Chinese leader Xi Jinping surprised observers on Tuesday by not attending a business forum held by the BRICS economic group in South Africa. Instead, his commerce minister delivered a speech on his behalf that criticized US dominance. Xi’s absence without explanation or official announcement raised questions about the situation.
Xi’s absence was noted by journalists at the event and is considered highly unusual in Chinese foreign policy. Brian Hart, a fellow at the China Power Project, stated that Chinese leaders rarely deviate from scripts at significant events like this, suggesting that something may have urgently required Xi’s attention.
China’s state media and diplomats have not provided any explanation for Xi’s absence, and experts believe it’s unlikely that Beijing will offer an explanation. This lack of transparency is consistent with previous instances, such as when China abruptly replaced its foreign minister Qin Gang without providing an explanation.
The absence also sparked speculation about Xi’s well-being or potential political developments. Bonnie Glaser, managing director of the German Marshall Fund’s Indo-Pacific program, stated that Beijing’s lack of transparency and control over information is a recurring theme in such situations, making it difficult to determine the true reasons behind such occurrences.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s unexpected absence from a business forum held by the BRICS economic group in South Africa has ignited a flurry of speculation and intrigue. Xi, who arrived in Johannesburg for the annual BRICS summit of major emerging economies, was notably missing from the event, leaving his commerce minister to deliver a speech on his behalf that lambasted US hegemony.
In a surprising turn of events, Xi’s absence remained unexplained, leaving both media and diplomatic circles perplexed. Even more perplexing was the absence of any official announcement from Beijing regarding Xi’s unexpected no-show.
The prepared statement that was intended to be delivered by Xi at the forum, rife with thinly veiled jabs at the United States, was presented by the Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao. The statement focused on the necessity of avoiding descending “into the abyss of a new cold war” and criticized a particular unnamed country that seemed obsessed with preserving its hegemony, which had resulted in actions detrimental to emerging markets and developing nations.
Xi’s absence at such a high-profile multilateral meeting raises eyebrows, especially given the significant context of the BRICS summit, which China has actively invested in. In contrast, other leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin, who couldn’t attend in person due to international legal issues, found ways to deliver their remarks virtually.
The enigma of Xi’s absence and the subsequent lack of official clarification have spurred conjecture about potential reasons. Speculations range from health concerns to pressing matters that demanded Xi’s immediate attention. Brian Hart, a fellow at the China Power Project, pointed out that Xi’s absence was “highly unusual,” and surmised that something might have urgently pulled him away from the event.
The fact that Xi opted to skip a significant engagement he was expected to participate in naturally sparks questions about the possible implications. Long-term observers of Chinese foreign policy find this departure from protocol notable. Bonnie Glaser, managing director of the German Marshall Fund’s Indo-Pacific program, emphasized that it is indeed uncommon for a Chinese leader to be present in a host country for a major meeting and not participate in a key event.
The lack of transparency and official explanation from Chinese state media and diplomats regarding Xi’s absence has fueled further speculation. China’s propensity to tightly control the flow of information, particularly concerning sensitive matters or personnel changes, makes it challenging to decipher the underlying cause of such unusual events. Last month, China abruptly removed its foreign minister Qin Gang without offering an explanation, a move that left observers puzzled.
In the absence of concrete information, experts conclude that the true reasons behind Xi’s absence may never come to light. The Chinese Communist Party’s propensity to keep matters undisclosed, often categorizing them as state secrets, leaves many questions unanswered. This opacity is not limited to foreign policy but extends to various aspects of Chinese leadership and decision-making.
Xi’s surprising no-show underscores the complexities of decoding China’s political landscape, leaving international observers grappling with a puzzle that may never be fully solved.