This a guest post from Chris Johnson, CEO of China Strategies Group and a former top China analyst at the CIA. Chris helps provide context for the recent round of PLA purges, and for what we may see at the now underway Fourth Plenum in terms of politics and personnel
Thank you for this piece. As a Western citizen waking up to other ways of running a country, I'm grateful to be able to know more about how Chinese politics really work. Until recently I was only exposed to foreigners' analyses, which sounded overly biased and oversimplified. I now realize how complex Chinese politics are. Not sure I'll ever smoothly understand how it works, but I love discovering news ways of thinking and doing, so reading such pieces is good enough for me! 😆
In 1970, using materials supplied by the CIA, I wrote a research paper on China’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Years later I realized my every conclusion was incorrect and my misunderstanding of the nature of the Cultural Revolution was entirely due to the CIA being so totally wrong on every significant point. In China the CIA was like an accountant, giving numbers which were nearly accurate, but in analyzing motivations and reasoning, the CIA was a terrible source of information about China.
“informed observers frequently say Xi must stay in office to pursue his legacy obsession of reunifying with” Taiwan. This is possibly true but more likely President Xi wants to see the 1992 accords reestablished. Official reunification is not a pressing motive as long as Xi can assure a long term process toward peaceful reunification.
Your conclusion that “we must guess” is absolutely correct. The CIA has been guessing about China for more than 50 years.
It seems the purges in the military represent Zhang Youxia and Liu Yuan taking Xi Jinping loyalists off the board. Xi’s Maoist approach resulted in severe damage to China’s economy and it is significant that Liu Xiaoqi’s son is playing a role in curtailing Xi’s ability to do whatever he wants and perhaps forcing Xi to relinquish titles, or more. History is repeating itself.
The best accounts of Xi Jinping - his rise and ultimate fall - will include plenty on the role of Ye Xuanning. Ye is the most significant red princeling in modern chinese history that the West has failed to identify. Any analysis of Chinese politics that misses Ye Xuanning falls short. The writer only became aware of Ye after working in the Second Island Chain-in the 1990s. This region, Micronesia had far less resources than other hyper-strategic parts of the world, and China’s white hot desire to exert influence was impossible to conceal. By tracking Ye’s political warfare here, it led to his major operations elsewhere. Ye needed a Chinese leader willing to allow him to work covertly and Xi served that role.
It’s hard to ignore the scope of Xi Jinping’s achievements over the past decade. Under his leadership, China eliminated extreme poverty for nearly 100 million people — a social milestone without precedent. The economy more than doubled in size while shifting toward “high-quality development,” emphasizing innovation and advanced manufacturing over raw growth. His sweeping anti-corruption drive restored public trust and strengthened Party discipline. The PLA’s deep modernization — new strategic commands, cyber and space units — has reshaped China’s defense capabilities. And globally, the Belt and Road Initiative has positioned China as a central force in infrastructure and trade across Asia, Africa, and beyond.
Whatever one’s politics, these accomplishments have transformed China’s domestic stability and global influence, ensuring that Xi’s legacy will define an era.
This is a really refreshing essay. I share a lot of the assessments made by Chris Johnson.
I think people brought up in a Western background often tend to under-estimate the sense of historical responsibility of leaders of Chinese/East Asian/Confucian descent. You can look at Singapore and the case of Lee Kuan Yew as someone who would not be explained by Western political theory, but who made it work with common sense and courage, despite controversies. The inner world and self-drive of these people need to be properly studied and appreciated, other than unhealthy cartoonish labeling that's not really in line with the facts.
I tend to believe that Xi would also make the right choice about succession at the right time, in advance, before it's too late, just as his controversial decision to abolish the invisible term limit in the first place would also turn out to be the correct and responsible one - for China at least. (Historians in the future will debate that, if not for Xi's unpopular choice to stay, how China, under a fresh leader, would have survived in the face of Trump's onslaught.)
expert and eloquent intake. However while battling his way into managed succession or not, XI creates invisible tension that will likely set the stage for unexpected acts aka tumult.
Very interesting piece of analysis. It is very hard to decipher political succession in such closed and opaque societies as China, where the state decides how much information is to be released to the public. Xi may be attempting a managed succession both to ensure long term survival of the regime as well as himself, but another point to be noted is also that a political overthrow of Xi would only be possible if there was another leader with cunning and ruthlessness more than Xi who would attempt such a thing keeping in view the turbulent economic, military and foreign relations of China at the present time. If there is such a man in China today, he has done an awesome job in concealing himself up till now.
Respectfully disagree. I don’t think Xi would relinquish power, mainly because once he does that, he can no longer protect himself. When his father was sent down during the Cultural Revolution, that is one of the lessons I think he would have learned and would never want to relive again. Is this the conventional analysis? Maybe - but my belief stems from Xi protecting himself whereas most of the others in this camp just see Xi as power hungry. A managed succession is a creative and intriguing thought and can’t be dismissed, but neither should the conventional wisdom in all of its forms.
Thank you for this piece. As a Western citizen waking up to other ways of running a country, I'm grateful to be able to know more about how Chinese politics really work. Until recently I was only exposed to foreigners' analyses, which sounded overly biased and oversimplified. I now realize how complex Chinese politics are. Not sure I'll ever smoothly understand how it works, but I love discovering news ways of thinking and doing, so reading such pieces is good enough for me! 😆
Another view on Xi: https://plus.econvue.com/p/xi-jinping-the-living-heart-of-the?
In 1970, using materials supplied by the CIA, I wrote a research paper on China’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Years later I realized my every conclusion was incorrect and my misunderstanding of the nature of the Cultural Revolution was entirely due to the CIA being so totally wrong on every significant point. In China the CIA was like an accountant, giving numbers which were nearly accurate, but in analyzing motivations and reasoning, the CIA was a terrible source of information about China.
“informed observers frequently say Xi must stay in office to pursue his legacy obsession of reunifying with” Taiwan. This is possibly true but more likely President Xi wants to see the 1992 accords reestablished. Official reunification is not a pressing motive as long as Xi can assure a long term process toward peaceful reunification.
Your conclusion that “we must guess” is absolutely correct. The CIA has been guessing about China for more than 50 years.
It seems the purges in the military represent Zhang Youxia and Liu Yuan taking Xi Jinping loyalists off the board. Xi’s Maoist approach resulted in severe damage to China’s economy and it is significant that Liu Xiaoqi’s son is playing a role in curtailing Xi’s ability to do whatever he wants and perhaps forcing Xi to relinquish titles, or more. History is repeating itself.
The best accounts of Xi Jinping - his rise and ultimate fall - will include plenty on the role of Ye Xuanning. Ye is the most significant red princeling in modern chinese history that the West has failed to identify. Any analysis of Chinese politics that misses Ye Xuanning falls short. The writer only became aware of Ye after working in the Second Island Chain-in the 1990s. This region, Micronesia had far less resources than other hyper-strategic parts of the world, and China’s white hot desire to exert influence was impossible to conceal. By tracking Ye’s political warfare here, it led to his major operations elsewhere. Ye needed a Chinese leader willing to allow him to work covertly and Xi served that role.
It’s hard to ignore the scope of Xi Jinping’s achievements over the past decade. Under his leadership, China eliminated extreme poverty for nearly 100 million people — a social milestone without precedent. The economy more than doubled in size while shifting toward “high-quality development,” emphasizing innovation and advanced manufacturing over raw growth. His sweeping anti-corruption drive restored public trust and strengthened Party discipline. The PLA’s deep modernization — new strategic commands, cyber and space units — has reshaped China’s defense capabilities. And globally, the Belt and Road Initiative has positioned China as a central force in infrastructure and trade across Asia, Africa, and beyond.
Whatever one’s politics, these accomplishments have transformed China’s domestic stability and global influence, ensuring that Xi’s legacy will define an era.
Lmao
Enjoyed this article
This is a really refreshing essay. I share a lot of the assessments made by Chris Johnson.
I think people brought up in a Western background often tend to under-estimate the sense of historical responsibility of leaders of Chinese/East Asian/Confucian descent. You can look at Singapore and the case of Lee Kuan Yew as someone who would not be explained by Western political theory, but who made it work with common sense and courage, despite controversies. The inner world and self-drive of these people need to be properly studied and appreciated, other than unhealthy cartoonish labeling that's not really in line with the facts.
I tend to believe that Xi would also make the right choice about succession at the right time, in advance, before it's too late, just as his controversial decision to abolish the invisible term limit in the first place would also turn out to be the correct and responsible one - for China at least. (Historians in the future will debate that, if not for Xi's unpopular choice to stay, how China, under a fresh leader, would have survived in the face of Trump's onslaught.)
expert and eloquent intake. However while battling his way into managed succession or not, XI creates invisible tension that will likely set the stage for unexpected acts aka tumult.
Very interesting piece of analysis. It is very hard to decipher political succession in such closed and opaque societies as China, where the state decides how much information is to be released to the public. Xi may be attempting a managed succession both to ensure long term survival of the regime as well as himself, but another point to be noted is also that a political overthrow of Xi would only be possible if there was another leader with cunning and ruthlessness more than Xi who would attempt such a thing keeping in view the turbulent economic, military and foreign relations of China at the present time. If there is such a man in China today, he has done an awesome job in concealing himself up till now.
An extremely interesting article!
Respectfully disagree. I don’t think Xi would relinquish power, mainly because once he does that, he can no longer protect himself. When his father was sent down during the Cultural Revolution, that is one of the lessons I think he would have learned and would never want to relive again. Is this the conventional analysis? Maybe - but my belief stems from Xi protecting himself whereas most of the others in this camp just see Xi as power hungry. A managed succession is a creative and intriguing thought and can’t be dismissed, but neither should the conventional wisdom in all of its forms.
Of course Xi could be forced into a managed succession. That’s a different story.
Nobody has the power to force him, apart from himself.
Thanks for posting. It’s good to have reasonable perspectives that don’t reinforce the conventional wisdom.
Xi might be a good guy after all???? 🤨
It’s not looking good for Xi …