China's Military May Have Gone 'Rogue' After All

Discussion in 'China' started by Rushil51, Sep 24, 2014.

  1. Rushil51

    Rushil51 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    217
    Location:
    Castelia City
    Source:- China’s Military May Have Gone ‘Rogue’ After All | The Diplomat

    Generally, when the Chinese military does something particularly bold, such as intercept a U.S. spy plane or barge into India-administered Kashmir, inevitably some analysts explain this behavior by suggesting that the Chinese military has gone “rogue.” In other words, there is a tendency to explain off Chinese aggression by pointing to a failure in the chain of command that results in miscommunication (or in some cases, non-communication) between the leadership in Zhongnanhai and field commanders. After the most recent manifestation of this sort of explanatory bias, following the U.S.-China spy plane intercept incident, Zachary Keck pushed back against this notion of rogue PLA officers. I tend to agree with this view as well–the Chinese military, after all, is subservient to the Chinese Communist Party, and Xi Jinping, as president, presides over the Central Military Commission.

    It turns out this may be more of how things are supposed to work in the Chinese military chain of command on paper. In reality, the “rogue” theorists may be right.

    New evidence supports the commonly held view that the Chinese military isn’t entirely in line with the party leadership. Recently, President Xi Jinping delivered a speech at the PLA headquarters in Beijing with PLA chiefs of staff present. Notably he delivered this speech following his return from his South Asia tour which featured a particularly interesting visit to India when PLA troops crossed intro India-administered Kashmir as Xi arrived in the country. In his speech, Xi unusually emphasized the importance of the PLA’s “absolute loyalty and firm faith in the Communist Party of China,” according to Xinhua.

    Further supporting the idea that there may be some commanders in the PLA who have acted without the consent of the party leadership, Xi emphasized the need for a “smooth chain of command” and called on field commanders to “make sure all decisions from the central leadership are fully implemented.” In a particularly telling paraphrasal, Xinhua notes that Xi suggested that “Military commanders should have a better understanding of international and domestic security situations as well as the latest military development.” According to Xinhua, Fang Fenghui, chief of the PLA general staff, was in attendance, along with other senior Chinese military leaders. A statement following Xi’s speech noted that “All PLA forces should follow the instructions of President Xi Jinping, also chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), and update their operations to meet new goals and missions set by the CMC.”

    In light of Xi’s remarks, it seems highly likely that PLA leaders have at times acted without the consent of the Communist Party’s senior leadership and, more critically, against the strategic vision of that same leadership. It is, of course, nearly impossible to ascertain the extent to which the PLA may have drifted from the party leadership without veering dangerously close to baseless speculation. All we know is that Xi Jinping, the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and the chairman of the Central Military Commission, felt it necessary to issue a statement to the People’s Liberation Army that, in effect, says “Please listen to me.”

    In light of Xi’s remarks, it may bear reconsidering the verity of, for example, him telling Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that he honestly did not know the details of the stand-off between Indian and Chinese troops in Kashmir as the two leaders met. The fact that Xi felt it necessary to deliver these remarks and issue a statement to the PLA immediately upon his return from India suggests that the Chinese incursion in Chumar may not have been carefully coordinated after all.

    The one oddity in all this is why we’re hearing about this speech at all. If Xi is truly concerned by lapses in China’s chain of command and fears that his leadership over the military is not absolute, why broadcast it via a report in state media? For a state apparatus so concerned with saving face, it’s somewhat curious that Beijing would choose to willingly broadcast these sorts of lapses in leadership to the outside world. Xi, like Hu Jintao before him, has issued statements expressing displeasure with the military before, but the frank language and the fact that the remarks were delivered following the incident in Kashmir between Indian and Chinese troops suggest that this time things might be different. One explanation might be that this speech and the report could be engineered specifically for consumption by the outside world. After all, given recent incidents involving Chinese troops in India, Southeast Asia, and the East China Sea, it may grant the leadership in Beijing some plausible deniability by suggesting that these actions were not sanctioned by the top leadership in Beijing. Of course, by the same token, this same admission makes Xi look weak in a way very much contrary to the image he has cultivated for himself (it is almost cliche to refer to Xi as anything but the 21st century reincarnation of Deng Xiaoping).

    Unfortunately for many of China’s neighbors, neither explanation of Chinese military behavior–be it top-down carefully planned strategy or “rogue” field commanders–is particularly comforting. Leaders and strategists in India, Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines, and the United States will be less interested in cracking open the black box that is the Chinese military and more interested in responding effectively to China’s increasingly assertive military behavior.
     
  2.  
  3. s002wjh

    s002wjh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,209
    Likes Received:
    126
    i have to disagree, china was complain about us spy on them for long time, i think the plane incident was calculate move in order to hope we can visit their coast less frequently
     
  4. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    422
    The author should have done couple things before writing this piece of crap, such as:
    history of civilian/military relationship in China;
    CCP's system in PLA;
    Chinese political tradition.
     
  5. mattster

    mattster Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    518
    Location:
    California
    @no smoking......I totally agree with your statement....nothing that the PLA does is random. It all orchestrated by the CCP leadership. But you forgot to add one more important point - let me do it for you.

    If this author (who appears to know diddly jack about the long history of India-China relations) had done his homework - he would know what every Indian who studies this relationship knows: that every single time a senior Chinese diplomat visits New Delhi....the very next day the PLA forces will be camped 20 miles inside the LAC.

    This timing of PLA intrusion deep into the Indian border to coincide with a visiting senior Chinese diplomat just as he is shaking hands with Indian leaders is the "single most telling aspect of the China-India relationship".

    no smoking - this behavior it is so consistent that you can bet your house on it. I guess "shame" is simply not in the Chinese DNA.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  6. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    There is no going rogue in China.

    It is the Laogai or the gallows or the firing squad for all deviants from the laid down Communist pecking order.
     
  7. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    422
    It is funny to hear an Indian talking about "shame" on Sino-India relationship:
    They claim "being back stabbed" in spite of their provocation of "forward policy";
    They are crying "invaded" while their own troops cross the LOC every day;
    They scream about "harassment" while this harassment is the result of their attempt of breaking the mutual understanding--no permanent building in overlap area.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  8. Kshatriya87

    Kshatriya87 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,726
    Likes Received:
    3,165
    Location:
    Mumbai
    1. Our army didn't cross, yours did.
    2. A hut is not a permanent building.
     
  9. Srinivas_K

    Srinivas_K Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    3,351
    Explain why Xi ordered the PLA units to retreat and obey orders and changed the commanders in Aksai Chin??
     
  10. Illusive

    Illusive Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,335
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    Who Sabotaged Chinese President Xi Jinping's India Visit?

     
    pmaitra likes this.
  11. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,172
    Likes Received:
    422
    Of course, according to Indian definition, the whole area belongs to India, how can you cross your "own territory".

    That is just a starting.
     
  12. Illusive

    Illusive Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    2,335
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    According to the 1996 LAC agreement between India and China,"No activities of either side shall overstep the line of actual control." This trespassing by chinese is a violation of this agreement, so what you think, believe or dream doesn't matter, whats signed in this agreement matters.

    But honouring agreement is a trait shared by civilized society, which is clearly missing in these commies.
     
  13. Kshatriya87

    Kshatriya87 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,726
    Likes Received:
    3,165
    Location:
    Mumbai

    This is just starting? After over 4 decades we build a hut and you think we are starting to build permanent structures? Why would we wait for 4 decades for that? Besides, China started a long time back. You have already built roads right up to your posts and were extending them into Indian territory. But fortunately, the Indian army stopped you. This incidence is nothing but a angry kid's idea of revenge.
     
  14. Sylex21

    Sylex21 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    326
    Location:
    USA
    Anyone know if the unsuccessful resolution of the LOAC is more of an issue on the Indian or Chinese side, or both? I assume since China is currently in a stronger position militarily and economically it would be a hesitation on China's side? However China has more to gain in peace with India due to it facing multiple and more formidable potential adversaries than India.
     

Share This Page