Eastern European cases are addressed jointly in an interdisciplinary work devoted to political and social institutions, socio-economic transformations and relations between State and society. The angle of approach tends to present the action of the Party-State in China in a favorable light.
How did the process of political re-institutionalization take place in the regimes of Central and Eastern Europe, in the new states resulting fromUSSRas well as in China during the two decades between 1989 and 2009 ? What was the role of old or emerging institutions in the collapse or on the contrary in the strengthening of political power? ? How have relations between state and society evolved, how have economic systems and behaviors been reoriented ? And, finally, how have social institutions been transformed during the same period ? These are the major questions developed by the fourteen authors (sociologists, economists, political scientists and anthropologists) of this ambitious collective work directed by Nina Bandelj and Dorothy Solinger, respectively a sociologist specializing in post-socialist Europe and a political scientist working on contemporary China.
Strengthened or weakened state power ?
While a number of works have separately addressed the Chinese situation after 1989 and developments in the countries of the former Soviet bloc after the end of the communist system, the contributions collected in the volume fill an absence in the scientific literature. by approaching in a comparative and multidisciplinary manner the political, economic and social transformations taking place since 1989 in these two parts of the world. A twofold general observation emerges from such work. First of all, all of the contributions collected testify to the centrality of the State, its nature, its activities, its policies and the processes of multiple institutional adaptations. Then, 1989 marked a decline and weakening of the State in the countries of the former Soviet bloc, while in China a more solid State emerged. This observation is all the more interesting if we remember the almost euphoric atmosphere linked to the collapse of the communist world and what some considered to be “ the end of history “, while at the same time, the majority of analysts of contemporary China agreed in predicting an imminent dire future for the post-1989 Chinese regime.
Politically, 1989 marked a more fundamental turning point for the countries of Eastern and Central Europe than for China. Indeed, even if the democratic transition proceeded with different temporalities and with different degrees of success in Eastern and Central Europe, the period following 1989 signified the end of authoritarian or even totalitarian regimes. For Chinese leaders, on the contrary, the political context, both national and international, has increased their vigilance in relation to any structured desire for opposition, as well as in relation to the potentially destabilizing consequences of democratic advances. The various democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in Central Asia (whether in the 1990s or during the “ color revolutions » from 2002 to 2005 in Georgia, Ukraine, Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan), probably reinforced the Chinese leaders in their conviction that any democratic advance could quickly become uncontrollable ; the power of the party over cadres should therefore remain a cornerstone of the political system in China (p. 55). Furthermore, the national and international political context after 1989 resulted in the strengthening and concentration of power by the Party State, as well as its more efficient use of resources in the service of economic development and national security, have become top priorities, defining economic reforms in the two decades since 1989 (p. 144). Let us bet in view of the growing budget devoted in recent years to “ maintaining social stability » (weiwen) in China, that recent events linked to “ Arab Spring » tend to further strengthen Chinese leaders in this tendency to consolidate their power and to anticipate any form of organized social protest which could threaten this power.
If 1989 represented a turning point of far more significant significance for the countries of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union than for China, the new direction and deepening of economic reforms taken in China from mid-1990s would nevertheless have decisive consequences on the development of the country. Recentralization of power, strengthening of the interests of the Party-State at the economic level, increase in inequalities and the social cost of reforms characterize this second phase which began around 1993-1994. Overall, two major features characterize this phase. Firstly, the new orientation meant the end of the period “ reform without losers » (“ reforms without losers “), namely the desire to henceforth expose society to competition and to have the social costs of this orientation borne by certain social classes. Second, the desire to strengthen the interests and resources of the state became a priority that was never abandoned (p. 138). But another important element changed not only the course of reforms, but also the nature of the Party itself: the increasing involvement of the Chinese Communist Party in economic activities. As Naughton points out:
Today, the Communist Party manages the largest, most concentrated groupings of capital in China, and it perceives many policy issues from the perspective of the owners of capital
Today, the Chinese Communist Party manages the largest and most concentrated capital pools in China and approaches many policy issues from the perspective of capital owners (p. 144).
If one of the major issues of the book is that of the strengthening or weakening of political power, the question of the overall economic weight of the former Eastern Bloc countries and China is the subject of two chapters. and is mentioned in several other contributions to the work. We note the gradual and general decline in the economic weight of the former Eastern Bloc countries, which had already begun at the time ofUSSR but which accelerated considerably after 1989. This decline concerns all the countries of the former Soviet bloc. Böröckz thus underlines the irony linked to the fact that the economies of these countries demonstrated greater heterogeneity before 1989 than during the period of decline which affected these countries after 1989. In China and India, it is an opposite trajectory which has occurred over the past two decades, with China becoming the second largest economy and on track to become the second largest political and economic power in the world (p. 126).
Progressive transformations versus “ shock therapy »
Another element of contrast, relating more to socio-economic transformations, runs throughout the work, namely the gradual, progressive and hybrid character of the transformations of the economy in China, while it is the radical nature and socially destabilizing changes leading to a market economy which is emerging in the countries of Eastern and Central Europe. On this level, a little-studied dimension with regard to the increase in inequalities in China is highlighted: in a general context of strong social polarization over the last two decades, the action of the Chinese government to reduce the intensity inequality within the same sectors (electricity, metallurgical, chemical industry, etc.), and organizations or work units, has had the effect of reducing the negative impact of income inequalities, particularly on a psychological level, on the different categories of the Chinese population, contrary to what occurred in many post-socialist European countries (p. 225).
If it is more what differentiates the trajectories in the two geographical areas studied which is highlighted, two common points are nevertheless underlined by Bandelj and Solinger. First, the introduction of market mechanisms into the economy and privatizations have considerably worsened inequalities while allowing a significant improvement in living standards in China as in Eastern and Central Europe. Furthermore, politicians have generally succeeded, even if to varying degrees and in different political-economic configurations, in transforming their political capital into economic capital.
Reading the work, one may wonder to what extent the contrast between a stronger Party-state in China and weakened states in central and eastern Europe does not have the effect of producing a mirror image disproportionately coherent, orderly and necessarily effective action of the Party-State in China. Such an image tends to neglect the tensions that drive the Party-State within itself, as well as in the relationships it maintains with the different categories of the population. Concerning the management of social conflicts and the “ Resilience of the Party State “, the authors addressing this issue have very little mentioned the work of researchers (sociologists, political scientists and jurists) who highlight the weak capacity of the current system to channel the discontent and demands of Chinese society. Furthermore, the question of the links between political and legal systems is literally absent from the work, whether in the Chinese case or in that of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. If we can say that the nature of relations between States and their citizens has profoundly changed in the countries of Eastern Europe having adopted various modalities of democratic representation, what about the evolution of the rule of law ? In China, is not the subordination of law to politics also, in a context of deeply rooted alliances between political and economic powers, a major source of social discontent? ?
That being said, this work nonetheless remains very stimulating and very clear, each chapter providing a clear and succinct overview of the issues addressed. Finally, let us emphasize that the strong point of this volume lies in a solid work of scientific coordination, a concern which is felt when reading almost all of the chapters which are enriched by a comparative questioning between Eastern Europe and the countries of the FormerUSSR on the one hand, and China on the other.