It is refreshing when someone is able to navigate all of the
subtleties of an argument as both Minxin Pei and Ellen Bork have
managed. Even the countries that have navigated the transition from
dictatorship to democracy without violence (e.g., Korea and Chile) have
done so because the ruling elites were forced to, not because they
chose to.
The only thing that separated Tiananmen Square from the
rapid disintegration of Eastern European dictatorships was the
willingness to use force in China. China’s leaders still value power
more than they value a good image. Amity Shlaes in 2002 found a Cold War precedent for human rights in the Middle East.
[Natan] Sharansky points out that linkage between economic aid and
political liberty is
crucial. In the case of the Soviet Union, he recalls, it was the
Jackson-Vanik amendment that required the Soviet Union to liberalize
emigration in exchange for trade; and the Helsinki Accord, with its
mandatory set of human rights, that forced Soviet change.
China faces nothing similar. Instead the main concern is what
happens if the government fails to maintain economic growth at the
current rate or fails to distribute the economic gains away from the
coast. Relying on dictators for stability is as dangerous as relying on
Social Security for your retirement.
