While China has the sovereign right to make whatever leadership changes it wants without having to explain the reasons why to the public, it’s also a Great Power with global influence whose decisions have a major impact on International Relations, hence why these shake-ups prompted speculation from many.
I believe the change is for the better, regardless of why it was made, but I still maintain that it would have been best if this hadn't happened at all since it raises some uncomfortable questions about what might really be going on behind the scenes and why.
I agree it's for the better, but I disagree it would be better left undone. If you look at the changes which have taken place among players of comparable league recently, i.e. in the Americas, Russia, India, etc., it would be unsettling if there were no changes demonstrating some acknowledgment of the shifting landscape. True, Russia and India don't fit this paradigm because they're relatively stable, but you get the point. Add to that Israel's recent self-unmasking... No, I'm much more comfortable with this, which I take as a sign of Chinese recognition, rather than denial as we've witnessed contributing to so many others' failure. True, some of the questions it raises may be unsettling. Nonetheless, I still feel more comfortable having them tacitly recognised, instead of, 'Move along, nothing to see here; everything is fine and nothing will ever change.'.
I still don't think that changing the Foreign and Defense Ministers, each of whom only served for less than a year, within months of one another without sharing an official explanation is better than if this hadn't happened in the first place.
I'm glad that they recognized whatever problems were associated with those two figures and promptly took the appropriate action, but these problems should have been identified ahead of time.
OK... But you're not trying to hold them up to a standard which wouldn't be expected of others, are you? How many ministers, etc. did Trump chase in and out of office in his early days? True, circumstances aren't comparable, but still.
Yeah, ideally соломку вовремя постелешь, а все-таки... То, что делается в идеальном мире, а то, что нам доступно... Не всегда совпадают.
I apply the same standards equally and would also be concerned if such literally unprecedented leadership changes happened in Russia, especially if there wasn't even an effort to explain why.
In Western countries, someone usually leaks the reason why to the media if it isn't officially announced, but that's not the case in traditionally opaque China.
I respect its right not to disclose the details, but nevertheless, it naturally prompts speculation and its overzealous supporters like those I've seen on social media are wrong to attack people for wondering what's going on.
"...the best-case scenario is that Qin and Li were dismissed for corruption-related reasons..."
I disagree. I think the best-case scenario is that China is an adult in the room reaching for innovative, but carefully considered, strategies to manage the moods of the children with whom they've been compelled to associate. See, e.g.: 'https://wehavekids.com/education/Behavior-Management-Strategies-for-Kindergartners' and/or 'https://teachingwheart.com/10-proven-strategies-for-classroom-management-in-kindergarten/' for relevant detail.
I believe the change is for the better, regardless of why it was made, but I still maintain that it would have been best if this hadn't happened at all since it raises some uncomfortable questions about what might really be going on behind the scenes and why.
I agree it's for the better, but I disagree it would be better left undone. If you look at the changes which have taken place among players of comparable league recently, i.e. in the Americas, Russia, India, etc., it would be unsettling if there were no changes demonstrating some acknowledgment of the shifting landscape. True, Russia and India don't fit this paradigm because they're relatively stable, but you get the point. Add to that Israel's recent self-unmasking... No, I'm much more comfortable with this, which I take as a sign of Chinese recognition, rather than denial as we've witnessed contributing to so many others' failure. True, some of the questions it raises may be unsettling. Nonetheless, I still feel more comfortable having them tacitly recognised, instead of, 'Move along, nothing to see here; everything is fine and nothing will ever change.'.
I still don't think that changing the Foreign and Defense Ministers, each of whom only served for less than a year, within months of one another without sharing an official explanation is better than if this hadn't happened in the first place.
I'm glad that they recognized whatever problems were associated with those two figures and promptly took the appropriate action, but these problems should have been identified ahead of time.
OK... But you're not trying to hold them up to a standard which wouldn't be expected of others, are you? How many ministers, etc. did Trump chase in and out of office in his early days? True, circumstances aren't comparable, but still.
Yeah, ideally соломку вовремя постелешь, а все-таки... То, что делается в идеальном мире, а то, что нам доступно... Не всегда совпадают.
I apply the same standards equally and would also be concerned if such literally unprecedented leadership changes happened in Russia, especially if there wasn't even an effort to explain why.
In Western countries, someone usually leaks the reason why to the media if it isn't officially announced, but that's not the case in traditionally opaque China.
I respect its right not to disclose the details, but nevertheless, it naturally prompts speculation and its overzealous supporters like those I've seen on social media are wrong to attack people for wondering what's going on.
Well, you can't say fairer than that!
And damn good point about overzealous supporters.