JIAMUSI, China (AP) – A new disaster. An outcry that officials failed to warn China’s public until it was almost too late. Another promise that next time, the government will do better.

China’s leaders say they will punish those responsible for a toxic spill in a major river. But there is no sign that they want to change what prompted the angriest criticism – a culture of secrecy that they consider not just a key political weapon but a legitimate way to deal with the Chinese public.

“I don’t think it’s going to produce any fundamental change,” said Kenneth Lieberthal, a scholar of Chinese politics at the University of Michigan. “This is still an autocratic system. There are things that they just don’t want the public to know about.”

The disaster is a collision between a communist system that tightly controls information and a fast-changing society. Investors and ordinary Chinese want to know more about the economy, health and other issues, and the public faces an array of threats from pollution, bird flu and other problems.

Communist leaders have given a green light to talking about selected difficulties such as drug abuse and coal mine accidents, admitting that it cannot tackle them without public help.

Beijing has promised to report honestly about disease outbreaks after its tardy response to severe acute respiratory syndrome prompted a storm of criticism in 2003 and hammered China’s economy by scaring away tourism and business travel.

But President Hu Jintao’s government seems more focused on improving its system for informing Chinese leaders about problems than on giving the public unfettered access to information about them.

Even if leaders wanted government to be more honest, officials have a financial incentive to protect local industry by hiding bad news, said Ding Xueliang, a specialist in Chinese government affairs at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

“I don’t think even one or two big incidents like this one can change the general pattern in China, because it involves too many things – the central government, local government, how free the media are, the legal system,” Ding said. “There is no law that says, “If you lie to the public, you will be punished.”‘

The government restricts news of other industrial accidents and environmental disasters – possibly because typical victims are farmers or factory workers, not business executives or foreign investors.

The Nov. 13 chemical plant explosion that killed five people and dumped 100 tons of toxic benzene into the Songhua River was an unusual exception, because the river supplies the major city of Harbin with drinking water and flows into neighboring Russia.

It was not until after Harbin announced it was shutting down running water to 3.8 million people, setting off panic-buying that stripped supermarkets of bottled water, that the government confirmed on Nov. 23 that the river was poisoned.

Premier Wen Jiabao visited Harbin three days later and promised to investigate the disaster and to protect the public better.

The Chinese government was forced to make embarrassing apologies to both its public and to Russia.

By contrast, when Chinese farmers elsewhere protest that similar pollution ruins their crops, the government breaks up the demonstrations and suppresses mention of them in state media.

“The Chinese central government perhaps now has much more knowledge about crises in local areas,” Ding said. “But that doesn’t mean the local government levels will be as honest to outsiders, media or to ordinary people.”

Lieberthal points to China’s bird flu outbreaks as a possible area where even Beijing is not completely candid. China has reported dozens of outbreaks, but only three confirmed human cases.

“Epidemiologists that I talk to say those ratios are not feasible. There have to be more people who have contracted it,” he said. “The shortfall seems to be in their commitment to avoid panic.”

So far, Beijing says the problem in China’s latest disaster was the chemical spill on the Songhua, not the decision to keep the public in the dark. But the loudest outcry was over the secrecy, which Chinese media say was a choice made by provincial party leaders.

Time magazine, citing an unidentified participant in a government meeting, said last week the leaders were worried about possible damage to tourism or investment.

There has been no sign that any of them will be punished.

The country’s chief environmental regulator, criticized for failing to detect the spill sooner, resigned in an apparent warning to officials to keep Beijing better informed.

“Maybe next time, the local officials will become more effective at reacting to a crisis,” Ding said. “Perhaps instead of lying for 10 days, they’ll only lie for two days.”

Copy the Story Link