China’s Military Under Xi Jinping: Power Consolidation, Internal Purges, and the Taiwan Factor

China’s Military Under Xi Jinping: Power Consolidation, Internal Purges, and the Taiwan Factor

Geopolitics | Military Strategy | East Asia

Under the leadership of Xi Jinping, China’s military projects an image of strength, unity, and near-invincibility. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has modernized rapidly, expanded its naval and missile capabilities, and increased its operational tempo around Taiwan. Yet behind this powerful façade, a more complex and fragile reality is emerging—one marked by forced leadership changes, repeated internal purges, and rising political pressure inside the military itself.

This article analyzes how Xi Jinping’s consolidation of power has reshaped the relationship between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the PLA, why Taiwan has become central to Beijing’s strategy, and whether these dynamics ultimately strengthen China—or risk undermining it from within.


Xi Jinping’s Absolute Control Over the Military

Xi Jinping holds three key positions simultaneously: President of China, General Secretary of the CCP, and Chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC). Among these, the chairmanship of the CMC is the most critical. It gives Xi direct authority over all military planning, appointments, and operations.

Since taking power in 2012, Xi has repeatedly emphasized one core principle:

“The gun must always be controlled by the Party.”

In practical terms, this means that loyalty to the CCP—and to Xi personally—has become the primary requirement for advancement within the PLA. Military professionalism and battlefield expertise, while still important, are now secondary to political reliability.


The Central Military Commission and Systematic Purges

The Central Military Commission (CMC) serves as the highest command authority in China’s armed forces. Between 2022 and 2025, Xi oversaw aggressive restructuring and purges within this body and across the PLA.

Numerous senior officers were:

  • Suddenly dismissed

  • Demoted

  • Investigated for “disciplinary violations”

In official Chinese language, such violations often signal corruption charges or political disloyalty.

What shocked observers most was that several of those targeted were previously considered Xi loyalists. Senior figures, including top generals once believed to be untouchable, were removed. By early 2026, reports indicated that the scale of these purges was the largest since the Mao era.

As a result, Xi now stands virtually alone at the top of the military hierarchy, with few powerful figures capable of challenging or even questioning his decisions.


Anti-Corruption or Political Loyalty Test?

Officially, Beijing frames these actions as part of an ongoing anti-corruption campaign launched in 2012. Given the PLA’s massive budget and influence, corruption has long been a real issue.

However, many analysts argue that the purges serve a deeper purpose:

  • Filtering out officers with independent power bases

  • Ensuring ideological conformity

  • Replacing competence-based leadership with loyalty-based leadership

Under Xi’s “Chairman Responsibility System”, the Chairman of the CMC—Xi himself—has the final and unquestionable say. Orders are not merely directives; they are political commands.

The message is clear:
A brilliant general with questionable loyalty is more dangerous than an average officer who is politically obedient.


The PLA’s Dual Role: Military Force and Regime Guardian

Today, the PLA performs two simultaneous functions:

  1. Defending China’s national interests

  2. Safeguarding the CCP’s political dominance

Unlike many militaries that swear allegiance to a constitution or neutral state authority, the PLA is explicitly a party army. Political commissars are embedded at every level of command, monitoring ideological alignment and reporting directly to party structures.

This system transforms the military into:

  • A fighting force

  • A political surveillance institution

While this strengthens internal control, it also raises concerns about initiative, trust, and flexibility on the battlefield.


The Risks of Over-Centralization

Concentrating military power around a single leader carries serious risks.

Frequent purges and leadership reshuffles can:

  • Undermine long-term strategic planning

  • Disrupt command continuity

  • Create a climate of fear among officers

When commanders fear political missteps more than tactical failure, they may avoid initiative and delay critical decisions. For a modern military expected to conduct complex joint operations, this hesitation can be costly.


Taiwan: External Pressure, Internal Utility

China’s increasingly aggressive posture toward Taiwan cannot be separated from its internal dynamics.

Since 2022, the PLA has conducted large-scale exercises around Taiwan, including:

  • Simulated blockades

  • Joint air–sea–missile operations

  • Rocket Force deployment scenarios

Exercises such as “Strait Thunder 2025A” and “Justice Mission 2025” demonstrated the PLA’s ability to coordinate across services and project overwhelming force.

However, these actions have stopped short of actual combat.


Taiwan as a Strategic Pressure Valve

Analysts identify three main reasons Taiwan remains central to Beijing’s strategy:

1. Nationalism and Regime Legitimacy

Taiwan is framed as an unfinished chapter of national reunification. This narrative fuels nationalism and reinforces the CCP’s image as the guardian of China’s sovereignty.

2. Testing Military Loyalty

Aggressive drills serve as loyalty tests for commanders during a period of internal purges. They ensure the PLA remains focused outward, not inward.

3. Diversion From Domestic Challenges

Economic slowdown, elite purges, and political uncertainty create internal pressure. External tension helps redirect public attention and unify domestic opinion.


Grey Zone Warfare: Power Without War

China’s actions around Taiwan fit the model of grey zone warfare—a strategy designed to apply constant pressure without crossing the threshold into full-scale war.

This approach:

  • Exhausts Taiwan’s military readiness

  • Sends deterrent signals to the United States and allies

  • Avoids the catastrophic costs of open conflict

Yet, grey zone tactics are inherently risky. Persistent tension increases the chances of miscalculation, accidents, or unintended escalation.


Conclusion: Strength or Strategic Fragility?

Under Xi Jinping, China’s military is more modern, better equipped, and more politically controlled than ever before. However, absolute loyalty and constant purges may weaken institutional resilience over time.

Taiwan, in this context, is not only a geopolitical objective—it is a political instrument. Military pressure serves domestic stability as much as external deterrence.

The greatest danger in the Taiwan Strait today may not be a sudden invasion, but a permanent state of heightened tension, where mistakes become more likely and crisis management more difficult.

China’s military power is real. But how it is used—and how tightly it is bound to one man’s authority—will determine whether it becomes a foundation of long-term strength or a source of internal vulnerability.

Share on Facebook

Related Articles

There are no other articles with similar categories.