There was near unanimous approval among the more than 3,000 delegates at the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) 19th National People’s Congress earlier this month to abolish constitutional limits on presidential terms, with only two voting against and three abstaining.
In doing so, they also approved Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) as general secretary of the CCP, chairman of the Central Military Commission and president — the three main offices of the state — in effect making him a Chinese emperor for the 21st century.
Under the leadership of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), the CCP defeated the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and successfully founded the People’s Republic of China (PRC). All of the party’s revolutionary elder statesmen wholeheartedly supported Mao’s elevation to emperor.
However, since Xi was born after the founding of the PRC, he made no direct contribution toward its establishment. Will the party’s many cadres accept his status as emperor for life?
Party elder Chen Yun (陳雲) criticized Mao for staying in power too long and called the Cultural Revolution a crime that tore apart the party’s structure and persecuted millions of party cadres.
Following Mao’s death, Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), who spearheaded economic reform through the “four modernizations,” was surely the most qualified to be given a regal title.
To prevent another dictator from emerging, Deng in 1982 established the rule that presidents should be able to hold office for a maximum of 10 years, or two terms. His successors, former presidents Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), respected this rule.
During his handling of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, Deng ordered the People’s Liberation Army to suppress the protest, killing thousands of unarmed students and members of the public protesting against corruption within the party and its autocratic rule. Deng was forced to assume responsibility for the calamity and step down.
In 2012, Xi took over as the party’s general secretary at the CCP’s 18th National Congress. The following year, he became president and began to amass enormous power by establishing and leading a plethora of “leading groups.” In the past, the party practiced a system of collective leadership with key roles shared among members of the party’s Politburo Standing Committee.
Under Hu and former Chinese premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶), Wen was in charge of handling the economy. However, since becoming president, Xi has sought to micro-manage every area of government and abolished the president-premier power-sharing arrangement to seize control of the economic brief from Premier Li Keqiang (李克強). While Li still holds the title of premier, control of the economy has passed to Xi’s most trusted political ally, Vice Premier Liu He (劉鶴).
Over the past five years, Xi has used an anti-corruption campaign as a cover to orchestrate a purge of rival factions within the military and the party. Having cracked down on cadres at all levels, Xi’s anti-corruption campaign has snared hundreds of high-level cadres and nurtured an army of loyal supporters, but has also created countless political enemies.
This vast hostile force has become a thorn in Xi’s side and is a source of nervousness and paranoia in the president, who believes there is an enemy lurking behind every tree or bush.
Will the abolition of presidential limits be sufficient to guarantee Xi’s permanent hold on power?
There are multiple dangers looming on the horizon that could yet derail his presidency. For instance, China’s economic growth could continue to slow and the trade war with the US could intensify to the extent that the US launches a full-scale economic assault on China.
In addition, Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative could be resisted and killed at birth by other nations or China might become entangled in a regional political conflict that triggers a military confrontation with the US.
During a lunch with US Republican Party supporters on March 10, US President Donald Trump joked about Xi’s lifelong presidency, saying: “I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot some day.”
However, the sarcasm was lost on academics in Hong Kong and China, who believed it to be a compliment and a show of support for his counterpart.
Beijing has strictly controlled discussion within domestic media on the topic of Xi’s lifelong presidency. The audio to a CNN report, broadcast in China, of Trump discussing Xi was abruptly silenced before the video feed was also severed.
The first US president, George Washington, served two terms between 1789 to 1797. Although the US constitution did not limit Washington from continuing to serve and his supporters urged him to continue, Washington refused. His decision set a precedent, creating an unwritten rule that US presidents may not serve more than two terms in office.
This rule was observed until 1940, when former US president Franklin D. Roosevelt won third and fourth terms. Eleven weeks into his fourth term in April 1945, Roosevelt died and was succeeded by his vice president, Harry Truman.
During Truman’s presidency, the US Congress quickly approved a constitutional amendment stipulating that a president may renew his term only once and may hold office for a maximum of 10 years. In so doing, Congress restored the principle that political power must always be limited through a system of checks and balances.
This period of history should remind us that the US reveres democracy, and checks and balances on power. It has no time for the likes of Emperor Xi, who has just carried out a colossal power grab in a bid to subvert the global trend toward democratic rule.
Parris Chang is president of the Taiwan Institute for Political, Economic and Strategic Studies, a former deputy secretary-general of the National Security Council and professor emeritus of political science at Pennsylvania State University.
Translated by Edward Jones
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
The inter-Korean relationship, long defined by national division, offers the clearest mirror within East Asia for cross-strait relations. Yet even there, reunification language is breaking down. The South Korean government disclosed on Wednesday last week that North Korea’s constitutional revision in March had deleted references to reunification and added a territorial clause defining its border with South Korea. South Korea is also seriously debating whether national reunification with North Korea is still necessary. On April 27, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung marked the eighth anniversary of the Panmunjom Declaration, the 2018 inter-Korean agreement in which the two Koreas pledged to
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength