DO YOU understand “the three represents” or “the six tightly revolve-arounds”? Have you fully embraced “ecological development civilisation” or “socialist modernisation construction”? No, neither have we. The communiqué issued after the Communist Party’s third plenum of the 18th Central Committee is as opaque and dense as ever. As usual, optimists can find cause for hope and pessimists will see their worst fears confirmed. The one thing they both agree on is that it is unusually important. Third plenums have a special place in Chinese politics as the venue for big changes in direction—and President Xi Jinping had hinted that this one would be no different.

Will this third plenum turn out to transform China as Deng Xiaoping’s did in 1978? More details will emerge. But on the basis of the document, issued on November 12th, and the choreography before the plenum, we are optimistic.


SOE far, so good
 
 
With an increasingly vocal Chinese public making growing demands on its leaders, Mr Xi, like his predecessor, Hu Jintao, has learned to talk a good reformist game. But Mr Hu failed to change much, partly because he never found a way round the mass of vested interests, including state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and local governments, who benefit from the current system and so stand in the way. Although the communiqué laying down Mr Xi’s priorities contains plenty of party-speak (just as Deng’s did in 1978), some of its content suggests that this chief may be more serious about reform than Mr Hu was.

In economic policy the communiqué calls for the market to play a “decisive” role in allocating resources. Until now, party literature has said the role of market forces should be “basic”.

Words matter in China. This tweak is a sign that Mr Xi wants the market to play a bigger part in shaping the economy; it may even signal that he wants to take on the SOEs, which squander vast amounts of capital. In the political arena, the communiqué proposes the setting up of a new “leading small group” to oversee reforms. Made up of senior party leaders, these groups report directly to the Politburo. The job of this new one will probably be to bang together the heads of obstructionist SOE bosses and provincial leaders to make them work together better, and Mr Xi himself could well chair it.

A new “state-security committee” could be more contentious. In foreign affairs, this is expected to mirror America’s National Security Council, which advises the president and helps co-ordinate government agencies.

America has long complained about the lack of coherence within Chinese policy-making, which leaves its most important bilateral relationships vulnerable to unpredictable hiatuses and sudden changes in direction. The committee is expected to include the army and police. If so, it could be a sign of Mr Xi’s growing clout and determination to rein in the free-wheeling security forces to ensure that they work with the rest of the state.

Pessimists will find plenty to be gloomy about. Asian markets fell when the plenum made its announcements, perhaps because of the lack of news about financial reform. The communiqué barely mentions the need for changes in rural land ownership let alone household registration (hukou).

Although it nods towards judicial reform, it does not speak of allowing any more political freedom. There are fears that the security committee could be used for internal repression. Some see it as a power grab by Mr Xi to give himself a more direct role in the security apparatus.

Yet if Mr Xi is to overcome China’s conservative interests, these changes or something like them are necessary. Too many people do too well out of today’s system to make change easy. The new small leading group should act as an economic commando force, tackling obstacles to reform within the bureaucracy and the party. The state-security committee could aim to ensure that factions do not embroil China in disputes abroad that escalate to the central leadership only very late, when much of the damage has been done.

The new committees leave Mr Xi with more power than any Chinese leader since Deng. A lot depends on what he does with it. If the coming years see more changes, such as economic reform in the countryside, curbs on the party’s clout and greater recognition of the rule of law, then people will look back on the plenum as the start of a better China just as they do now to the 1978 meeting.

If Mr Xi does nothing, the country will be heading in a dangerous direction.