Failures of two-party and multiparty systems behoove West to look to Belarus

During a recent trip to Minsk, I managed to talk with Jaroslav Romanchuk, a former presidential candidate and economist who is a household name in Belarus. Romanchuk, born in 1966, was defeated by President Alexander Lukashenko during the 2010 election, and I was eager to hear his views on China, from the perspective of a politician not in power.

Normally, in the Western political arena, those in power and those on the outside hold opposite views about China's development in order to attract the attention of voters. I thought Romanchuk, now working as president of the Scientific Research Mises Center and deputy chairman of the United Civil Party of Belarus, would be on the opposite side of Lukashenko, who has long treated China as friend.

At a bar in downtown Minsk, Romanchuk told me about his understanding of China's economic miracle of the past few decades, while waving to the passersby from time to time. In a balanced approach, he fully recognizes China's developmental progress and its challenges.

I challenged him about his comments on the efforts of China and Belarus to turn a village and its neighborhood near Minsk's airport into a high-tech city within 20 years. Without any hesitation or demonstrating any fear about China's growing presence in his country, he says the project is warmly welcomed, and if he were president it would progress much faster.

His answers were inspiring. In Belarus, politicians are competing with each other to test whose policies toward China are more efficient in speeding up mutual progress. They have not followed the old pattern that if one party is on China's side, the other will be cursing the country or at least less friendly to it.

For a long time, the China factor has affected political elections in the West. This is typical of the United States. With the US presidential election coming up next year, US politicians have been using China as a topic to attract voters. The hawks on this topic focus on geopolitical issues, foreign currency rates and trade protectionism while the other side urges closer engagement, open markets and increase two-way trade and investment.

However, no matter whether the hawks or the doves win the election, their policies toward China focus on cooperation instead of confrontation. They know well that their businesses could not afford to lose the market in China and now they could not afford to lose investment from China. This is basic logic of Western electoral politics when the politicians talk about China.

But this approach does not always work, especially if they don't realize the fact that growing numbers of their voters - many of whom have had the chance to visit China or learn more through media - have started to recognize the success that China has achieved during previous decades.

Romanchuk has set a good example of how to change that mindset and approach. Western politicians would engage more voters by competing with their rivals on who can offer even better China policies.

This is especially so for young voters, who have a greater understanding about China than their parents since they have easier access to such information through media or travel. Romanchuk says he, on average, puts up two to three postings on social media a day, and if he does not tell the truth and goes against China, he risks losing young people.

In fact, some Western politicians now have concluded that it is a losing proposition to propagate any predictions of China's collapse or its straying from the market-oriented reform process that has brought it success in past decades. China is now the world's second-biggest economy following the US, though admittedly it still has daunting challenges.

These failures of the Western system mainly result from finger-pointing over these challenges without noticing the other side of the coin. That is, in logical language, they have not seen the whole picture.

If what they're doing is wrong, my suggestion to Western politicians is that they change their tactics in approaching voters. If they continue on the same path, it will not benefit their political career. They will only make a lot of noise about containing China, and then they will have to give up on that idea once they are elected.

At the peak of the world financial and debt crisis, Pierre Defraigne, executive director of the Madariaga - College of Europe Foundation, a think-tank in Brussels, famously pointed out the shortcomings of two-party or multiparty systems: If one side believes this is white, the other side must say that it is black. It is difficult for them to make compromises to recognize the perspective of the other side.

Defraigne urged them to change even though that is difficult. If they could not change the white-or-dark mindset, they should compare things carefully to recognize which is whiter or darker. If they do that, that is more acceptable, just like what Romanchuk, who is preparing his 2020 election, has done.

The author is China Daily chief correspondent in Brussels. Contact the writer at fujing@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily European Weekly 05/29/2015 page13)