The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) last month officially announced that Zhang Yuxia (張又俠), vice chairman of the CCP’s Central Military Commission (CMC), as well as General Liu Zhenli (劉振立), chief of staff of the CMC’s Joint Staff Department, were being investigated for suspected contraventions of the law, confirming speculation in the rest of the world that China had purged more high-level military personnel.
The purge was not just an anti-corruption campaign, but also a blatant political security operation. For Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the military is not professional armed forces, but the final insurance policy of his regime. Any officials who do not pledge “absolute loyalty” to him must be eliminated.
Serving as the first vice chairman of the CMC, Zhang was only subordinate to Xi, while Liu controlled the commission’s pivotal joint staff affairs. Both being investigated at the same time showed that Xi has completely lost trust in the chain of military command.
Even if there is no clear sign of a substantial coup d’etat, as long as there is a potential uncontrollable risk, it is enough to trigger his logic of “striking first to gain an upper hand.”
This is the governance model of “better to kill 100 by mistake than to spare one who is guilty.”
Such a governance model might lead to a chilling effect instead of stability — officers are only loyal to individuals, the decisionmaking process becomes conservative and rigid, and military professionalism is replaced by political loyalty.
Internal unrest does not necessarily reduce the risk of external conflict, while it might prompt the leadership to shift internal pressure through tougher external measures.
As for Taiwan, the key is not betting on the direction of Beijing’s power struggles. It lies in recognizing that when the CCP uses its military as a political tool, uncertainty over regional security only increases.
Wang Hao is a political commentator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
RSS