开心

 
‘li shang wang lai' can be translated as reciprocity. Like most translations, it has a far deeper meaning. It is a ‘cheng yu’, Chinese proverbial idiom, a fixed saying that is resonant with meaning. ‘li’ is gift, ‘shang’ means to show respect, ‘wang’ is go, ‘lai’ is come (very basically translated). It is in effect reciprocity based on respect for receiving or giving a gift. When you give a gift, you expect something in return. When you receive a gift, you expect to give something in return. It is deeply in the Chinese mind. You would look down on the other person if you gave a gift but received nothing in return. The person receiving the gift would look down on themselves if they did not give something back in return.
 
That is all complicated by status and rank. You can clearly see where you stand by the value of a gift given or received.
 
Much of what the ‘west’ labels as corruption in China is ‘li shang wang lai’. It is a vast grey area between the white of never receiving or giving gifts and favours, and the black of taking huge gifts for specific favours. In China, the black is frowned upon and in the wrong circumstances you will lose your life if you are caught straying there.
 
There has been much ink spilt urging China to rid itself of this troublesome priest, what the ‘west’ labels as corruption. Yet, like most things in China, it requires a deeper understanding of Chinese history and culture. 
 
'Corruption' really doesn’t get good press in the OED: ‘adjective 1 willing to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain. 2 evil or morally depraved. 3 (of a text or computer data) made unreliable by errors or alterations. 4 archaic rotten or putrid.’
 
What about acting ‘honestly’ in return for money or personal gain?
 
That is how China was governed for thousands of years. An official’s income came from charging a fee for doing his (there were no ‘hers’ until recently) job. It certainly left room for preferment based on personal connections and the size of the fee, but it was not seen as ‘corrupt’, unless it went too far. 
 
The question is then, how does China address what the ‘west’ labels as ‘corrupt’ ( using the wests’ definition of course) when, essentially, it is not seen as ‘corrupt’ in China? In China, it is just the way things have always been done, in particular business.
 
‘Ren ji guan xi’ and little red envelopes full of qian oiled the wheels of business both private and State.
 
I am sure that many of the ‘western’ companies now operating in China use both to further their interests. After all, it is the way business is done and you swim against the tide and risk drowning if you do not 'play the cultural game'.  Perhaps it is why large international companies hired people from China or with Chinese heritage to run their company there. They understand how it works and the large international company can stand aloof if it has to. Those companies have profited from using the Chinese way of doing business. Indeed, it is unlikely they could have operated in China without doing things the Chinese way.
 
It applies particularly to smaller businesses, not supplying vital raw materials for China.
 
Building up and maintaining ‘ren ji guan xi’ and using 'li shang wang lai' is a game of skill and dexterity. The rewards are great if you play it well. If you cannot play it well, then you are destined for a very average life and income in China. It can however be disastrous if a sudden move from left field leaves you wrong footed. Which is what I suspect happened to Stern Hu and his hapless colleagues.
 
Confucianism v corruption.
 
Confucianism does not condone corruption as defined by the ‘west’. It is does extol the virtue of loyalty to a patron over competence. That does not mean it extols incompetence. ‘Ren ji guan xi’ (interpersonal relations) and 'li shang wang lai' were at the heart of Confucianism, the ability to get the job done through using personal relationships. China has been around, and quite well governed, for quite a long time. It has seen civilizations from the ‘west’ come and go. So, something must be working.
 
‘li shang wang lai’ was and is an accepted part of the culture, which is why it is not seen as corrupt as defined by the ‘west’. Giving a 'gift' or taking a fair ‘share’ or a ‘fee’ oiled business and the wheels of State. Taking too much tended to upset the King or perhaps a powerful patron, which in turn tended to lead to unfortunate consequences.
 
China is now trying to address what the ‘west’ defines as corruption. In particular, where ‘west’ meets ‘east’. Yet it is a difficult process because most people in China, while understanding the ‘western’ definition of corruption, do not, in their hearts, see it as applying to them. It is like understanding a joke from another language and culture. You can understand why it is funny, you just don’t find it funny.
 
In China a lot of leeway is still given to ‘gifts’ in comparison to the ‘west’. Only the very greedy, or the unlucky, or those wrong footed by the ‘ren ji guan xi’ game, are caught and punished. I would suggest that that has always been the case.
 
This is perhaps another issue where the ‘west’ will have to come to terms with doing things the Chinese way, or at least understanding it. For centuries the ‘western’ way of thinking has been imposed through force of arms or economic might. That seems to be changing, and China can now expect the ‘west’ try to understand the Chinese way.
 
While the ‘west’ clings to using its own definitions to define its relationship with China, lack of understanding will continue. The ‘west’ has had its way for so long it is finding it hard to come to terms with challenging its accepted philosophies and ways of thinking. It cannot now automatically assume the moral high ground. Those philosophies and ways of thinking had their genesis in the ‘west’, so naturally they are seen as ‘norms’ by the ‘west’. However, there must be room for different philosophies with their genesis in different cultures. 
 
Xiaosui is quite adamant that the Chinese people hate corruption. The Central Government is moving to get rid of corruption. Then again, that has generally been the case when China has been well governed. How well this is achieved has yet to be seen. However, it is best to keep in mind the difference between ‘corruption’ and ‘li shang wang lai’.

 
CCTV & China Daily – Linked closely to the issue of corruption is legal reform in China. This was highlighted recently by the Stern Hu case. This was covered in depth by the following:

The Age

Billionaire who bribed Rio exec unlikely to be charged JOHN GARNAUT, SHANGHAI 
 
THE well-connected billionaire who testified to giving $US9 million in bribes to a Rio Tinto executive is unlikely to be prosecuted, according to a Chinese news report.

The National Business Daily, which is partly owned by the Shanghai municipal government, reported yesterday that small private steel mills that paid bribes to Australian Stern Hu and three other Rio Tinto employees would be processed through the Chinese justice system, citing an inside source.

But the billionaire steel magnate who paid by far the biggest bribe would escape.

Kaixin – The legal system in China has come a long way since Mao’s time, yet it still has a long way to go. For expert analysis of this, see the Wall Street Journal’s China RealTime Report:

Stanley Lubman, a long-time specialist on Chinese law, looks at limitations on judicial reform in China. Mr. Lubman teaches at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and is the author of “Bird in a Cage: Legal Reform in China After Mao,” (Stanford University Press, 1999).

Stanley Lubman: Uncertainty in China’s Legal Development, Part I: Intimidation of Activists and Lawyers

Stanley Lubman: Uncertainty in China’s Legal Development, Part 2: Reforming the Courts

Stanley Lubman: Rio Tinto Trial Shines Harsh Spotlight on Chinese Criminal Justice

While the facts of the alleged conduct of four employees of the British-Australian company Rio Tinto Ltd. who were on trial this week for taking bribes and infringing trade secrets are obscure, the trial starkly exhibits some key characteristics of Chinese criminal justice. It demonstrates the usual limits on the ability of defense lawyers to fully represent their clients, a disturbing lack of transparency, and the impact of political influences on the proceedings and the outcome. Criminal justice has moved only partially and irregularly toward a level of legality that it lacked under Mao, and is an object of concern to Chinese law reformers as well as to foreign observers. This particular case also raises serious concerns about China’s interpretation of its international obligations given its disregard for the Sino-Australian consular agreement.

Rio four verdict based on shaky legal grounds
ANN KENT

Dr Ann Kent is a Visiting Fellow in the ANU College of Law. She is the author of numerous books and articles on China and international law and China and the rule of law, including Beyond Compliance: China, International Organizations and Global Security (Stanford University Press, 2007).

The sentences meted out to the ''Rio four'' in Shanghai’s Intermediate Court this week were, by any criterion, extremely harsh. In Australian citizen Stern Hu's case, he was sentenced for bribery and stealing commercial secrets to 10 years' prison and substantial fines as well as the acquisition of his assets. Of the four, he received the second longest sentence.

Moreover, this verdict, announced to a waiting world, is based on extremely shaky legal foundations.

Kaixin – The thing that concerns me is the all the commentary is based on supposition. No-one knows for sure why Stern Hu pleaded guilty. No-one knows for sure whether the trial was indeed fair. Also, should the trial of Stern Hu be judged fair by Chinese standards or some other countries standards?

What is has done is shine the spot light on the Chinese legal system. A system that is indeed subject to political and other influence. China must expect criticism when such matters are common knowledge.

Reform of the legal system was discussed at the National People Congress. It was noted that progress would be slow.