Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Hriday
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 15 Jun 2022 19:59

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Hriday »

From Jaidev Jamval,
I compiled a partial list of issues with Chinese weapons in service with several countries last year. Now observe how poorly Chinese air defense, ECM, drones & other equipmt performed in Pakistan.
Some folks got butthurt then & will probably do so again😃
Link below.
https://jjamwal.in/yayavar/flaws-in-chi ... breakdown/
drnayar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2077
Joined: 29 Jan 2023 18:38

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by drnayar »

Mod Note: Please edit your post to learn how to post YouTube videos. I have edited your post. Please DO NOT post just the video and a title. Please provide a description of the video (either from the video itself or even in your own words). It helps readers and/or posters who are following the thread. Thank You for your co-operation in this matter.

China Introduces the HQ-9BE: A New Era in Air Defense Technology

China has unveiled the HQ-9BE, an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed for global markets. Showcased at IDEX 2025, it features a 250 km range, Mach 4 speed, and superior anti-jamming capabilities. With multi-target engagement and seamless defense integration, the HQ-9BE strengthens China's presence in the air defense industry.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21363
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

drnayar wrote: 21 May 2025 18:14 China has unveiled the HQ-9BE, an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed for global markets. Showcased at IDEX 2025, it features a 250 km range, Mach 4 speed, and superior anti-jamming capabilities. With multi-target engagement and seamless defense integration, the HQ-9BE strengthens China's presence in the air defense industry.
Dr Saab, please post in the correct thread. I have moved your post to this thread.
prashantsharma
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 23:17

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by prashantsharma »

Check out youtube channel ‘Lei’s Real Talk’ video called Power Shift in China : What Zhang Youxia’s rise reveals.
She says he was involved in guiding Pak during Op Sindoor.
Not sure about how reliable her intel and analysis has been in the past.
There are Some other interesting predictions / rumours in the video.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4403
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rudradev »

drnayar wrote: 21 May 2025 18:14 China has unveiled the HQ-9BE, an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed for global markets. Showcased at IDEX 2025, it features a 250 km range, Mach 4 speed, and superior anti-jamming capabilities. With multi-target engagement and seamless defense integration, the HQ-9BE strengthens China's presence in the air defense industry.
Unveiled by China.
Showcased by Pakistan.
De-briefed by India.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5588
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Cain Marko »

Chinese maal rnd moving at a rapid coup it looks like:
https://www.twz.com/air/massive-chinese ... etive-base
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21363
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

Exposed Undersea: PLA Navy Officer Reflections on China’s Not-So-Silent Service
https://cimsec.org/exposed-undersea-pla ... t-service/
24 June 2025
gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5082
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by gakakkad »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... a-military

Multiple jernails (>30) fired. Wonder what's up . This is third such purge I know off in the last couple of years including the famous one in which water was used instead of raakit fuel .
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14805
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Can we say thats because J10C with PL 15, LY 80 radar, ACM 400, Wing Long drones, HQ-9, HQ-16, J-17 all flopped during operation Sindoor.
nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 1684
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by nandakumar »

gakakkad wrote: 30 Jun 2025 08:00 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... a-military

Multiple jernails (>30) fired. Wonder what's up . This is third such purge I know off in the last couple of years including the famous one in which water was used instead of raakit fuel .
https://www.moneycontrol.com/world/jinp ... 05374.html
This says there is a churn in the top leadership.
prashantsharma
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 23:17

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by prashantsharma »

This channel had been talking about a major power struggle for a month plus.
prashantsharma wrote: 29 May 2025 22:44 Check out youtube channel ‘Lei’s Real Talk’ video called Power Shift in China : What Zhang Youxia’s rise reveals.
She says he was involved in guiding Pak during Op Sindoor.
Not sure about how reliable her intel and analysis has been in the past.
There are Some other interesting predictions / rumours in the video.
Jay
BRFite
Posts: 982
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Jay »

prashantsharma wrote: 01 Jul 2025 14:23 This channel had been talking about a major power struggle for a month plus.
Just a month...lol. In our cheen threads, this has been going on for over a decade.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 574
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

This is a Russian take on the Chinese HQ-9B surface-to-air missile (SAM) system.
The Chinese "S-400 competitor" turned out to be weak

Pakistan is dissatisfied with the performance of the HQ-9B complex, which was advertised in China as "more advanced than the Russian Triumph."

Local conflicts, such as the Indo-Pakistani war, are often particularly interesting because of these duels, where systems that were competing in peacetime find themselves on the front lines against each other. The Chinese anti-aircraft missile system, like the S-400, is based on the Soviet S-300PM system.

The first models were presented in the early 1990s, and since then, several modifications have been developed, each more advanced than the last. The latest model, with the letter "B" and an integrated AESA radar and digital combat control system, was introduced by the Chinese in 2021. It was positioned as a "more advanced competitor to the S-400," although the Chinese were the first to acquire the "Triumfs" and are now using them in the most critical areas. But what can not be said for the sake of marketing.

Many countries were quite satisfied with this relatively inexpensive alternative, and it has recently become one of the most exported high-tech products from China's military-industrial complex.

Pakistan acquired the HQ-9B in 2021. Its combat debut took place during the brief conflict in May. However, it was a bit of a misfire. The system managed to intercept some of the French SCALP-EG cruise missiles launched by the Rafales, but it was completely ineffective against the Russian-Indian BrahMos missiles, which caused significant damage to Pakistan's rear airfields.

Shortly after the end of the conflict, Islamabad requested more advanced HQ-19 systems from Beijing, and tried not to even discuss the operation of the HQ-9B. However, it is now revealed that behind this conspiracy of silence lay a deep disappointment with one of China's top air defense systems.

Pakistanis on military forums complained that the complex is highly susceptible to electronic warfare systems, and its missiles require constant target illumination, which in turn quickly attracts enemy anti-radar missiles.

At least one full battery protecting the key Nur Khan airbase was destroyed by Indian Rudram-1 anti-radar missiles. The Pakistani military also complained that the HQ-9B could only shoot down subsonic cruise missiles, even though the advertisement promised that all missiles, including hypersonic and quasi-ballistic missiles, would be shot down.

This example once again proves that the original is always better than a copy, especially when the developer of that copy uses the original Russian Triumph for their own urgent needs, as does the PRC in the Taiwan Strait area.

https://dzen.ru/b/aGaheWrcjGIpP8Mz
S_Madhukar
BRFite
Posts: 905
Joined: 27 Mar 2019 18:15

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by S_Madhukar »

The Amirkhans at Nur Khan trusted protection by HQ9?? :lol:
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by bala »

Here is an assessment of how China armed forces would fare in direct battle. Lt. Gen Ravi Shankar (R) and Lt. Gen Dushyant Singh (R) analyze China’s military readiness, strengths, and potential vulnerabilities in conventional warfare.

Will China meet the same fate as Iran, whose proxy wars against Israel failed to deliver decisive victories? As China undertakes sweeping reforms in its armed forces, a bigger question looms: how would it perform in a real, direct battlefield scenario?

On PGurus YT:

Beyond Proxies: How Would China Perform in Direct Battle?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-gHhTQ6yXU

// China has poor training and leadership is even worse. There is chaos at the top due to Emperor firing top leadership. Many new fangled weapons/equipment don't work as advertized. Conscripts don't know how to use them properly. Another issue is these youngsters are 1 child in their family. These people are not cut out for any hard warfare in actual battle conditions. After 62, all the battles with India, china lost and ran away. With Operation Sindoor most of the chinese supplied equipment were failures for Pak. Same is true in Iran with chinese equipment.

// Personally I feel that India should use post Sindoor to take away 100-200+ km of Tibet and solve all of India's immediate issues with China. If possible take out Lhasa. India can suppress HQ-9B or whatever after SEAD/DEAD, the PLA are sitting ducks. A rainshower of brahmos (which they cannot intercept) on their key assets and Tibet falls to India.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6783
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

^ our official position is that we recognise Tibet to be a part of China.

Perhaps we need to change that position first...
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by bala »

Manish_P wrote: 08 Jul 2025 22:47 ^ our official position is that we recognise Tibet to be a part of China.
According to Lt. Gen P R Shankar (retd), India has no official document or stmt that says Tibet is part of China. During 2003 ABV and chinese agreed to do trade by enabling two locations one in Tibet side close to India and the other is in India close to Tibet border. That is it. So commerce was enabled btwn China and India using a ground based system.

When China does not recognize Arunachal Pradesh and has chinese names for disputed land with India, it is kinda stupid for India to recognize Tibet as part of China. I agree that now India can publicly state that, after the Dalai Lama took the lead to have a trust appoint the next lama for Tibet.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14065
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Vayutuvan »

bala wrote: 08 Jul 2025 08:15 // Personally I feel that India should use post Sindoor to take away 100-200+ km of Tibet and solve all of India's immediate issues with China. If possible take out Lhasa. India can suppress HQ-9B or whatever after SEAD/DEAD, the PLA are sitting ducks. A rainshower of brahmos (which they cannot intercept) on their key assets and Tibet falls to India.
The whole world will turn against India. What is the casus belli that India can simply attack Chinese positions in Tibet? :!:
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14065
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Vayutuvan »

S_Madhukar wrote: 08 Jul 2025 03:57 The Amirkhans at Nur Khan trusted protection by HQ9?? :lol:
Very sharp observation. That means there are no american nukes or anything that Americans have control over at NKB.
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by bala »

Vayutuvan wrote: 09 Jul 2025 02:01 What is the casus belli that India can simply attack Chinese positions in Tibet? :!:
Good question. When the deputy chief of IA Lt. Gen Rahul Singh said that China was giving full support (live feed of Indian positions) to Pak in Sindoor for the Pahalgam murder, do you need any more reasons than that? India can instigate the Tibetans to revolt and then to support the cause take out PLA positions. BTW PLA is not in a position to fight, they have told Emperor many times. Tibet was forcibly taken by the Chinese in the 1950s, a territory never theirs in their own ancient maps.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6783
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

bala wrote: 08 Jul 2025 23:15
Manish_P wrote: 08 Jul 2025 22:47 ^ our official position is that we recognise Tibet to be a part of China.
According to Lt. Gen P R Shankar (retd), India has no official document or stmt that says Tibet is part of China...
Are we 100% sure about this?

We should not be caught out unless we are sure

After ABV there was congress sarkar with agreements and MOUs signed... Some which are not yet revealed to the public.

In any case GoI needs to publicly declare that we support freedom of Tibet. Rest follows from there...

Any idea how many Han Chinese have been located to Tibet to bring about demographic change?
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14805
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

The problem for Chinese is that inspired of the Best efforts HAN Chinese are not able to adapt to Tibetan altitude
bala
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by bala »

Manish_P wrote: 09 Jul 2025 06:59 Are we 100% sure about this?

We should not be caught out unless we are sure

After ABV there was congress sarkar with agreements and MOUs signed... Some which are not yet revealed to the public.

In any case GoI needs to publicly declare that we support freedom of Tibet. Rest follows from there...
Manish ji, the agreement signed between China and India in 2003 by ABV does not carry any legal binding on either country. It is not an international Treaty. If China persistently fails to appreciate India’s sensibilities in the POK and other border areas, India is free to raise Tibet issue any time.

India signed a joint statement with China in 2003, which mentioned Tibet in the context that Tibet Autonomous Region of China would provide facilities to the India pilgrims visiting Kailash-Mansarovar. India and China agreed to open a new route to Kailash-Mansarovar through Sikkim.

With Dalai Lama stmt recently, GOI should increase the pressure and support freedom of religious practices by the Tibetan people.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6783
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

bala wrote: 09 Jul 2025 09:08 ..

With Dalai Lama stmt recently, GOI should increase the pressure and support freedom of religious practices by the Tibetan people.
True. This (appointment of successor) is a hot topic and an opportunity, Bala sir.

Some recent reports I read put Han population at around 12 to 15%. So it is still doable. Once the han population reaches around 30 to 40% it will be more difficult and long drawn.

Capturing territory is the relatively easy part. Holding on to it is more difficult.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21363
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

An absolute must read Twitter thread...please click on the link.

https://x.com/Duorope/status/1946834665320415360 ---> All chapters of the PLA SF veteran's memoir during his tenure at LAC 2019-2021 are below.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21363
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

China’s J-35 Naval Stealth Fighter Looks Set For Service
https://www.twz.com/air/chinas-j-35-nav ... or-service
19 July 2025
There are signs that the J-35 has now entered limited series production, with carrier trials the likely next step.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21363
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

I Have Studied Fighter Jets for 3 Decades: The J-20 Fighter Is No F-35
https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/i-h ... s-no-f-35/
27 July 2025
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20848
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Karan M »

That assessment above by Reuben Johnson is flawed on so many levels that one doesnt even know where to begin. Hubris goes before a fall. The US establishment is taking the J-20 seriously unlike Reuben.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6783
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

^ ssshhh Karan Sa'ab.. if you say such things then how will we attack and capture Tibet in one swift, quick operation.

Please to shrug off this deafeatist mindset....
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6783
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Ignoring the hyperbole - the J-36 lands on a carrier

China's J-36 Becomes First Fighter Jet To Land Amid Sea Storm, Surpasses F-16 And Su-57M
China’s stealth fighter jet, the J-36, has stunned military observers with a feat rarely attempted, successfully landing on a warship amid towering six-metre-high waves in open sea. While American and Russian jets struggle in such extreme maritime conditions, China’s J-36 has now set a new benchmark in naval aviation.

The aircraft’s tailless design would normally add to the challenge, but China’s engineers have equipped it with a sophisticated Direct Force Control (DFC) system. Drawing inspiration from robotics, DFC allows for microsecond adjustments to control surfaces, enabling the jet to execute ultra-precise landings even in unpredictable conditions.

In the 2025 test, Western naval experts reportedly looked on as the J-36 performed a clean landing on the carrier ‘Fujian’, a feat few other militaries could replicate under similar circumstances.

The J-36 is also paired with the ‘Fujian’ carrier’s electromagnetic catapult system, allowing quick and high-energy launches. This combination enhances China’s capacity to operate effectively in volatile maritime zones including the Indian Ocean, an area of strategic interest to multiple nations.
Image
uddu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2679
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by uddu »

Moment Chinese ships CRASH while tailing Filipino boat in South China Sea

This is the moment a Chinese Navy warship crashed into its own coast guard vessel while chasing a Philippine patrol boat in South China Sea.
Dramatic footage released by Manila showed a massive Chinese warship bearing the number 164 on its hull smashing into a China Coast Guard ship with a loud crash. More footage and photos released later by the Philippine Coast Guard showed the stricken Chinese vessel still afloat but with its entire bow crumpled inward. It sustained major damage to its hull after crashing into its own coast guard ship.The collision took place near the contested Scarborough Shoal in the disputed South China Sea. Footage before the crash shows the PLA's navy vessel coming dangerously close to the Philippine Coast Guard ship in a show of force.
pravula
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by pravula »

wow, more tofu construction
ricky_v
BRFite
Posts: 1458
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

Post by ricky_v »

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/wh ... y-he-wants

https://archive.is/rfv5C
By the end of his tenure, Xi could well exceed the mercurial Mao Zedong in his body count of officers who have been purged. Although Xi oversaw military purges earlier in his career and even imposed a sweeping overhaul of the PLA’s command structure in 2015, this recent shakeup has raised eyebrows since many of the affected men were Xi’s putative allies rather than potential political rivals. The ousting of senior officers who were once considered untouchable has fed a flurry of rumors that Xi is losing his grip over the PLA—and even prompted more extreme claims that Xi’s own political demise might be imminent.

But rather than Xi’s diminution, the recent moves more likely reflect Xi’s continued dominance of the military. Much like a Mafia don, Xi has shown that he considers even his associates to be disposable. More important, the staggering political casualties reflect that he is losing patience with his military rather than his control over it. The moves demonstrate his continued dissatisfaction with the PLA’s high command and can be seen as part of an ongoing process of achieving his larger goals of bending the military to his will. Indeed, Xi wants to ensure he can employ violence with confidence, but Xi’s confidence seems to be the rarest and most precious commodity for an otherwise well-resourced military.

Xi sees his military agenda as a centerpiece of his legacy. Whereas Xi’s predecessors focused their political firepower primarily on advancing major economic reforms, some of the most dramatic reforms of the Xi era have occurred in the military. Two goals have driven his unforgiving management of the PLA. His paramount aim is ensuring the military is thoroughly politicized and thus willing to fulfill its role as the ultimate guarantor of the party’s rule should it be challenged by internal unrest. And Xi also wants a military that can fight if he needs it to do so, including against the U.S. military.
The recent purges of He Weidong, the vice chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), and Admiral Miao Hua, the director of the Political Work Department, have garnered the most attention in the rumor mill. The two men overlapped with Xi in Fujian Province earlier in their careers and were believed to enjoy a special relationship as a result. But He is now missing (he hasn’t been seen in public since March), and Miao was removed from his post in November 2024.

Analysts have gravitated to two hypotheses. The more mundane is that these purges reflect embarrassingly poor judgment by Xi in his choice of subordinates. The more extravagant is that they reflect a burgeoning movement among disaffected party and military leaders who now seek to challenge or even remove Xi.

Neither of these hypotheses stands up to scrutiny, however. Both share the unlikely premise that these purges have somehow loosened Xi’s grip on the military. If the political turmoil inside the PLA was in fact embarrassing to Xi, it would be covered up rather than publicly acknowledged, as most of these cases have been. If the party excels at nothing else, it is adept at propagandizing and protecting the leadership’s image, particularly Xi’s.

Moreover, if Xi were in fact in political trouble with the military, the question would be: Why now? After a decade of seemingly supine obeisance, there is no obvious reason why the military leadership would suddenly rouse itself to oppose Xi. The PLA actively thwarted the efforts of Xi’s predecessors when they tried to reform the high command. But so far, the PLA has not only succumbed to Xi’s sweeping reforms, it also seems to be earnestly preparing for Xi’s order to provide military options for a Taiwan contingency by 2027.
Rather than a split between Xi and the PLA, it seems more likely that the recent purges are the result of an intramural game of thrones within the PLA. Xi still has close ties to key senior officers, after all, especially CMC Vice Chairman General Zhang Youxia, whom Xi has known for decades and whose father was close friends with Xi’s father. Xi has even allowed Zhang to remain CMC vice chairman after he exceeded the party’s informal retirement age—a remarkable and clear sign of Xi’s trust in him. Zhang has also survived Xi’s anticorruption campaign unscathed despite having previously run the PLA’s Equipment Development Department, which has been a focal point of the most recent round of purges.

The ousted officers, by contrast, could simply be in the outer orbit of Xi’s political circle. And given that corruption is such a widespread reality of life in the PLA, especially since Xi initiated his pricey military modernization program, the recently purged officers may have miscalculated that their ties to Xi would allow them to line their pockets with impunity.
Yet in 2010 when Xi became a member of the CMC and the Chinese Communist Party’s heir apparent, he was probably alarmed by what he discovered at PLA headquarters. Thanks to the domination of generals loyal to former leader Jiang Zemin, who sustained his influence throughout the Hu era (2002–12), the PLA had become an insular and unwieldy institution that was spending more time protecting its own parochial interests than operating as a joint force globally or even regionally.

Indeed, Xi started his tenure as commander in chief by promulgating the idea that the PLA needed to be prepared “to fight and win battles,” a turn of phrase that rather patronizingly implied that the PLA was not currently prepared to do so. Xi also likely found that behind the wall of PLA insularity, there was extensive corruption. As one of Xi’s princeling allies famously commented, corruption had become so rife in the PLA that “only our own corruption can defeat us.”

The insularity of the PLA is hard to fathom from afar. It is a sprawling, opaque, and technologically advanced empire unto itself within the party apparatus, and even civilian Communist Party leaders often can’t understand, penetrate, or control it. Although the Communist Party has a monopoly on the use of force, the PLA has a near monopoly on military expertise. Unlike in the United States, there is no cadre of civilian experts on military affairs either inside or outside the PLA. There is no equivalent to the Pentagon’s Office of the Secretary of Defense, which helps ensure civilian control of the military.
In 2011, a mere year into Xi’s tenure on the CMC, the question of whether the PLA would serve as guarantor of the party became acute because of the Arab Spring. In the face of public discontent, security forces across the Middle East melted away and regimes fell. During China’s 1989 pro-democracy movement, the PLA’s support for quashing the protesters in Tiananmen Square rested on a narrow consensus; many senior PLA officers opposed martial law and the military was paralyzed for a month before paramount leader Deng Xiaoping could sway the outcome. After the Arab Spring, one could imagine senior CCP leaders asking, “If Tiananmen happened today, would the PLA again save the party?”

Xi was likely not assured. The command structure of the PLA at the time looked like a joint force at first glance, with each service having a representative on the party’s supreme military body—but in fact, this structure made it even more difficult to control the high command since no officer had the authority to corral the various service chiefs. For any civilian leader, this state of affairs would be troubling. But for a Leninist leader like Xi, it was unacceptable.

Soon after becoming commander in chief, Xi initiated a risky blitzkrieg against the military chieftains who had turned the PLA into a near state within a state. He arrested and purged two retired but influential vice chairmen of the CMC for accepting bribes before purging several other senior officers across a wide swath of the PLA. He then went on to diminish the role of the PLA’s Ground Force, which had traditionally enjoyed a dominant position in the PLA, through a major overhaul of the PLA’s command structure. (Unlike their brethren in the navy or the air force, the ground forces did not consider themselves a mere service among several in the PLA. Rather, they were the PLA itself because they had conquered China for the Communist Party.)

This is a marked shift from just 20 years ago, when the ground forces still dominated the PLA’s priorities and institutions. The “Army Army” no longer dominates membership of the CMC, and the Joint Theater command staff and the other services now receive a greater share of the budget, especially for weapons acquisitions. Those services have grown, meanwhile, while the army has been cut by almost 500,000 since 2010.

The sheer scope and scale of the institutional reforms that Xi imposed on the PLA a decade ago are not to be underestimated. They are tantamount to the U.S. military experiencing both the 1947 National Security Act, which subjugated the Navy and War Departments to a unified Department of Defense, and the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act, which sought to oust the service chiefs from the operational chain of command, simultaneously. Although the United States has a long tradition of civilian control of the military, both reforms provoked intense public hostility as well as opposition from the high command, including the famous “Revolt of the Admirals” in 1949 when navy officers publicly opposed the Truman administration’s defense policy.

Given the audacity of Xi’s purges and reforms, many analysts have expected—or even hoped for—some kind of backlash against Xi for more than a decade. Yet Xi made these extensive renovations to the high command with no visible sign of dissent. By going straight for the metaphorical jugular of the PLA, Xi flipped on its head the oft-used phrase that Chinese leaders “kill the chicken to scare the monkeys.” Instead of purging the protégés of PLA elites to send a message to the top, he decapitated the leadership itself. It was a gamble, but the moves effectively bludgeoned resistance and seemed to enhance Xi’s stature.

As Xi noted in his first speech to the PLA after becoming commander in chief, the Soviet Union fell because “nobody was man enough to stand up and resist.” Xi is obsessed with ensuring that the PLA’s men would resist if need be—but he is still not confident they would.
Post Reply