I think Chinese leaders are among the tamest leaders in the world.
Despite being called “butchers of Beijing” (or much worse), constantly being maligned by a maniacal Western press, and even having one of its own be the target of a shoe throwing protester, leaders from the CCP continue to consistently keep up their cordial and composed demeanor.
Most recently, when it has become alarmingly clear that the U.S. government’s idea of fixing the economy is to throw more good money after the bad, Wen Jiabao simply said “We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.”
When the Fed announced it was going to buy back debts, effectively promising to print more money, thus raising the specter that Chinese investments in U.S. debts will be diluted by future inflation, nary a complaint was heard from China – reputedly the largest creditor of the U.S.
Contrast that with what the E.U. leaders have been saying. In case you have missed it, the current European Union president has just branded the U.S. administration’s handling of the economy as creating a “road to hell,” emphasizing all European leaders have been “quite alarmed” at the White House’s policies.
So – should Chinese leaders learn to speak up more?
Should Chinese leaders adopt a more “European” way of speaking?
Or do you prefer the Chinese current – more subdued style. Perhaps Chinese leaders are communicating much more to the U.S. behind close doors?
Many observers, such as in this recent commentary, have urged the Chinese to be more stingy about lending more money to the U.S. Lending more money to a money addict is detrimental to both the lender as well as the addict.
But do the Chinese government have a real choice about whether to lend or not?
In light of the G-20 (or G-2 as some have suggested) summit coming up, how should Hu be preparing to work with Obama?