Mail Call: A Changed China?

Our June 30 report on how the quake changed China won mixed responses from readers. Two who were present in China then wrote, "Thank you for a well-researched article." But another said, "Your claims are naive, even offensive." A third wondered, "Was it solely the negligence of rogue local officials?"

China ' s Transformative Calamity
Reading your June 30 article "All Shook Up" was a very emotional affair for us. We were in Chengdu, 90km from the epicenter, when the earthquake hit. Those were the two longest minutes in our lives. Every word of your article reflects how we have felt since then. As we said on our Web site, "it is overwhelming to watch how the whole country sticks together and unites to show their support for the many victims." The TV coverage on both the Chinese- and the English-language channels was everything you would expect from professional journalism. Even the shoddy construction of the schools was addressed on TV, in open criticism of the local government. This four-week trip through southwest China was an immense eye-opener, and some of the negative preconceptions we had of this country were corrected or simply vanished. We changed our minds not only because of the heartbreaking images in the aftermath of the earthquake, but rather because of what we experienced on a daily basis in this country. Thank you for this very well-researched article.
Heidi Sequenz andGilles Barbier
Vienna, Austria

The tone and focus of several articles in your June 30 issue made me think you must have recently relocated to Bucharest, where the Romanian Parliament recently approved a draft law calling for at least half of all news to be "good." Several of the claims made in "All Shook Up" (the account of how responses to the Sichuan earthquake supposedly illustrate positive new political and social developments in China from the grass-roots level on up), are naive at best, offensive at worst. For example: "New allies are pushing the party in the direction of which it has wanted to go for some time but for which it has, until now, lacked the courage." China's Communist Party doesn't want to go anywhere; it wants to retain absolute political control and will do whatever it takes to quash any real dissent. That stance doesn't indicate a lack of courage, but clear-eyed ruthlessness. Just ask Zeng Jinyan, whose husband, Hu Jia, a leading HIV/AIDS activist, was arrested earlier this year. If that's an example of the newfound respect for and influence of civil society, then let's hope such a neutered and cowed version doesn't spread elsewhere. I'd also suggest going online to read articles and blogs critical of the government, but you better not do that from China: most such sites are blocked. And let's not even get started on the manipulative whipping up of nationalist frenzy in the wake of the March crackdown in Tibet.
Jeff Hoover
Cape Town, South Africa

It is good to read that a natural calamity in Sichuan has become a cause of public awakening with people raising their voices against corruption. The Chinese central leadership, especially Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, reached the quake-hit areas within hours of the incident, and camped out there for days, supervising rescue and relief operations. Such visible acts by top leaders are confidence and morale boosters for the masses. Issues like poor construction quality and corruption are bound to come up, and Chinese leaders will, no doubt, punish the guilty as in the past. Let's hope that a new society emerges in China—one based on reason, equality and transparency of public action. In the meantime, it is heartening to learn that the new rich in China are pitching in for social transformation. NGOs like the CSEF have volunteered their commitment to social upliftment of the masses. But Chinese leaders now need to permit freedom of speech. If China wants social transformation, it will have to learn to live with dissent.
R. K. Sudan
Jammu, India

You portrayed the recovery process of Sichuan province after the big earthquake beautifully, describing it as "the emergence of a new Chinese order." Sure, Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao rushed to the site very quickly to ease the anger and pain of the suffering people. But it seems like smart propaganda, doesn't it? Many of the school buildings were reduced to rubble, and many schoolchildren became victims. Is it appropriate to attribute the tragedy solely to the negligence of a bunch of rogue local officials and to say that their removal will be a good solution? They are only parts of huge system, so it is necessary to review and fix whole governing system managed by the Communist Party. So far, the current situation is not promising at all. The protests of the parents who lost their beloved sons and daughters have been suppressed by authorities. In some cases, they are prohibited contact with foreign journalists. The way to the "New Order" seems long and treacherous.
Kyoichi Kunimi
Fujisawa, Japan

Gallic Sound-Bite Diplomacy
I read your cover story on French President Nicolas Sarkozy's domestic-reform plans with great interest ("The Summer of Sarkozy," June 30). While I don't necessarily share your optimism concerning Sarkozy's rupture of overdue domestic-policy reforms, your writer completely ignores Sarkozy's grandiose overtures on the foreign-policy level. Like most contemporary heads of state, Sarkozy seeks refuge in sound-bite diplomacy that, in the end, is much less dependent on concrete results. His idea of a Mediterranean alliance (the Barcelona Process) risks an implosion of the already overstretched European Union. And as for domestic reforms, there is no such thing as a "big bang without social explosion." To think otherwise is to ignore the traditional mind-set of the French people. Plusça change is still a mantra dear to the heart of the French.
Karl H. Pagac
Villeneuve-Loubet, France

Advising Obama on Iraq
Fareed Zakaria's June 30 point of view column, entitled "What Obama Should Say on Iraq," sounds like patriotism powered by intelligence, wisdom and pragmatism. I hope November returns to the White House a man who will make the country stronger with policies free of militancy and belligerence. Uncle Sam needs a president with practical ideas, not a destructive attitude.
Michael G. Driver
Ichihara, Japan