CHINA MARITIME STUDIES INSTITUTE 

U.S. NAVAL WAR COLLEGE 

Newport, Rhode Island

Chinese Civil-Military Relations 

in the Post-Deng Era

www.usnwc.edu/Research---Gaming/China-Maritime-Studies-Institute.aspx

Implications for Crisis Management 

and Naval Modernization

Nan Li
Naval War College

Newport, Rhode Island 

Center for Naval Warfare Studies 

China Maritime Study No. 4 

January 2010

President, Naval War College

Rear Admiral James P. Wisecup, U.S. Navy

Provost

Amb. Mary Ann Peters

Dean of Naval Warfare Studies

Robert C. Rubel

Director of China Maritime Studies Institute

Dr. Lyle J. Goldstein

Naval War College Press

Director: Dr. Carnes Lord 

Managing Editor: Pelham G. Boyer

Telephone: 401.841.2236 

Fax: 401.841.3579 

DSN exchange: 948 

E-mail: press@usnwc.edu 

Web: www.usnwc.edu/press 

www.twitter.com/NavalWarCollege

Printed in the United States of America

The China Maritime Studies are extended research projects 

that the editor, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the 

President of the Naval War College consider of particular 

interest to policy makers, scholars, and analysts. 

Correspondence concerning the China Maritime Studies 

may be addressed to the director of the China Maritime 

Studies Institute, www.usnwc.edu/Research---Gaming/ 

China-Maritime-Studies-Institute.aspx. To request additional copies or subscription consideration, please direct 

inquiries to the President, Code 32A, Naval War College, 

686 Cushing Road, Newport, Rhode Island 02841-1207, 

or contact the Press staff at the telephone, fax, or e-mail 

addresses given.

Reproduction and printing is subject to the Copyright Act 

of 1976 and applicable treaties of the United States. This 

document may be freely reproduced for academic or other 

noncommercial use; however, it is requested that reproductions credit the author and China Maritime Studies series 

and that the Press editorial office be informed. To obtain 

permission to reproduce this publication for commercial 

purposes, contact the Press editorial office.

ISSN 1943-0817

ISBN 978-1-884733-73-4


The views elaborated herein are those of the author alone and do not represent the 

official viewpoints of the U.S. Navy or any other agency of the U.S. government. The 

author thanks Pelham Boyer, Andrew Erickson, Lyle Goldstein, and Jonathan Pollack 

for their helpful comments, but he is solely responsible for any shortcomings in the 

monograph.

Photographs are from People’s Daily, Liberation Army Pictorials, and Modern Navy, all 

publications of the Chinese government.

Analytical Questions

This study addresses two analytical questions: What has changed in Chinese civilmilitary relations during the post–Deng Xiaoping era? What are the implications of 

this change for China’s crisis management and its naval modernization?

Why Important? 

Addressing these questions is important for three major reasons. First, because the 

People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is a party army, it is commonly assumed that its primary function is domestic politics—that is, to participate in party leadership factional 

politics and to defend the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) against political opposition 

from Chinese society. For the past twenty years, however, the PLA has not been employed by such party leaders as Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao against political opposition 

from either the CCP or Chinese society. The PLA’s ground force, which is manpowerintensive and therefore the most appropriate service for domestic politics, has been 

continuously downsized. Technology and capital-intensive services that are appropriate 

for force projection to the margins of China and beyond and for strategic deterrence 

but are inappropriate for domestic politics—such as the PLA Navy (PLAN), the PLA Air 

Force (PLAAF), and the Second Artillery (the strategic missile force)—have been more 

privileged in China’s military modernization drive.1

 This study, by examining change in 

Chinese civil-military relations, undertakes to resolve this analytical puzzle.

Second, China’s civil-military interagency coordination in crisis management during the 

post-Deng era has remained an area of speculation, for lack of both information and 

careful analysis. By analyzing change in Chinese civil-military relations, this study aims 

to shed some light on this analytical puzzle as well. 

Finally, the PLAN was previously marginalized within the PLA, partly because the latter was largely preoccupied with domestic issues and politics, where the PLAN is not 

especially useful. By exploring change in Chinese civil-military relations, this study also 

attempts to explain why during the post-Deng era the PLAN has become more important in China’s military policy. 

Chinese Civil-Military Relations in the Post-Deng Era 

Implications for Crisis Management and Naval Modernization
2 china maritime studies

Background: Legacies of Mao and Deng

Traditional analysis of China’s civil-military relations assumes that the relationship 

between the CCP and the PLA remains symbiotic, without functional differentiation 

or technical specialization–based institutional boundaries. Such a symbiosis has been 

attributed to Mao Zedong’s reliance on a strategy of manpower-based mass mobilization 

rather than functional and technical specialization–based expertise and administrative 

efficacy for his revolutionary agenda and post-revolutionary development. A product 

of civil war and revolution, the PLA was naturally an integral part of Mao’s strategy. 

Party-army “symbiosis” did not imply the lack of political dynamics; on the contrary, 

political rivalries and alignments were rampant in the Mao years and immediately after. 

But rather than party-army institutional boundaries, highly personalized leadership factions defined these rivalries and allegiances, which cut across and weakened further the 

party-army boundaries. That is, a few political-military factions engaged in a zero-sum 

struggle for political power.2

The rise of Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s, however, led to the replacement of Mao’s 

revolutionary agenda with a nation-building project of “four modernizations”—

modernizing industry, agriculture, science and technology, and national defense. It was 

recognized that technical expertise and administrative efficiency based on a division of 

labor are indispensable for such tasks. As a result, functional differentiation and technical specialization have been promoted. Institutional boundaries between the party and 

Photo 1. Mao met with PLAN sailors in 1953. But the PLAN was largely neglected by Mao 

because he wanted “politics to take command” in the PLA.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 3

the army became clearer, so that the latter could enjoy more institutional autonomy to 

pursue its functional and technical expertise. This trend was reflected in the downsizing of the PLA by a million billets during 1985–87, the reduction of its role in domestic 

party and societal politics, the decline of cross-boundary circulation of elites, and the 

concentration of the armed forces on the military-technical tasks of modernization.3

There was, however, one caveat. At the top leadership level, such as the Central Military 

Commission (CMC), Deng’s informal and personal influence remained substantial and 

institutional prerequisites were not so important. Deng, for instance, held the position of 

CMC chair from 1981 to 1989, though he did not hold the position of the CCP general 

secretary from 1981 to 1987 or any party or state portfolio between 1987 and 1989. 

Deng’s command of the military was based largely on his revolutionary and military credentials, as well as his status and prestige as one of the founders of the People’s Republic 

of China and the PLA. Moreover, Deng appointed to key CMC positions close allies, like 

Yang Shangkun (CMC vice chair from 1981 to 1992 and CMC secretary general from 

1981 to 1989) and such pre-1949 Second Field Army (where Deng served as political 

commissar) comrades as Qin Jiwei (CMC member and defense minister from 1987 to 

1992), Liu Huaqing (CMC deputy secretary general 1987–89 and CMC vice chair 1989–

97), and Yang Baibin (CMC member 1987–89 and CMC secretary general 1989–92). 

These personal factors prompted Deng to employ the PLA covertly against political 

opponents within the party, such as Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang, and explicitly against 

threats from society such as the popular rebellion in Beijing in the summer of 1989. The 

Photo 2. Deng reviewing PLA troops on 1 October 1984.
4 china maritime studies

PLA’s intervention in 1989 led some scholars to argue that the emphasis of China’s civilmilitary relations had shifted from military tasks to politics.4

 Based on similar logic, the 

conventional wisdom suggests that Jiang Zemin, as the CMC chair 1989–2004, employed 

the PLA largely for factional struggle against political opponents within the CCP leadership, particularly in times of power transition.5

Useful Concepts

The mobilization of armed forces against domestic political opposition or inserting 

them into domestic politics constitutes what Samuel Huntington calls “subjective control,” which aims to enhance civilian power by a “divide and rule” strategy of “politicizing” the military. It is also intended to preempt such major military interventions as 

coups. Subjective control is based on the premise that undesirable military intervention 

in politics is caused not by weak or failed civilian governance but rather by excessive 

institutional autonomy and professionalism of the military, fostering managerial ability, 

an ethos of public service, and internal cohesiveness and inculcating with the “military 

mind” skepticism regarding politicians.6

“Objective control,” in contrast, intends to enhance the institutional autonomy and 

professionalism of the military. It is based on the premise that coups and the like are in 

fact caused by weak or failed civilian governance or by the inability of civilian authorities to resolve major socioeconomic, political, or foreign-policy crises. It is not a product 

of military professionalism, because the military is mainly a conservative organization 

that prefers narrow functional and technical expertise to the broad and complex area of 

politics.7

 In that view, the best strategy to preempt undesirable military intervention in 

politics is to enhance civilian governance, not to “politicize” the military.

Central Argument

This study argues that rather than employing the PLA against political opponents from 

within the CCP and Chinese society as suggested by the conventional wisdom, postDeng leaders—Jiang and Hu—have prevented the PLA from intervening in intra-CCP 

and intra-societal political struggle, by changing the dominant paradigm of Chinese 

civil-military relations from subjective control to “objective control with Chinese characteristics.” Such a change, in turn, has major implications for Chinese crisis management 

and naval modernization. 

To flesh out the central argument, this study makes four specific subarguments. First, 

Jiang’s policies with regard to the PLA were similar to what Huntington calls “objective 

control”—that is, tending on the civilian side to enhance civilian governance, or the 

CCP’s legitimacy to rule, and on the military side promoting functional and technical 

expertise, or professionalization of the PLA. Both policies helped to maintain 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 5

civil-military boundaries and contributed to the PLA’s internal cohesion. While there is 

an element of subjective control in employing the PLA for power transition and consolidation, mobilizing it into factional rivalries among the CCP central leadership and 

in Chinese society, which would have eroded civil-military boundaries and fractured the 

military’s cohesion, was clearly not the primary purpose of Jiang’s approach to managing the Chinese armed forces. 

Second, Hu Jintao’s policies regarding the PLA, since he succeeded Jiang as the CMC 

chair in 2004, have represented not only continuity with Jiang’s policies but also a 

significant step in the trend toward objective control, mainly in terms of externalizing 

the PLA.8

 That is, Hu has required the military to fulfill externally oriented missions that 

were absent under Jiang: to secure China’s newly emerging interests in outer, maritime, 

and electromagnetic space, and to contribute to world peace by participating in peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance.

Third, while clearer institutional boundaries may have contributed significantly to the 

cohesion and professionalization of the PLA, increased civil-military bifurcation has also 

led to pronounced tensions in interagency coordination for crisis management. Such 

tensions were more or less evident in such foreign policy crises or events as the EP-3 incident in 2001, China’s antisatellite (ASAT) test in early 2007, the intrusion of a Chinese 

submarine into Japanese territorial waters while submerged, China’s refusal to allow the 

U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk to visit Hong Kong in late 2007, and the USNS Impeccable incident in 2009. They became particularly acute, however, in a domestic crisis of 

2009, the Sichuan earthquake. That situation was further exacerbated by a lack of appropriate PLA force structure, equipment, and training for nonwar military operations. 

Remedies have been introduced to correct these deficiencies, but major issues remain 

unresolved. 

Finally, the PLA Navy is probably the biggest institutional beneficiary of the shift toward 

objective control and “externalization,” partly because it is one of the most technologyintensive services, and partly because of the specific environment in which it operates 

and the functions it is supposed to fulfill. The promotion of the PLAN by the central 

civilian leadership and the PLAN’s skillful leveraging of that promotion are also likely to 

contribute to its increased importance in China’s military modernization. 

Organization

This study has six sections, of which the first is the present introduction. The second 

and third sections address Jiang’s and Hu’s policies with regard to the PLA. The fourth 

discusses civil-military tensions in interagency coordination in crisis management 

stemming from increasing civil-military bifurcation, as well as the prospects for remedies. The fifth section examines the naval implications of objective control and 
6 china maritime studies

externalization. The concluding section summarizes the findings and discusses the analytical implications.

Jiang and the PLA

Analysts agree that though he had no service experience and few close connections in 

the PLA, Jiang was quite successful in consolidating his power, by exploiting his position as the CMC chair. The CMC chair has the final say regarding all major military 

decisions, including appointing senior officers, allocating the budget, deploying troops, 

and controlling the employment of nuclear weapons. Jiang was able to win support 

from PLA senior officers mainly because he was able to employ his formal position 

to promote many of them to higher ranks and to increase the defense budget, which 

translated into higher salaries and better living conditions for the military. Jiang was also 

quite adept in cultivating and maintaining good relations with all the informal groupings within the PLA leadership, as well as with lower levels, by showing respect for PLA 

elders, listening to officers’ concerns on major issues, honoring PLA heroes and traditions, and conducting regular inspection tours of basic-level PLA units.9

Why Power Consolidation? 

Some argue that the primary purpose of Jiang’s power consolidation in the PLA was 

to employ the military against political threats and opponents from within the CCP 

Photo 3. Jiang visits with PLAN sailors and officers on 23 December 2000.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 7

Name Position Date 

of 

Birth

Provincial 

Origin

Education Unit Origin Military Expertise/ 

Combat Experience

Jiang 

Zemin

Chair 1926 Jiangsu Shanghai 

Jiaotong 

University

None None

Hu Jintao First vice 

chair since 

1999

1942 Anhui Qinghua 

University

None None

Zhang 

Wannian

Vice chair 1928 Shandong Nanjing 

Military 

College

41st Army, 

Guangzhou 

Military 

Region (MR)

Command and staff, 

infantry/Civil War

Chi 

Haotian

Vice chair 1929 Shandong PLA General 

Advanced 

Infantry 

School

27th Army, 

Beijing MR

Command and staff, 

infantry/Civil War and 

Korean War

Fu 

Quanyou 

Chief of 

General 

Staff 

Department 

(GSD)

1930 Shanxi Nanjing 

Military 

College

1st Army, 

Wuhan MR

Command and staff, 

infantry/Civil War and 

Korean War

Yu Yongbo Director 

of General 

Political 

Department 

(GPD)

1931 Liaoning PLA Fourth 

Political 

Cadre School

42nd Army, 

Guangzhou 

MR

Political work/Civil 

War and Korean War

Wang Ke Director 

of General 

Logistics 

Department 

(GLD) 

1931 Anhui PLA Military 

College 

21st Army, 

Lanzhou MR 

Command and staff, 

infantry/Civil War and 

Korean War

Cao 

Gangchuan

Director 

of General 

Armament 

Department 

(GAD)

1935 Henan Artillery 

Engineering 

School, Soviet 

Union

General 

departments

Military engineering 

and administration

Wang 

Ruilin

Deputy 

GPD 

director

1930 Shandong High school Confidential 

staff, Fourth 

Field Army

Confidential work

Guo 

Boxiong

Deputy 

chief of 

GSD and 

member 

since 1999

1942 Shaanxi PLA Military 

College, 

Beijing

19th Army, 

Lanzhou MR

Command and staff, 

infantry

Xu Caihou Deputy 

GPD 

director and 

member 

since 1999

1943 Liaoning Harbin 

Military 

Engineering 

Institute

Jilin Military 

District, 

Shenyang 

MR

Political work

Table 1. Central Military Commission of the Fifteenth CCP Congress (1997–2002)
8 china maritime studies

leadership and from Chinese society, lessons learned from the power struggles under 

Mao and from the military suppression of the popular rebellion in Tian’anmen of 1989. 

Such an argument, however, produces an analytical puzzle. During Jiang’s fifteen years 

as the CMC chair (1989–2004), the PLA was in fact not employed to suppress domestic 

social unrest, the major type of threat from society.10 Regarding political threats and 

opponents from within the CCP leadership, evidence of PLA intervention in intraparty 

factionalism struggles at Jiang’s invitation is sketchy. The only evidence produced so far 

is the alleged collective support by senior officers of Jiang’s retention of the CMC chair 

position at the Sixteenth CCP Congress of November 2002. In this instance, Hu Jintao, 

who succeeded Jiang as the CCP general secretary, was assumed to be a potential political threat and opponent to Jiang.11 Some also suggest power struggles between Jiang and 

Hu over the role of the PLA in the SARS crisis and with respect to a submarine accident 

that occurred in 2003.12 Jiang’s promotion of a few senior officers, including his chief 

bodyguard You Xigui, to the rank of general in June 2004 was also interpreted as preparation for a power struggle against Hu.13

Though plausible, such evidence is inconclusive. The alleged collective petition by senior 

officers for Jiang to stay as the CMC chair is highly unlikely, for several reasons. Most of 

the uniformed CMC members—Zhang Wannian, Chi Haotian, Fu Quanyou, Yu Yongbo, 

Wang Ke, and Wang Ruilin, for instance—were to retire at the Sixteenth Congress. They 

had no special incentive to sponsor a petition to keep Jiang as the CMC chair or to 

encourage their subordinates to do so. New uniformed members, such as Liang 

Guanglie, Liao Xilong, and Li Ji’nai, were too new to sponsor such a petition.14 Also, 

military and CCP discipline forbid senior officers (who are also party members) from 

organizing such a “collective action”; it is doubtful that anyone would want to risk his 

career to engage in politically incorrect behavior. Complaints from senior officers about 

the “two power centers” have been reported.15 This contradicts the assertion that senior 

officers preferred Jiang to stay on as CMC chair while Hu took over as the CCP general 

secretary. 

It was actually Hu who proposed to the CCP Politburo that Jiang stay on, to help him 

make a successful transition.16 It is likely that Hu, as the first CMC vice chair since 1999, 

consulted the remaining military professionals in the CMC (such as Cao Gangchuan, 

Guo Boxiong, and Xu Caihou) and gained their support before he made the proposal. 

Jiang stayed on also to push for what he calls “new military revolution” (新军事革命), 

or a revolution in military affairs (RMA)–based transformation of the PLA, against the 

vested interests.17 Not yet equipped with the political capital that Jiang enjoyed with the 

PLA, Hu would have found this agenda more difficult to accomplish had he become the 

CMC chair in 2002. This suggests Jiang actually stayed on for two more years to help Hu, 

not compete against him. 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 9

There were other institutional limits on the extent of Jiang’s power consolidation in the 

PLA and on his use of this power. It is usually argued that Jiang won personal loyalty by 

appointing a large number of senior officers. But these appointments can be attributed 

to reasons other than Jiang’s intention to consolidate power. PLA Officers’ Service Regulations requires authorization by the CMC chair for the appointment of officers at and 

above the divisional command, or senior colonel, level. As a result, Jiang would inevitably have been responsible for a large number of such appointments; he served as the 

CMC chair for fifteen years, the PLA is a large bureaucracy with many senior positions 

to be filled in so long a period, and higher personnel turnover has resulted from new 

term and age limits. Also, the candidates for these appointments were recommended 

by the military professionals in the CMC, not picked by Jiang.18 He interviewed some 

of the senior candidates, but his knowledge of them was limited by the little time they 

spent together. As a result, personal ties were not especially strong. Officers would fulfill 

Name Position Date 

of 

Birth

Provincial 

Origin

Education Unit Origin Military Expertise/

Combat Experience

Jiang 

Zemin (see 

table 1 for 

information) 

Chair 

Hu Jintao 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

First vice 

chair 

Guo Boxiong 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Vice chair

Cao 

Gangchuan 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Vice chair

Liang 

Guanglie

GSD chief 1940 Sichuan PLA Military 

College, 

Beijing

1st Army, 

Wuhan MR

Command and staff, 

infantry/War with 

Vietnam (1979–89) 

Xu Caihou 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

GPD 

director 

Liao Xilong GLD 

director

1940 Guizhou PLA Military 

College, 

Beijing

11th Army, 

Kunming 

MR

Command and staff, 

infantry/War with 

Vietnam 

Li Ji’nai GAD 

director

1942 Shandong Harbin 

Polytechnic 

University

Base 52 

(Anhui), 

Second 

Artillery

Political work

Table 2. Central Military Commission of the Sixteenth CCP Congress (2002–September 2004)
10 china maritime studies

military tasks on Jiang’s orders; however, without Deng’s credentials, Jiang might have 

been unsure that they would follow an order from him to shoot unarmed civilians in 

another crisis on the scale of Tian’anmen. 

From the officers’ perspective, Jiang was to be supported and obeyed because he was 

the commander in chief. But when Hu became the CMC chair in September 2004, their 

support and obedience shifted to Hu, as shown by the behavior of Cao Gangchuan, Guo 

Boxiong, and Xu Caihou.19 Guo and Xu are alleged Jiang “loyalists” but have not been 

replaced by a new entourage of Hu “loyalists”; to that extent, retention, removal, and 

new appointments of senior PLA officers are apparently more regularized by institutional and professional criteria (such as term and age limits and performance) than by 

the personal connections with and loyalty to individual party leaders. Finally, because 

rank affects remuneration and privileges after retirement, sometimes a decision by the 

commander in chief to promote officers to higher rank simply expresses appreciation of 

their services, by offering better material conditions for retirement. This can particularly 

explain such June 2004 appointments as You Xigui. Also, that announcement was made 

jointly by Jiang and Hu. This indicates that the transfer of power would take place soon, 

but not that there would be a power struggle between Jiang and Hu.

Defense budget increases also cannot be explained by power consolidation alone. The 

1991 Gulf War showed how large the technological gap had become between the most 

advanced militaries and the PLA, a gap that could be narrowed only by budget increases. 

The 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis and the possibility of U.S. intervention added a degree of 

urgency to the need to upgrade PLA capabilities, which would cost money. The post1998 divestiture of the PLA from business activities led to a shortfall in income that had 

Photo 4. Jiang and Hu speak to PLA delegates attending the second annual meeting of the 10th 

National People’s Congress on 11 March 2004.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 11

to be offset by budget increases. In late 2002, the CMC endorsed a shift in emphasis of 

military modernization from mechanization to RMA-based informatization. This made 

digitized operational platforms the top priorities for acquisition. Because these items are 

technology-intensive, they are also capital-intensive and therefore require more financial 

investment. In the meantime, the Chinese economy had been growing rapidly since the 

early 1990s, which made it easier to argue for more spending on national defense. All 

these points were articulated and socialized by China’s military planners in lobbying 

civilian leaders for defense budget increases. The resulting budget growth has continued since the retirement of Jiang from the CMC in 2004, suggesting that the policy has 

broader roots than would a crude ploy by Jiang to win support from military leaders.

Objective Control: The Civilian Side

If power struggle is not the primary purpose of power consolidation in the PLA, what 

is? Jiang’s power consolidation aimed at implementing two types of policies. The first 

was to enhance party-state governance, or the legitimacy of CCP rule, by promoting economic growth and social stability. This would reduce the need to mobilize the PLA into 

domestic politics. The second was to confine the PLA to narrow military-technical tasks. 

Both approaches helped to maintain civil-military boundaries and enhance the cohesion 

of the PLA. In his writings, Jiang particularly stressed the importance of the functional 

specialization–based division of labor as society developed.20 This was also a major lesson from the 1989 Tian’anmen incident and the collapse of communism in the Soviet 

Union and Eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991.

The CCP’s dependence on military force in Tian’anmen for its survival, for instance, indicated the failure of the party-state to resolve major socioeconomic crises and implied 

its inability to manage social protests other than by such lethal means as tanks and submachine guns. This had contributed to a decline of the CCP’s legitimacy to rule. Also, 

there are indications that the PLA was reluctant to get involved in the suppression of 

the rebellion, mainly because its image would be damaged.21 Even for Deng, the task of 

persuading the PLA to intervene may have been far from easy, and it is likely that he had 

to exhaust much of his political capital to accomplish it. As we have noted, new leaders 

like Jiang do not possess the revolutionary and military credentials that Deng did, so 

they are not confident that the military would take their side in another such crisis. In 

the popular revolts that ended communist rule in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, 

rather than taking the party’s side, the military mostly defied its orders.22 This means the 

party’s reliance on military force for its survival may not necessarily guarantee success 

but may quicken the demise of party rule instead. 

These concerns explain why, at the Fourteenth CCP Congress of 1992, Jiang replaced the 

post-1989 policy of military control and ideological indoctrination with a new policy 
12 china maritime studies

of economic growth, a policy also associated with Deng’s southern tour in early 1992.23

It was intended to enhance the legitimacy of CCP rule by increasing income, improving 

living standards, and providing employment opportunities for the millions of people 

joining the labor force every year. It also helped to generate revenue needed for preventing and preempting crises. Strategies have been developed to manage social protests 

stemming from the downsides of rapid economic growth, such as massive urban 

unemployment due to reform of state-owned enterprises, overtaxation of the peasants, 

rampant corruption, wealth polarization, and environmental degradation. These strategies range from soft approaches (such as meeting the demands of the protesters and 

improving institutions for monitoring, expressing, and resolving grievances before they 

escalate) to hard ones (arresting politically conscious organizers and isolating and containing protests to prevent them from evolving into larger, better organized movements 

that challenge the CCP). Similarly, the People’s Armed Police (PAP), which is primarily 

responsible for maintaining domestic social stability, has been substantially strengthened, and riot-control units with nonlethal weapons like tear gas and rubber bullets have 

been developed and deployed.24 All these have reduced the need to mobilize the PLA 

against domestic political opposition.

Objective Control: The Military Side

On the military side, Jiang aimed to confine the PLA to military-technical tasks. For 

instance, he endorsed in 1993 the new PLA strategic principle of preparing for local 

war under high-tech conditions, in 1995 operationalizing the principle into a policy to 

transform the PLA from a manpower-intensive force to a technology-based one. He introduced the concept of “leapfrogging development” (跨越式发展) in 1997, shifting, as 

noted above, the emphasis of military modernization from mechanization (that is, adding new hardware platforms) to informatization (developing information technologies–

based network and software) to narrow the technological gap with the more advanced 

militaries of the world. This led to the CMC’s endorsement of a policy of “dual construction” (双化建设), referring to mechanization and informatization, in late 2002.25

These technology-centric policies led to decisions to downsize the PLA by five hundred 

thousand billets in 1997 and another two hundred thousand in 2002. 

Because bureaucracies and the ground force, or the elements most likely to become 

involved in domestic politics, suffered the most from the cuts, these decisions erected 

more technological barriers between the PLA and domestic politics. It is, for instance, 

more difficult to employ in situations of domestic turbulence such technology-intensive 

services as the PLAN, the PLAAF, and Second Artillery. The cuts, however, were unpopular in the PLA, because they eliminated numerous billets, particularly in sectors that 

believed in manpower-based people’s war and mechanized warfare. Jiang was able to 

make these decisions after 1997 mainly because he felt his power was more secure than it 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 13

had been, as support from the top PLA leadership had become more solid with the death 

of Deng and the retirement of “old guards” like Liu Huaqing and Zhang Zhen from the 

CMC in 1997. By removing major bureaucratic obstacles, these decisions made it easier 

for Hu, in his turn, to consolidate power in the PLA when he assumed power. This shows 

that the relationship between Jiang and Hu was actually more cooperative than competitive.

Another major decision endorsed by Jiang and supervised by Hu for implementation after 1997 was to divest the PLA from its business activities, in 1998. This policy 

significantly reduced the domestic role of the PLA, so that it could focus on its militarytechnical tasks. Jiang has written that from the day he became the CMC chair, he wanted 

to get the PLA out of commercial business.26 He was unable at first to do so, apparently 

because it had been more or less Deng’s decision to allow the PLA to go into business;27

many children of the PLA elders were involved, and military units were poorly funded 

otherwise. But after 1997 Jiang felt sufficiently secure to introduce this policy without 

fear of displeasing Deng and the PLA elders; also, the PLA’s business had grown to the 

extent that it began to negatively affect the normal functioning of the national economy, 

and Zhu Rongji, the then premier, was particularly concerned. Furthermore, rapid 

economic growth had made it possible to allocate more funding to the PLA. Moreover, 

the policy presented itself as a good political strategy to control the PLA through control 

of the purse, by cutting off its extrabudgetary income. The policy would also help to 

reduce bickering over distribution of funds and the incidence of corruption cases among 

officers, thus enhancing the internal cohesion of the PLA. Finally, the policy resolved a 

thorny issue that may have complicated Hu’s journey to power. This is clearly another 

example of cooperation between Jiang and Hu to develop military policy.

Hu and the PLA

Like Jiang, Hu took over, in 2002, the position of CCP general secretary with weak 

military credentials, having no service experience and few close connections in the PLA. 

Hu, however, had been the first CMC vice chair since 1999 and therefore had developed 

good relations with Jiang and the military professionals in the commission. His strategy 

initially was to employ Jiang to help him to deal with the PLA. In a “grand bargain,” he 

invited Jiang to continue as CMC chair after shedding his other party-state positions. 

Hu needed more experience in running the state and the economy and therefore wanted 

Jiang to preside over military affairs and foreign policy, where Jiang had more experience.28 Deng had set a precedent of serving as CMC chair without other party or state 

portfolios for two years, beginning in 1987. 

The strategy also represented a goodwill gesture to Jiang, who seemed eager to show 

that he was just as competent a commander in chief as his predecessors, if not more so. 

Partly to return the favor, Jiang endorsed the RMA-based transformation, leading to 
14 china maritime studies

the elimination of a large number of senior billets. This benefited Hu, because it made 

it easier for him to consolidate power in the PLA in the near future. Jiang stayed rather 

low-key and refrained from interfering in Hu’s running of state affairs. By 2003, Jiang 

had handed over the foreign-affairs and Taiwan-affairs leadership positions to Hu. Hu 

had also begun to preside over major CMC decisions. At a CCP plenum in September 

2004, Jiang volunteered to resign from the CMC chair, and Hu took over. More or less as 

a reciprocal gesture, Hu codified Jiang’s theory of “three represents” (the party as representing the most advanced productive forces, culture, and the interests of the broadest 

masses) into the state constitution and published the Selected Works of Jiang Zemin for 

all CCP members to study. 

Partly because Jiang held the CMC chair until 2004, and partly because the PLA had 

become more professional under Jiang and therefore less politically inclined, Hu did 

not focus particularly on consolidating his position in the PLA after 2002 by cultivating 

personalized relations with senior officers or making personnel changes. Instead, Hu’s 

policies have largely centered on objective control—that is, enhancing civilian governance, thus the CCP’s legitimacy to rule, and endorsing programs that confine the PLA 

to its military-technical and external tasks. Both have helped him consolidate power in 

the PLA. 

Objective Control: The Civilian Side

On the civilian side, Hu has attempted to reverse the excesses of single-minded economic growth, such as the widening of the income gap (which has led to serious social 

tension), lack of social security for large numbers of marginalized groups, official graft, 

and environmental damage. Hu believes that these issues cannot be resolved by more 

economic growth or riot-control techniques alone but rather require dedicated social 

policies. Otherwise, they could render economic growth unsustainable, thus undermining the CCP’s legitimacy to rule, possibly triggering socioeconomic and political crises 

and military intervention. Hu has worked closely with the premier, Wen Jiabao, to divert 

investment from the rich coastal regions to the less developed heartland and the west, reduce tax burdens on farmers, remove restrictive regulations on migrant workers, develop 

basic social and medical safety nets for the poor and unemployed, fight corruption on a 

more substantial scale, and require “green” gross-domestic-product growth as a criterion 

for the career advancement of local officials. 

It is still too early to determine the success of these policies, because vested interests 

at both the central and local levels have been recalcitrant, and some measures cannot succeed without genuine political reform. The 2008 financial crisis has also cast a 

shadow, by making job creation the top priority. But Hu and Wen’s policies have proved 

immensely popular among the ordinary people in China, and contributed to the image 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 15

of the CCP leadership as having a heart and a human touch. The perception of fair and 

competent governance has clearly enhanced the CCP’s legitimacy. This has helped to 

consolidate Hu’s control over the PLA as well, because it has enhanced Hu’s popularity 

among PLA officers and in the ranks.29 Also the image of competent civilian governance 

reduces the preconditions needed for PLA intervention in politics.

As to maintaining social stability, Hu has continued Jiang’s policy of minimizing the 

use of force. To deal with the numerous “mass incidents” (群体事件) concerning land 

and property compensation and environmental grievances, officials at various levels are 

required to increase transparency, conduct “face to face” explanation, employ persuasion, avoid “politicization” of reasonable economic and livelihood-related demands but 

meet them, and refrain from employing public security and PAP forces, which tend to 

escalate tension. Officials are also required, after resolution of incidents, to draw lessons 

from them, penalize accountable individuals, and formulate new “rectification plans.”30

To implement this policy, about 2,800 party secretaries and two thousand secretaries of 

party disciplinary inspection commissions, all at the county level, were brought to Beijing’s Central Party School, the State Administration College, and the CCP Central Disciplinary Inspection Commission (CDIC) training center for instruction in investigating 

graft and abuse of power by basic-level (township and village) officials—offenses that 

are major triggers of mass incidents. Similarly, 3,080 public security bureau directors 

and 3,500 prosecutors, also from the county level, traveled to Beijing for training in how 

to prevent and control, and not escalate, mass incidents and how to “harmonize policepeople relations.”31 Moreover, the CCP Central Committee and the State Council have 

recently issued regulations on penalizing and removing officials for major cases of misconduct, including mismanagement practices that trigger mass incidents.32 Similarly, the 

CCP CDIC has recently issued regulations on inspection and supervision at the county 

level, aimed at bureaucratic misconduct.33 Furthermore, domestic surveillance apparatuses, such as the First Bureau (domestic security) of the Ministry of Public Security and 

the Ministry of State Security, have been strengthened to preempt mass incidents.34 Millions of surveillance cameras are also planned for China’s rural communities.35 Similarly, 

the PAP has continuously been reinforced to deal with domestic security threats. As the 

PLA continues to downsize, more infantry divisions are likely to be converted into PAP 

quick-reaction units.36 All these measures have reduced the need to employ the military 

against domestic political threats and opposition.

A caveat to the PLA’s relative detachment from handling domestic security threats 

concerns its involvement in suppressing the unrest in Tibet in March 2008. It is important, however, to note that the military units involved were relatively few and small 

in size and that their involvements were brief. Also, these units deliberately stayed in 

the background so that the PAP units could take the lead, mainly providing protected 
16 china maritime studies

transportation to the PAP personnel with their armored personnel carriers. Also, the 

denial of Chinese government spokesmen of the presence of military personnel in Lhasa 

and the effort made to conceal the license plates of military vehicles at the site showed 

that the regime is concerned about the negative image of employing the PLA against domestic political opposition.37 Moreover, in the eyes of many both in and outside China, 

the unsettled issues concerning Tibet have both domestic and external, not purely domestic, origins, particularly as compared with hinterland provinces. Finally, in the most 

recent riot, in Ürümqi of Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, on 5 July 2009, PAP 

reinforcement was transported or airlifted by civilian airlines from provinces of Gansu, 

Jiangsu, Henan, and Fujian to Ürümqi to “maintain stability” (维稳). No evidence, however, shows that any PLA active-service unit was directly employed.38

These policies could not have been possible without a high level of consensus, based on 

power consolidation, among the CCP leadership. This consolidation and consensus are 

possible mainly because without a strongman like Deng, institutional positions become 

especially important, and Hu, holding the positions of CCP general secretary and state 

president, is “the first among equals.” Hu is also assisted by Wen, who heads the State 

Council, the most influential institution dealing with nonmilitary affairs in China. Jiang, 

though he still held the CMC chair position for a time, was not comparable to Deng in 

credentials, status, or prestige; therefore, the position confined him narrowly to military 

affairs. Also, Hu’s policies are articulated as a further development of Jiang’s policy of 

economic growth, not as an affront to Jiang’s legacy. Both Jiang and Hu want economic 

growth to sustain the CCP’s legitimacy to rule. But Hu wants to add a “human face” to 

the growth so that it can be more balanced and better sustained. These policies are also 

popular. Both made it more difficult for Jiang to mobilize his Shanghai colleagues in the 

Politburo Standing Committee against these policies. 

Also, Zeng Qinghong, an alleged loyalist of Jiang from Shanghai, jumped on Hu’s bandwagon, because Hu holds formal leadership positions, is popular, and thus represents the 

future.39 Jiang’s other allies, like Wu Bangguo and Jia Qinglin, are of mediocre political 

acumen and not likely to challenge Hu, and the institutions they head, the National 

People’s Congress and the National People’s Political Consultative Conference, are not 

highly influential over policies. Jiang’s inability to salvage his Shanghai colleagues, such 

as Chen Liangyu, in the countergraft investigations reduced even more the credibility 

of a coherent and robust “Shanghai faction” assisting Jiang in his power struggle against 

Hu. Most important, Hu’s success in power consolidation within the CCP leadership 

has made a significant impact on the PLA’s perception of him. It is likely that most PLA 

senior officers see Hu as a prudent and competent leader, and this should contribute to 

Hu’s power consolidation to control the PLA.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 17

Objective Control: The Military Side

On the military side, Hu has continued Jiang’s program of RMA-based transformation 

of the PLA. In May 2003, he presided over a Politburo study session where researchers 

from the Academy of Military Science (AMS) lectured the members on world trends 

in RMA and priorities for China’s military modernization.40 Hu met with Chinese 

astronauts and watched the whole processes of launching three manned spacecraft, in 

October 2003, October 2005, and September 2008, respectively. He has initiated a campaign to study RMA-related subjects in the PLA and has supported personnel reform 

to appoint officers who understand the RMA to higher ranks and key positions. For 

instance, Li Ji’nai and Chen Bingde, who ran the Shenzhou V and Shenzhou VI programs, 

respectively, now hold the positions of the director of the PLA’s General Political Department and chief of the PLA’s General Staff Department.41 Hu has stressed regular military 

training and exercises, rules and regulations, and effective management as major ways to 

regulate behavior.42 All these clearly aim to confine the PLA to its functional and technical expertise—a good political strategy to enhance the objective, or institutional, control 

of the PLA.

More important, however, at a CMC expanded conference in late 2004 Hu introduced a 

new military policy that defined the four missions of the PLA: to “serve as an important 

source of strength for consolidating the party’s governing position” (为党巩固执政地位

提供重要的力量保证); to “provide a strong security guarantee for the important period 

of strategic opportunity for national development” (为维护国家发展的重要战略机

遇期提供坚强的安全保障); to “serve as a forceful strategic support for safeguarding 

national interests” (为维护国家利益提供有力的战略支撑); and to “play an important 

role in upholding world peace and promoting common development” (为维护世界和

平与促进共同发展发挥重要作用).43

The first mission may contradict somewhat objective control, or alternatively it may 

reflect the “Chinese characteristics” aspect of objective control. But it is the politically 

correct thing to say for any new CCP leader, and it really refers to the “party’s absolute 

leadership of the army” (党对军队的绝对领导), enshrining civilian control. Party 

leadership of the PLA, however, may be largely nominal, mainly because the political 

commissar system, the ostensible tool by which the party controls the PLA, is an integral 

component of the military command structure, not external to it. As a result, the true 

incentive for political commissars is to perform well within this structure so that they 

can advance their careers. They are therefore unlikely to investigate deviations and report on military commanders to outside party authorities. A critical test of the political 

orientation of the political commissars is a crisis, such as Tian’anmen in 1989. If political 

commissars are more loyal to the party than to the PLA, then one should find that the 

majority of political commissars followed the order of the party leaders to suppress 
18 china maritime studies

the students but that the majority of commanders refused to do so. Instead, there were 

significant numbers of political commissars and commanders on both sides of the issue. 

As argued in the introduction of this study, the central reasons for the PLA following the 

party order in 1989 was not enforcement of political commissars but Deng’s prestigebased political capital and his loyalists’ control of the CMC. 

Also, the post-Mao objectives of the party and the PLA are consistent: to promote 

national economic and technological development and national defense modernization. 

This is very different from Mao’s time, when pursuit of military expertise was criticized 

as practicing a “bourgeois military line” that undermined the chairman’s “proletarian 

revolutionary line,” leading to a continuous witch hunt for class enemies in the PLA and 

causing severe political divisions there. Finally, the new PLA Political Work Regulations,

issued in late 2003, contained important revisions. One is that political officers are to 

“uphold the legal rights and interests of the military and military personnel” (维护军

队和军人的合法权益). They are also to “give full play to the operational function of 

political work” (发挥政治工作作战功能), characterized mainly in terms of information 

operations, such as “opinion warfare,” “psychological warfare,” and “law warfare.”44 These 

revisions were clearly aimed to integrate political officers into the PLA by redefining 

their objectives and functional expertise in ways more in line with those of the PLA. All 

these indicators show that the best way for the PLA to help in consolidating the CCP’s 

governing position is not to intervene in civilian governance but to develop and perfect 

its own functional and technical expertise. 

The other three missions are more in line with objective control. The second, for instance, refers to continued military modernization to enhance the credibility of deterrence against threats, such as formal Taiwan independence. Strategic stability ensures 

a peaceful external environment for economic development at a time when China can 

benefit from the U.S. concentration on countering terrorism, from globalization, and 

also from the integration of China into the global economy.45

The third and fourth missions were not only absent under Jiang Zemin but unprecedented in PLA history. The third calls on the PLA to secure China’s newly emerging 

interests in outer, maritime, and electromagnetic space in addition to its traditional 

security interests, such as its sovereign territories, airspace, and waters.46 The fourth is 

for the PLA to participate in United Nations peacekeeping operations and international 

humanitarian assistance. What is remarkable is that these new missions are externally 

oriented. Externalization of the PLA is clearly a good political strategy for Hu, if he is to 

control the PLA. This is because, as the end of the Cold War showed, a declining focus 

of the military on external threats tends to make civil-military relations more difficult to 

manage.47
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 19

Power Consolidation 

In June 2006, Hu promoted ten senior officers to three-star general and many more to 

lower ranks. By July, PLA officers had received a 100 percent increase in their salaries, 

and better-quality uniforms had been issued. As early as since 1999, Hu has regularly received briefings on major military policy issues and attended CMC meetings. He has also 

paid many visits to basic-level units, attended and delivered speeches at party congresses 

of major PLA institutions, and maintained good relations with senior officers. While 

these can be interpreted as efforts to consolidate power in the PLA, as discussed earlier, 

there are strict limits on how far the new generations of CCP leaders can go to do so and 

how they can use such power. In comparison with Deng’s and Jiang’s years, the promotion rate of senior officers under Hu to the rank of general is not high.48 CMC membership at the Seventeenth CCP Congress in the fall of 2007 involved only minor changes 

(compare tables 3 and 4). Cao Gangchuan was retired because he was seventy-two, exceeding the normative retirement age of sixty-eight for CMC members. Wu Shengli and 

Xu Qiliang, who succeeded the deceased Zhang Dingfa and the sixty-eight-year-old Qiao 

Qingchen as the new PLAN and PLAAF commanders, became new members because 

the navy and air force commanders have been CMC members since 2004.

Jiang was lenient on disciplinary issues in his early years as the CMC chair, for fear of 

offending Deng and the PLA elders, but Hu has been bolder. Wang Shouye, a deputy 

navy commander, was dismissed from his office and court-martialed in early 2006 for 

taking bribes of millions of dollars and keeping mistresses. Also in 2006, the CMC appointed a small leading group to audit the financial conditions of a thousand senior 

officers.49 Similarly, in June 2006 disciplinary actions were taken against four senior and 

seven lower-ranking air force officers as the result of a crash of an airborne warning and 

control plane that killed forty people in Anhui. The penalties ranged from recording 

demerits, serious warnings, and demotions to dismissal from office.50

There are several reasons why Hu has felt secure enough to enforce discipline against 

senior officers soon after becoming the CMC chair. Because Jiang’s credentials, status, 

and prestige are not comparable to those of Deng and PLA elders, his influence over Hu 

is much less than Deng’s and PLA elders’ influence over Jiang. Also, Hu has accumulated 

some political capital in the PLA, having been in the CMC since 1999. His objectivecontrol measures have also contributed to the accumulation of this capital. Finally, the 

professionalizing trend within the PLA has had a dampening effect on the political 

aspiration of senior officers. Because these disciplinary measures were driven by specific 

issues, it may be inappropriate to treat them as stratagems meant to politicize and divide 

the officer corps in a power struggle against political opponents. In any case, Hu’s nononsense style enhanced his authority as the new commander in chief of the PLA.
20 china maritime studies

Name Position Date 

of 

Birth

Provincial 

Origin

Education Unit Origin Military Expertise/

Combat Experience

Hu Jintao 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Chair 

Guo Boxiong 

(see table 

1 for 

information) 

Vice chair 

Cao 

Gangchuan 

(see table 

1 for 

information) 

Vice chair 

and defense 

minister

Xu Caihou 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Vice chair

Liang 

Guanglie (see 

table 2 for 

information) 

GSD chief

Li Ji’nai (see 

table 2 for 

information)

GPD 

director

Liao Xilong 

(see table 

2 for 

information)

GLD 

director

Chen Bingde GAD 

director

1941 Jiangsu PLA Military 

College, 

Beijing

60th Army, 

Nanjing MR

Command and staff, 

infantry

Zhang Dingfa Navy 

commander

1943 Shanghai Qingdao 

Naval 

Submarine 

Academy

North Sea 

Fleet

Command and staff, 

submarine force

Qiao 

Qingchen

Air Force 

commander

1939 Henan PLAAF 6th 

Aviation 

School

4th Air 

Corps, 

Nanjing MR 

Air Force

Aviator, command 

and staff, Air Force

Jin Zhiyuan Second 

Artillery 

commander 

1944 Hubei Wuwei 

Artillery 

School, 

Gansu 

Province 

Base 56 

(Qinghai), 

Second 

Artillery

Command and staff, 

strategic missile force

Table 3. Central Military Commission of the Sixteenth CCP Congress (September 2004–2007)
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 21

Name Position Date 

of 

Birth

Provincial 

Origin

Education Unit Origin Military Expertise/

Combat Experience

Hu Jintao 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Chair 

Guo Boxiong 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Vice chair

Xu Caihou 

(see table 

1 for 

information)

Vice chair

Liang 

Guanglie (see 

table 2 for 

information)

Defense 

minister

Chen 

Bingde (see 

table 3 for 

information)

GSD chief

Li Ji’nai (see 

table 2 for 

information)

GPD 

director

Liao Xilong 

(see table 

2 for 

information)

GLD 

director

Chang 

Wanquan

GAD 

director

1949 Henan Wei’nan 

Teachers 

College, 

Shaanxi 

Province

47th Army, 

Lanzhou MR

Command and staff, 

infantry

Wu Shengli Navy 

commander

1945 Hebei PLA 

Measuring 

and Mapping 

College 

6th Destroyer 

Flotilla, East 

Sea Fleet 

Sea measuring and 

mapping, command 

and staff, Navy 

Xu Qiliang Air Force 

commander

1950 Shandong PLAAF 5th 

Aviation 

School

8th Air 

Corps, 

Nanjing MR 

Air Force

Aviator, command 

and staff, Air Force

Jin Zhiyuan 

(see table 

3 for 

information)

Second 

Artillery 

commander

Table 4. Central Military Commission of the Seventeenth CCP Congress (2007)
22 china maritime studies

Implications of Civil-Military Bifurcation for Crisis Management

While objective control, or allowing more institutional autonomy for military professionalization, may substantially benefit military modernization, it has also reinforced 

civil-military bifurcation, which has produced the unintended consequence of difficulty 

in interagency cooperation and coordination in the management of crises. The old 

party-army symbiosis, based on personal relationships, may have been characterized by 

political infighting among political-military factions, but in times of crisis, such as the 

Korean War and the 1979 war with Vietnam, it enabled charismatic political-military 

leaders like Mao and Deng to make quick decisions without much institutional hindrance. Since then, the institutionalization of civil-military boundaries that began under 

Deng has made it increasingly difficult for the new generations of uncharismatic technocrats like Jiang and Hu to do so.51

Foreign-Policy Crisis Management

There have been several major cases where a lack of interagency coordination appears 

to have incurred high costs, at least in terms of diplomacy and image, on China. In 

April 2001 a patrolling Chinese jet interceptor collided with a U.S. EP-3 reconnaissance 

aircraft seventy miles off the coast of Hainan Island, leading to the loss of the Chinese 

aircraft, the death of its pilot, and the crash landing of the American aircraft on Hainan, 

where the crew was detained. The crisis remained unresolved for about eleven days.52

One major reason for the delay seems to have been that the PLA took a much harder 

line than China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), insisting that the United States be 

required to terminate its reconnaissance activities in China’s exclusive economic zone 

(EEZ) and compensate the Chinese losses. This hard line reportedly made it difficult for 

Jiang Zemin to build quickly a civil-military consensus on resolving the issue—whereas 

a quick resolution is presumably what Jiang desired, to maintain a good and stable U.S.-

Chinese relationship so he could focus on issues of economic development.

Similarly, in November 2004 a Chinese nuclear-powered attack submarine intruded, 

while submerged, in Japanese territorial waters southwest of Okinawa for two hours. It 

was about a week before the MFA acknowledged the incident, attributing the intrusion 

to a technical error, and expressed regret.53 This happened at a time when Hu was preparing to attend an Asia-Pacific Cooperation Forum summit in Chile, where he was to 

meet with Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi to find ways to improve strained 

Sino-Japanese relations. The incident seems not only to have caught the MFA by surprise 

but to have added difficulty to Hu’s effort to improve Sino-Japanese relations. It was 

even suggested that Hu, the new CMC chair, had not even been aware of the operation.

In January 2007, China launched a ground-based ballistic missile carrying a kinetic-kill 

vehicle. It impacted and destroyed an aging Chinese weather satellite orbiting 537 miles 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 23

above the earth. The United States, Japan, Australia, and Britain asked Beijing for an explanation but met with prolonged silence. Only after twelve days did the MFA officially 

acknowledge the test. China’s space program is largely managed by the PLA’s General 

Armament Department; such a belated response suggests that the MFA may not have 

been informed of the test. Nonetheless, the test contradicted the image of China as a rising power committed to peaceful development that Hu wanted to project to the world. 

The test produced numerous pieces of debris that could interfere with space activities 

for years to come, and, more important, might have triggered an arms race in space.54

Just before the Thanksgiving holiday of 2007, the U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk and 

accompanying ships approached Hong Kong to make a long-planned port visit. Without 

warning, China suddenly denied them entry; the decision was reversed abruptly, again 

without explanation, but the ships were already on their way to Japan. This incident 

again seems to indicate a lack of coordination between the PLA and the MFA; apparently 

the soldiers wanted to turn the U.S. ships away while the diplomats tried unsuccessfully 

to neutralize the fallout. It also implies Chinese insensitivity, in thwarting the planned 

family reunion of American sailors. Moreover, this happened only weeks after a visit 

to China by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who had aimed to initiate a long-term 

dialogue. Again, the disruption seems to have made it more difficult to maintain a stable 

U.S.-Chinese relationship, which Hu is understood to have wanted badly.55

In early March 2009, five Chinese ships—two trawlers, two Fisheries Administration 

patrol vessels, and a naval intelligence ship—blocked and surrounded the U.S. ocean 

surveillance ship USNS Impeccable (T-AGOS 23) seventy-five miles south of Hainan. 

The trawlers attempted to snag the towing cable of Impeccable’s sonar array with a grappling hook. The incident led to the exchange of protests between the two governments. 

It happened only eight days after the two countries had agreed to restore a military-tomilitary dialogue; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had just visited China, and China’s 

foreign minister, Yang Jieshi, was just about to visit Washington, D.C.56 Once more, the 

incident clearly made it more difficult to improve U.S.-Chinese relations as China’s civilian leadership appears to have desired.

In these incidents a lack of civil-military interagency coordination may have been the 

cause of diplomatic and image costs to China, but several caveats are in order. First, 

other related but different factors may have caused delay. The indecision about the EP-3 

incident, for instance, may be attributable in part to Jiang’s absence at the time on a 

state visit to Latin American countries, to frustration stemming from the PLA’s failure 

to recover the lost pilot, or to the absence of a more forthcoming American apology. 

Moreover, China’s civilian leader might sometimes prefer the more hawkish positions 

of the military, to enhance his bargaining leverage with foreign counterparts in negotiating a resolution. In the case of the EP-3 incident, this bargaining power was further 
24 china maritime studies

enhanced by the fact that China held the crew, which made it difficult for the United 

States to retaliate. While China might have paid a high cost if it had indefinitely delayed 

resolution of the crisis, China’s civilian leader had no incentive to resolve it too quickly, 

on U.S. terms.

In addition, China’s civilian leader may calculate that the benefits of building domestic 

consensus outweigh the diplomatic and image penalties of not reacting quickly. This is 

particularly the case if these costs are symbolic and difficult to measure or if the chance 

of escalation to a real military conflict is low (either because the other side may be 

uncertain about the effects of escalation or because China could retaliate effectively). 

Collective decision making and consensus building, for instance, have become the new 

norms with the end of the era of charismatic leaders. One of the often-cited benefits of 

these norms is that they can minimize the chance of such arbitrary and costly decisions 

as another costly war or another Cultural Revolution, particularly under a condition of 

high uncertainty. As a result, China’s civilian leader has an incentive to abide by these internal norms in a crisis, because doing so will enhance domestic credibility and legitimacy. This also seems a rational choice under conditions of highly imperfect information. 

Similarly, one of the new missions Hu assigned to the PLA since becoming the CMC 

chair in 2004, as we have seen, was to secure China’s newly emerging interests in outer, 

maritime, and electromagnetic space; Hu has also promoted PLA informatization. In 

both instances, space capabilities are essential. So Hu had a reason to endorse the ASAT 

test, and thereby match his words with deeds, which would enhance his credibility and 

legitimacy in the eyes of the PLA high command. In comparison, space debris may be 

a minor issue; it did not cause a problem in earlier, non-Chinese ASAT tests. It was also 

unclear that the Chinese test would trigger a space arms race, because the military space 

programs of other major powers were ahead of the Chinese test; China still has a long 

way to go to operationalize its space war-fighting capabilities. Finally, the prolonged 

silence and lack of an explanation about the ASAT test were consistent with Chinese behavior with respect to the testing of strategic weapon systems, where secrecy is intended 

to aggravate the sense of uncertainty for China’s opponents, thus enhancing the deterrent effect.57

There are other incentives as well for China’s civilian leader not to resolve foreignpolicy crises too quickly on the terms of foreign states. He, for instance, does not want 

to be perceived by domestic constituencies as compromising Chinese national interests, 

particularly at the time of power transition when he may still be relatively inexperienced 

and therefore politically vulnerable. He may also leverage foreign-policy crises to foster 

populism and nationalism and to enhance his domestic popularity by scapegoating 

foreigners. Jiang and Hu desired a stable U.S.-Chinese relationship, but not at all costs. If 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 25

they were to make too many concessions, their domestic legitimacy may have been hurt 

and therefore their rule destabilized. 

Furthermore, it may be wrong to interpret some of the cited incidents as instances of 

poor interagency coordination. The Impeccable incident, for instance, might actually 

show good Chinese civil-military coordination. The two fishing boats that confronted 

the U.S. ship directly constituted the first line, backed up by two of China’s Fisheries 

Administration patrol ships, which constituted the second line, while a naval intelligence ship formed the third line. Employing civilian ships to confront the American 

ship directly seems to have been a well-thought-out interagency plan, calculated to gain 

publicity points by showing China as the weak and victimized side. Also, Jin Yi’nan, the 

strategic studies director at China’s National Defense University, complains that U.S. reconnaissance in China’s EEZ has been a long-standing thorn in the side of Sino-U.S. military relations. The issue was raised in the PLA’s Beijing meeting with Deputy Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for East Asia David Sedney in late February 2009, an event that was 

intended to resume the U.S.-Chinese military-to-military dialogue.58 The MFA would 

have helped to arrange for the meeting and so would have been notified of the agenda. 

The CMC and Hu should be aware of the major issues to be discussed in similar meetings. Finally, making U.S. reconnaissance activities in China’s EEZ difficult is consistent 

with Hu’s requirement on the PLA to defend China’s newly emerging interests in China’s 

maritime space and with the call by China’s central leadership over the years to “develop 

the national maritime consciousness.” As a result, Hu has reason to endorse such a plan 

to enhance his credibility and popularity as the commander in chief of the PLA.

Even the November 2007 Kitty Hawk incident may actually reflect a well coordinated 

plan. The decision to refuse the carrier’s visit to Hong Kong can be interpreted as an 

exhibition of MFA displeasure over a visit by the Dalai Lama to the White House and of 

PLA disapproval of a recent American decision to upgrade Taiwan’s missile system. The 

quick reversal of the decision would have been meant to show that the demonstration 

was measured and limited, that China was still willing to maintain workable relations 

with the United States. 

The only incident that convincingly shows weak central and civil-military interagency 

coordination seems to be the Chinese nuclear submarine’s two-hour, submerged intrusion into the Japanese territorial waters. It is still unclear what caused the intrusion, 

but it is highly unlikely that Hu ordered it. Also, the MFA is unlikely to have been aware 

of the operation; it would have objected to it as likely to produce a major diplomatic 

incident.

Because the costs of these incidents are largely symbolic rather than substantial, there 

seems to be no sense of urgency to introduce corrective measures. A central, integrated 
26 china maritime studies

interagency coordinating institution similar to the U.S. National Security Council 

has been in discussion for many years, but there is no evidence that one has been fully 

established. Also, detailed information about the Chinese foreign-policy processes is 

generally lacking. Both factors suggest that any assumption that weak civil-military interagency coordination is causing Chinese delay or dysfunction in crisis response would 

be premature. 

However, and in contrast to foreign-policy cases, wherein information remains highly 

speculative, a domestic crisis offers concrete and convincing indicators on the relationship between civil-military interagency coordination and crisis management. This is because the stakes are much higher in these crises, where there could be huge material and 

human losses, which in turn puts the competence and legitimacy of major leaders and 

institutions to a critical test. Moreover, more information has become available about 

these domestic crises. Finally, such crises are usually followed by observable remedial 

mechanisms and measures for prevention and preemption. The Chinese management of 

the Sichuan earthquake relief in May 2009 is a case in point. 

Domestic Crisis Management: Sichuan Earthquake Relief 

On the early afternoon of 12 May 2008, an earthquake of Richter magnitude 8 hit 

northern Sichuan Province, which has about eleven million inhabitants. The first 

seventy-two hours after an earthquake are critical, and most of the PLA troops 

deployed for earthquake relief arrived within this time, with the central objective of 

“saving lives” (救人). Within three hours of the earthquake, for instance, the PLA had 

mobilized and deployed sixteen thousand troops from the Chengdu Military Region 

(MR), the PLAAF, and the Sichuan provincial PAP. Within twelve hours another 

thirty-four thousand were mobilized from the more distant Ji’nan MR and the PLAAF 

airborne army in Hubei Province. On 14 May another 32,600 troops were mobilized, 

including a marine brigade from Guangdong Province and sixty-one helicopters from 

army aviation and the PLAAF. In total, China deployed 137,000 troops (including 

more than twenty thousand PAP men) for the Sichuan earthquake relief. It is important to note that this employment was mostly requested and authorized by Hu Jintao.59

It is likely Hu was in close contact with Wen Jiabao, who reached the scene of the 

quake within two hours after it occurred. This contact is likely to have shaped decisions about the type and scale of the troop deployment. 

The PLA transferred more than a million people in distress to safer areas and provided 

extensive aids in terms of tents, temporary quarters, food, potable water, medical treatment, and disease control. Nonetheless, the central indicator of “saving lives” was not 

impressive: only 3,336 people were saved from the ruins of the earthquake by the PLA.60

In the end, over sixty-nine thousand were confirmed killed, with over eighteen thousand 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 27

reported missing. A more careful examination of the case shows that weak civil-military 

interagency coordination was a major reason why the PLA was not able to save more 

lives. The episode raises major new issues in China’s civil-military relations, mainly in 

terms of interagency coordination–based command and control and also regarding force 

structure, equipment, and training in crisis management.

For higher command and control in the Sichuan earthquake-relief operation, a two-level 

structure was established: the Army Command Group for Resisting Quake and Relieving Disaster (军队抗震救灾指挥组), headed by the PLA chief of General Staff Chen 

Bingde, which is responsible for deploying out-of-area troops to the earthquake region; 

and the Chengdu MR Joint Command Department for Resisting Quake and Relieving 

Disaster (成都军区抗震救灾联合指挥部), headed by Chengdu MR commander Li 

Shimin, which is responsible for deploying all the troops within the earthquake region. 

For interagency coordination, the two-level PLA structure was to follow the orders of the 

State Council Command Department for Resisting Quake and Relieving Disaster (国务

院抗震救灾指挥部), headed by Wen, who was at the scene of the earthquake.61

As a result partly of the urgent desire to save the lives of the hundred thousand people 

trapped in the epicenter of the earthquake, Wenchuan County, and partly of his lack of 

understanding of the PLA (stemming from the fact that he had never served in the military), Wen somewhat hastily ordered the PLA to reach the epicenter within thirty-four 

hours of the earthquake. The commanders on the scene, however, saw reaching Wenchuan 

on such short notice as almost impossible; Wenchuan, although only one hundred 

kilometers from the city of Dujiangyan, where most of the PLA troops had gathered, is 

Photo 5. Wen Jiaobao issuing orders to a PLA senior officer at the site of the Sichuan earthquake.
28 china maritime studies

surrounded by impassable mountains, and all the roads were now blocked by massive 

rock slides and debris. Efforts to clear the landslides were hampered by incessant rain, 

minor quakes, and a shortage of heavy road construction equipment. Wen also requested 

the PLA to send helicopters or air-drop troops into Wenchuan. To the PLA commanders, however, because of the rain, quakes, four-thousand-meter-high mountains, and a 

visibility of less than twenty meters, such an order amounted to a reckless risking of the 

lives of their soldiers. The tension between Wen and the PLA commanders grew to the 

point where Wen allegedly snapped, “It is the people who have raised you. It’s up to you 

to see what to do! Even with two legs, you must walk in there” (是人民养育了你们, 你

们自己看着办! 你们就是靠双腿走, 也要给我走进去).62

A PLA helicopter attempted six times to reach Wenchuan but failed. As the sky cleared 

on 14 May, one hundred paratroopers were airborne; fifteen of them, having left wills 

behind, jumped at a height of five thousand meters, with no ground command or guidance, no ground signposts, and no meteorological information. The plan to air-drop the 

rest of the paratroopers was aborted when the fifteen, who landed safely, reported that 

the terrain was too treacherous for a massive airdrop. In any case, late the night before 

a PAP unit had reached Wenchuan by foot, only to find the damage there not as serious 

as had been believed. By 16 May Hu had to replace Wen as the commander in chief on 

the earthquake scene, partly because it had became difficult for Wen and the PLA commanders to coordinate, as a result of the mutual mistrust that had developed.63

Photo 6. Hu talks with a PLA medical officer at the site of Sichuan earthquake on 16 May 2008.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 29

For lower-level interagency coordination in command and control, the central difficulty 

was the lack of collateral coordination between the PLA units and the county, township, and village government authorities. This is because most of the troops deployed 

were centrally or MR-controlled quick reaction forces (快反部队) and strategic reserve 

forces (战略预备队), which have no regular or institutional interactions and relationship with the local government authorities. As a result, any coordinated tasks had to 

go up and down their own chain of command before approval. This cumbersome and 

time-consuming process contributed to a situation where some units idled while none 

were available where relief work needed to be done; the units could not adapt well to the 

rapidly changing circumstances on the ground.64 A high cost was incurred as a result of 

this inability to take timely action. 

One major indicator of this weak local interagency coordination was the postearthquake 

call by PLA analysts to employ reserve elements (预备役部队) controlled by provincial 

military districts (MDs) and local militia for disaster relief. The reserve and the militia units are more familiar with local geographical, social, and cultural conditions and 

are closer to crisis locations. But most important, these local units are under the dual 

leadership (双重领导) of the PLA and civilian chains of command; provincial and local 

party secretaries serve as first political commissars of these units. This institutionalized 

relationship would facilitate local civil-military interagency coordination in managing 

crises, thus contributing to lower costs and higher effectiveness.65

Another major civil-military issue arising from the PLA’s Sichuan earthquake relief 

experience concerns force structure, equipment, and training. Except for a few small 

support units specializing in engineering, road construction, transportation, and medicine, which are highly applicable to civil disaster-relief work, the troops deployed for the 

Sichuan earthquake were armed and trained to fight conventional wars. Their arms and 

equipment could not be used for disaster relief. Some heavy machinery, such as excavators and bulldozers, was issued to the involved units at the last moment, but the troops 

were not trained to handle it. The majority of the troops were issued light tools, such 

as spades and picks. The attempt to remove large concrete pieces of collapsed buildings 

with light tools and bare hands turned out to be ineffective and lost time that was precious for saving lives. Inappropriate force structure and equipment and lack of specialized training significantly increased the costs of the Sichuan earthquake relief.66

Again, a major indicator of the relative ineffectiveness of the PLA in the Sichuan 

episode was the postquake endorsement of remedies to correct these deficiencies. For 

instance, at the CMC meeting held in December 2008 Hu requested the PLA to adopt 

for civil-military interagency coordination in command and control a new core-value 

concept (核心价值观): “Be loyal to the party, love the people, render service to the state, 

dedicate to mission, and uphold honor” (忠于党, 热爱人民, 报效国家, 献身使命, 崇尚
30 china maritime studies

荣誉).67 What Hu really means by requiring the PLA to “be loyal to the party” is that the 

CMC and other senior PLA officers are to follow the orders of the CCP Politburo Standing Committee, of which Wen Jiabao is the second-ranking member. In the same way, 

by requesting the PLA to render service to the state, he means that the PLA officers are 

to coordinate well with state authorities, including the State Council (headed by Wen) at 

the highest level, in fulfilling nonwar military operations, including disaster relief. Similarly, there has been extensive discussion on how to institutionalize, and formalize in law, 

civil-military interagency coordination in command and control, particularly in terms 

of who issues orders, who follows orders, and what the legal accountability is of various 

parties involved concerning these orders.68

With regard to force structure, equipment, and training, Hu reiterated his instruction 

to the PLA to “enhance the capabilities of the military to cope with multiple types of 

security threat and fulfill diversified military missions” (提高军队应对多种安全威

胁、完成多样化军事任务的能力), outlined in his report to the Seventeenth CCP 

Congress of October 2007. This means that the central criteria of PLA combat effectiveness needed to be expanded from traditional preparation for war fighting, narrowly 

defined, to the broader areas of counterterrorism, stability operations, and emergency 

and natural-disaster relief. As a result, major changes needed to be brought about in 

the areas of strategic guidance, interagency coordination–based command and control, 

unit specialization, armament and equipment development, and training.69 This call for 

a fundamental shift in military missions, however, was implicitly criticized by various 

Photo 7. PLA paratroopers with picks and shovels await transport to the site of the Sichuan earthquake.
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 31

PLA analysts. PLAAF colonel Dai Xu, for instance, argues that the primary mission of 

the elite forces controlled by the services and MRs is defense against foreign invasion. As 

a result, they are not organized, armed, or trained for disaster relief. China is prone to 

natural disasters, he noted, and using these forces regularly for such a mission will not 

only prove ineffective but could harm national security, at a time when China’s external 

security environment is still quite grim.70

Toward the end of 2008 and, particularly, in a session with the PLA delegates to the 

National People’s Congress annual meeting on 12 March 2009, Hu modified his earlier 

instruction to the PLA, seemingly taking into consideration the implicit criticisms of 

fundamentally shifting its missions. Hu now instructed the PLA to place “emphasis on 

enhancing core military capabilities construction, while at the same time [to] handle well 

nonwar military capabilities construction in overall planning” (重点加强核心军事能

力建设,同时统筹搞好非战争军事能力建设). That is, the PLA was to continue to 

emphasize preparation to fight and win “local war under informatized conditions.”71

This modification of policy has two implications. First, rather than requiring the PLA to 

shift its missions fundamentally, it points to a division of labor among the elite forces, 

the provincial MD–controlled reserve and militia forces, and the PAP. The elite forces 

would concentrate on traditional security missions, which also lay a solid basis for 

an ability to support nontraditional security missions. The MD reserves and militias 

would focus on preparation for nontraditional security missions or nonwar military 

Photo 8. Hu receives PLA delegates attending the second annual meeting of the 11th National 

People’s Congress on 11 March 2009.
32 china maritime studies

operations, including emergency and natural-disaster relief.72 The elite forces, however, 

would support these operations, particularly with transportation and logistics. Moreover, because the elite forces have become more technology-intensive and therefore need 

more systematic, lengthy, and uninterrupted training to translate informatized platforms 

into combat effectiveness, the PAP would take full responsibility for operations to maintain domestic social stability. As a result, more motorized infantry units of the PLA will 

likely be transferred to the PAP to reinforce its mobile units (机动部队).73 Second, the 

elite forces would designate units with appropriate specializations and expertise, arms, 

equipment, and training (those specializing in engineering, medicine, road construction, transportation, and nuclear, biological, and chemical defense) for nonwar military 

operations (flood and earthquake relief; nuclear, biological, and chemical disaster relief; 

transportation disaster relief; and international peacekeeping).74

The Gulf of Aden Mission: A Success Story?

The PLA’s participation in fighting piracy in the Gulf of Aden appeared to be more 

successful in terms of civil-military interagency coordination. The fact that no sudden, 

unexpected incident (突发事件) was involved allowed more time for planning and 

preparation. Also, the PLAN seems to be interested in opportunities to expose itself to 

genuine maritime conditions in more distant seas, in order to gain operational experience. Both factors contributed to this success, but more forthcoming PLA cooperation 

and coordination with the state authorities to remedy deficiencies revealed in the Sichuan earthquake relief were clearly also important.

The Ministry of Transportation (MT) of China’s State Council first raised the issue of 

deploying naval ships to escort Chinese merchant ships against pirates in Gulf of Aden, 

at a meeting of the MT and MFA in mid-October 2008. The MT had two concerns. One 

was that the piracy issue had become so disruptive that Chinese shipping firms might 

have had to breach contracts and so lose global market share; relatedly, four hundred 

thousand Chinese merchant mariners needed to be protected. The second was that 

diplomatic efforts to resolve the issue through foreign governments and international 

organizations had been difficult and ineffective. The MT, MFA, and PLAN quickly 

reached consensus on the urgency and importance of the issue after intensive coordination and research on three key issues: capacity, logistic supply, and international law. The 

PLAN Military Art Studies Institute (海军军事学术研究所) in Beijing, for instance, 

analyzed legal issues concerning counterpiracy naval operations: whether it is legal to 

deploy naval ships against pirates; what they can do and how much force they can use; 

legal accountability if a warship fails to rescue a vessel under pirate attack; and what 

must be done if Chinese naval ships enter Somali territorial waters.75 By 26 December 

2008 a naval escort group had set sail for the Gulf of Aden. 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 33

A circular coordination chain has been 

introduced for interagency coordination 

in command and control in counterpiracy 

operations. It begins with voluntary applications of concerned ships, seven days in 

advance, to the China Ship Owners Association. The applications are forwarded to the 

MT, which analyzes the capacities of the 

ships involved, holds coordination conferences, and makes escort recommendations 

to the PLAN. The PLAN command decides 

on a final escort plan; the MT coordinates 

with the merchant ships, directing them to 

designated sea areas where the naval ships 

are deployed. To enhance effectiveness, a 

highly advanced maritime satellite–based 

ship-movement tracking system (船舶动态

跟踪系统) has been deployed with newly 

developed software that provides alldimensional tracking (全方位跟踪) and video-based communications among all 

concerned ships.76

Room for Improvement

The PLAN’s counterpiracy operation in the Gulf of Aden appears to be a success of civilmilitary interagency coordination. The PLAN’s cooperative behavior here is in contrast 

to its earlier reluctance to get involved in the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami relief and in 

the evacuation of Chinese nationals threatened by civil unrest in the Solomon Islands in 

late April 2006.77 But major issues still exist and need to be resolved in order to reduce 

the cost of future crisis management. For instance, the issue of who pays for nonwar 

military operations remains unresolved. “Military budgets do not cover nonwar military 

operations. But under emergency, the military budget has to be used, and the equipment 

can be very expensive. If there is no compensation afterward, routine war preparation 

and training would be negatively affected.” Also, if they do not have to compensate the 

PLA, civilian authorities may develop the habit of considering military assistance in 

crises a “free ride,” making it more difficult for the PLA to cooperate in the future.78

Also, the role of the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the State Council is ceremonial. It has no real organization or personnel; the putative functions are fulfilled by the 

PLA’s four general departments (staff, political, logistics, and armament). However, those 

departments answer to the CMC and its chair, not the premier of the State Council. There 

Photo 9. A Chinese warship patrols the sealanes against pirates in the Gulf of Aden.
34 china maritime studies

may be coordination conferences with State Council ministries, but the senior officers 

who represent the PLA general departments are likely not to follow the instructions of 

the State Council but simply report the proceedings of these conferences to the CMC, if 

only for fear of being suspected of institutional disloyalty. Also, the State Council premier, 

Wen Jiabao, has no control over the career advancement of senior PLA officers, so the 

latter have little incentive to follow his orders. This partly explains why it is difficult for 

Wen to order the PLA to do things on his own authority; he has to go through Hu Jintao. 

Similarly, his predecessor, Zhu Rongji, had to go through Jiang Zemin to get the PLA out 

of business activities when they began to impact the national economy. 

Because the CMC is at the same bureaucratic level as the State Council, it is external to 

the State Council, answering only to the CCP Politburo and its Standing Committee (see 

figure 1).79 But the latter do not meet regularly to manage daily state affairs, and the State 

Council, which does, has no administrative jurisdiction over the PLA, making routine 

civilian oversight over PLA affairs clearly more difficult. Such a difficulty, however, can be 

eased by establishing a genuine, more civilianized MND, one within the State Council and 

answering to the premier. A real MND could absorb the majority of the PLA’s four general 

departments, which would in turn help streamline the PLA command structure and turn 

the CMC into a central, joint command institution of chiefs of services.

Naval Implications of Objective Control and Externalization

As discussed earlier, the sense of insecurity in dealing with military matters, arising from 

lack of personal military credentials and their technocratic backgrounds, have generally 

Party (党) = CCP

Politburo and its

Standing

Committee

State (政) = State

Council

MFA, MT, and other

Ministries and

Commissions

GSD, GPD, GLD, GAD

Military ( ) = 

CMC

Figure 1. China’s Civil-Military Bureaucratic Hierachy
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 35

motivated new leaders like Jiang and Hu toward objective control and externalization of 

the PLA. The PLAN is clearly the biggest beneficiary of this trend, partly because it is one 

of the most technology-intensive services and partly because of the specific environment 

in which it operates and of the functions it fulfills. Also, the promotion of the PLAN 

by Jiang and Hu and the leveraging of this promotion by the PLAN have combined to 

elevate the importance of the navy. 

Technology, Environment, and Functions 

Objective control allows for more institutional autonomy and military professionalism. 

To the extent that the PLAN is much more technology and capital-intensive than the 

ground force and therefore requires more systematic, intensive, lengthy, and uninterrupted training to translate technologies into combat effectiveness, institutional autonomy without major political interference clearly benefits the PLAN more than it does 

the ground force.80 It is certainly true that objective control should also benefit greatly 

the PLAAF and the Second Artillery, because both are also technology and capital-based. 

Externalization, however, should benefit the PLAN more than the PLAAF and the Second Artillery, for two major reasons.

One has to do with the operational environments of these services. The environment 

in which the PLAAF and Second Artillery operate is mostly nonphysical or one or two- 

“dimensional.” The second reason is a result of the first reason—that is, the functions of 

the PLAAF and the Second Artillery tend to be fewer and narrower, mainly in terms of 

providing operational support and strategic deterrence. But the environment that the 

PLAN operates in is mostly physical and multidimensional, involving the sea surface, 

the ocean depths, the air, space, the littoral, and the shore. As a result, the functions that 

the PLAN fulfills are more numerous and also broader, which explains why the PLAN 

is a comprehensive (综合性) service possessing its own surface combatant, submarine, 

air, sea-based strategic deterrence, amphibious assault, and coastal-defense arms. But 

whereas the physical environment of the PLA ground force is largely internal, that of 

the PLAN is often the high seas—that is, external to national territories—and therefore 

necessarily more international (国际性). Because of its comprehensive and international 

nature, the PLAN is also a versatile service that can be employed on its own for multiple 

tasks in distant areas. They range from traditional security tasks, such as strategic and 

local deterrence, sea control and denial operations, and surveillance and countersurveillance, to nontraditional security tasks, such as sea-lane security and counterpiracy operations, naval diplomacy, and international humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. 

As a result, the PLAN is also a strategic (战略性) service.81 On the whole, the PLAN is 

clearly more useful in fulfilling the “new historical missions” assigned by Hu to the PLA 

generally, missions that aim to externalize the PLA.
36 china maritime studies

Civil-Military Interactive Dynamics

The PLAN benefits from objective control and externalization also because Jiang and 

Hu have actively promoted the PLAN, which in turn has leveraged this priority position. 

Both Jiang and Hu have promoted the PLAN, though for different strategic priorities. 

For Jiang the top strategic priority, particularly after the 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis, was to 

deter Taiwan from declaring formal independence and the United States from intervening militarily in a conflict over Taiwan. As a result, he promoted the PLAN by acquiring 

Sovremenny-class destroyers and Kilo-class submarines from Russia, as well as indigenously developed more advanced surface and undersea combatants. He paid particular 

attention to the East Sea Fleet, deploying the heavy, Russian-built antiship platforms 

in that fleet. Because air superiority in any military conflict over Taiwan can be gained 

by land-based combat aircraft, Jiang did not endorse the aircraft carrier program for 

which Admiral Liu Huaqing, who served as the PLAN commander from 1982 to 1988 

and CMC vice chair from 1989 to 1997, had actively lobbied, to provide air cover for 

naval operations over the more distant Spratlys, in the South China Sea.82 Instead, Jiang 

pursued diplomacy with Southeast Asian countries under his “new security concept,” 

leading to China’s signing of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation with the Association 

of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and of the Declaration of Code of Conduct with 

ASEAN with regard to the South China Sea. Jiang even removed a commanding officer 

of the South Sea Fleet for advocating, directly to him during an inspection tour of the 

fleet, aircraft carriers to resolve the Spratlys issue.83

By the time Hu took over, the naval capabilities thought necessary to deter a formal declaration of independence by Taiwan and U.S. military intervention in its support were 

largely in place. As shown in the second of his four new historical missions for the PLA, 

Hu wants the military to deter flash points on China’s margins such as the Taiwan issue 

from escalating into military conflict, so that China can leverage the twenty-year window of strategic opportunity from 2001 to 2020 to develop its economy.84 But as shown 

in the third and fourth historical missions, Hu has other strategic priorities on his mind 

as well. The election of the anti-independence candidate Ma Ying-jeou as Taiwan’s 

new president in March 2008 made it easier for the PLA to fulfill the second historical 

mission, making it possible for Hu to concentrate on the other two historical missions, 

in which the PLAN would play a major role, because these missions are largely external.

Hu, for instance, has been particularly concerned about China’s newly emerging national 

interests in terms of energy security. As early as at the Central Economic Work Conference held in November 2003, Hu, as the new CCP general secretary, advanced the 

concept of oil security (石油安全), and stressed the need to develop a new energydevelopment strategy from a “strategic overall height” (战略全局高度) to achieve 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 37

national energy security.85 Because the South China Sea has potentially rich deposits of 

fossil fuels and natural gas and straddles major sea-lanes through the Strait of Malacca 

into the Indian Ocean, Hu seems to favor particularly the development of the South Sea 

Fleet. 

The first PLA unit that Hu inspected after becoming the CCP general secretary, for 

instance, was a destroyer flotilla of the South Sea Fleet, and this took place as early as 11 

April 2003.86 On 9 April 2008 he inspected the South Sea Fleet again. This time he visited 

the naval base at Sanya on Hainan Island, where he instructed: “The navy is a strategic, 

comprehensive, and international service. It holds an important position and plays an 

important role in safeguarding the security of state sovereignty and territorial integrity and national maritime interests.” He particularly requested the PLAN to strive to 

develop “powerful” capabilities for accomplishing the new “historical missions” that he 

had assigned to the PLA.87 It is also important to note that the first two escort groups for 

the Gulf of Aden deployment in the first six months of the mission came from the South 

Sea Fleet.

The special attention that Hu has paid to the PLAN is also reflected in his other endeavors. In December 2006, Hu attended the inauguration ceremony for a new-type nuclear 

Photo 10. Hu visits PLAN officers and sailors at Sanya Naval Base of Hainan on 9 April 2008. 
38 china maritime studies

submarine and conferred a PLA flag upon the captain of the boat.88 Finally, Hu attended 

the naval parade in Qingdao to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the PLAN, on 

22 April 2009.89

Another indicator of naval promotion by both Jiang and Hu is the increased naval representation in China’s party and PLA central institutions under their rules. In September 

2004, for instance, the PLAN commander gained membership in the powerful CMC, 

together with the PLAAF and the Second Artillery commanders. This membership has 

surely enhanced the PLAN’s bargaining position (as well as those of the PLAAF and 

the Second Artillery) in negotiating budgetary allocations, force restructuring, senior 

personnel appointments, and weapons acquisition. 

Moreover, the navy’s representation in the CCP Central Committee has also increased 

under Hu’s tenure. Counting both full and alternate members and excluding the PAP 

members,PLA membership constitutes about 17 percent, or sixty-two out of 356, of 

the membership of the CCP Central Committee elected at the Sixteenth CCP Congress 

of November 2002.90 Out of sixty-two, five (8 percent of the PLA delegation) came 

from the PLAN. PLA membership declined to 15.6 percent of the membership of the 

CCP Central Committee elected at the Seventeenth CCP Congress of October 2007, or 

fifty-eight out of 371. Naval membership, however, grew from five to seven out of the 

fifty-eight, or 12 percent of the PLA delegation.91

Finally, many senior positions within PLA central institutions have opened up to senior 

PLAN officers under Jiang and Hu. Vice Admiral Sun Jianguo, for instance, now holds 

the position of deputy chief of the PLA General Staff, while Vice Admirals Tong Shiping 

and Xu Yitian hold the positions of NDU political commissar and National Defense 

Science and Technology University political commissar, respectively. Rear Admiral Wang 

Zhaohai, on the other hand, held the position of vice president of AMS.92

While Jiang and Hu have actively promoted the PLAN, the PLAN has also leveraged 

this promotion well to advance its own institutional interests. Only one month after Hu 

became CMC chair in September 2004, researchers from the Navy Military Art Studies 

Institute in Beijing published several articles in the October issue of the prestigious Military Art Journal of AMS, arguing for shifting the PLAN strategy from one of “near-sea 

active defense” to “far-seas operations.” Their argument was based on the need to secure 

newly emerging Chinese interests with respect to increased dependence on maritime resources, energy imports, external trade and investment, merchant fleets, and sea-lanes, as 

well as on the need to improve China’s unfavorable maritime strategic posture by breaking out of the narrow, long, and blocked “near seas” in order to gain the initiative.93 This 

was clearly an institutional effort of the PLAN to operationalize both Jiang’s and Hu’s 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 39

naval aspirations and promotions, and perhaps even more a response to Hu’s concern 

about China’s energy security. 

Similarly, in response to Hu’s instruction, given during his inspection tour of Sanya in 

April 2008, that senior naval officers follow his neo-Confucian concept of “taking people 

as the foremost” (以人为本) by paying particular attention to basic-level units, the PLAN 

launched a “Project of Warming Hearts and Benefiting Soldiers” (暖心惠兵工程), meant 

to improve the quality of life for PLAN sailors and officers. The project involves construction on shore of living quarters, study facilities, libraries, sports facilities, psychological 

counseling facilities, and battlefield-acclimatization facilities in all naval bases, with an 

emphasis on humanistic concerns, ecology, and personal privacy. Moving sailors from 

ships to land has helped to improve their health, because quarters on board are smaller, 

hotter, more humid, more crowded and noisy, and more subject to electromagnetic 

radiation, and as a result are more likely to make sailors physically and psychologically ill. 

The project has also saved energy costs and lengthened the service lives of ships, because 

generating energy on board ship is costly and takes a high toll on power plants. Moreover, 

it has helped to protect the environment, because trash disposal on land is easier to manage; there is less trash to pollute harbors and waterways. Finally, the project has helped to 

enhance morale, because sailors can eat and rest well on shore after long and exhausting 

sea tours.94 Undoubtedly, this quality-of-life improvement effort closely aligns with Hu’s 

priorities to improve genuinely both living standards and the environment.

Finally, among all PLA services, the PLAN appears to be most responsive to Hu’s call 

to cope with multiple types of threats and fulfill diverse missions, partly because, as 

discussed above, the PLAN is more versatile and therefore more appropriate for these 

missions. Senior naval officers, for instance, have published major analytical pieces to 

operationalize the PLAN role in these missions.95 But more important, the PLAN is 

clearly much more amenable to complex interagency cooperation and coordination, as 

demonstrated in the counterpiracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, and as compared to 

the PLA’s role in the Sichuan earthquake relief. 

Generally speaking, the civil-military interactive dynamics stemming from naval promotion by the central civilian leadership and the PLAN’s skillful leveraging of this promotion are likely to enhance the PLAN’s importance in China’s military modernization.

Conclusions and Analytical Implications 

This study shows that even though Jiang was successful in consolidating his power in 

the PLA, there is little evidence that he employed the PLA against domestic threats, from 

either Chinese society or within the CCP leadership. There were also major institutional limits on the extent of this power consolidation and on Jiang’s use of this power. 
40 china maritime studies

Personnel appointments and budget increases, for instance, may have been driven by 

reasons other than an intention to consolidate power in the PLA, and Jiang may have 

been unsure that the military would follow his orders to fulfill functions other than 

its usual tasks. As a result, the central thrust of his policies to control the PLA was to 

enhance civilian governance or the CCP’s legitimacy to rule, through promoting economic growth, and to confine the PLA to narrow, military-technical tasks. These policies 

prevented and preempted domestic crises and threats that might have provided excuses 

for the PLA to intervene in domestic politics. Jiang’s policies in this regard helped to 

maintain civil-military institutional boundaries and therefore increased the internal 

cohesion and combat effectiveness of the PLA. 

Hu’s policies are similar to Jiang’s. One exception is that Hu has not particularly focused 

on consolidating his power in the PLA. While inviting Jiang to help him to deal with the 

military, Hu has concentrated on enhancing the CCP’s legitimacy to govern, by promoting more equitable income distribution and sustainable economic growth, and on 

adopting programs that confine the PLA to its narrow military-technical tasks. But more 

important, he has directed the military to fulfill new external missions, such as defending China’s newly emerging interests in outer, maritime, and electromagnetic space, and 

in international peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance. These policies have also 

helped him to consolidate power in the PLA.

While objective control benefits PLA modernization, it has also contributed to civilmilitary bifurcation, which has complicated interagency coordination in managing 

crises and, as a result, increased the cost of crises. This complication is reflected in both 

foreign-policy and domestic crisis cases, including particularly the Sichuan earthquakerelief episode. While policies have been adopted to remedy deficiencies, apparently with 

some success, unresolved issues remain. 

Finally, the PLA Navy is the biggest beneficiary of objective control and externalization, 

partly because it is one of the most technology-intensive services, and partly because 

the specific environment in which it operates is mostly physical, multidimensional, and 

external, as a result of which its functions are highly diverse. Also, the promotion of the 

PLAN by the central civilian leadership and the service’s leveraging of this promotion 

are also likely to contribute to the increased importance of the navy in China’s military 

modernization. 

The findings of this study have three analytical implications. One is that the conventional wisdom on party-army relations in China may be flawed. According to this view, the 

CCP leaders, highly insecure in the face of domestic threats both from within the party 

and from society, attempt to buy off the military with higher ranks and more money. 

In this way, it is often said, the leaders can consolidate their power by controlling the 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 41

military (or part of it) in order to employ it in power struggles against political threats 

and opponents; as a result, they can feel more secure. However, such linear thinking neglects the possibility that by employing the military against domestic political opponents 

CCP leaders would no doubt reveal their own weaknesses or incompetence, which could 

be exploited by the military. As a result, they actually would create a new threat—the 

military itself—and thus make themselves feel even less secure. 

Roman emperors established the Praetorian Guard to protect them from domestic unrest. Over time, the unit gained independent power and became instrumental in installing and deposing emperors. As its domestic political role increased, its effectiveness in 

war waned. The newer generations of CCP leaders may not be students of Greco-Roman 

history, but their sense of insecurity—arising from lack of charisma, military credentials, 

or close ties with the military—may have convinced them that there are major limits on 

how far they can go to consolidate power in the PLA and how they can use this power. 

They seem to have adopted an additional way to control the military—that is, enhancing 

civilian governance and thereby the CCP’s legitimacy to rule, to prevent and preempt 

domestic threats, on the one hand, and to confine the PLA to narrow functionaltechnical and external tasks, on the other. In this way the chances of undesirable military 

intervention in politics decline, and as a result the leaders should feel more secure.

Second, as the findings of this study show, an unintended consequence of a Leninist 

party-army structure is that if the military is given institutional autonomy and allowed 

to increase its professionalism, routine civilian oversight becomes difficult, mainly 

because state authorities have no administrative jurisdiction over the military, whereas 

the party, which controls the military, does not manage daily state affairs. The effects are 

particularly pronounced in unexpected crises. Accordingly, the extent of efforts to introduce new institutional arrangements to ease this difficulty should be carefully analyzed; 

they may have important implications for China’s future crisis management. 

Finally, the extent of military involvement in domestic politics is closely related to the 

degree of the military’s institutional autonomy and level and types of its technological 

development. If this is true, research should continue to focus on the evolving relationship between these two key variables in China. This is because such a focus may help to 

reveal both the level of civilian governance–based political and social stability and the 

degree and types of technological development of the military. But more important, if 

domestic political and social stability can be achieved and maintained in China, more 

analytical attention should be paid to technological development in the PLA. This development has widened and deepened during the past twenty years, and it may have major 

implications for Asian and global security. 
42 china maritime studies

1. Recently, for instance, China announced plans to 

cut its ground force by another seven hundred 

thousand billets and boost naval and air force 

personnel in the next two to three years. See 

“China to Cut Army by 700,000 Troops: Sources,” 

Reuters, 30 September 2009.

2. See William Whitson, “The Field Army in Chinese Communist Military Politics,” China Quarterly, no. 37 (1969), and The Chinese High Command: A History of Communist Military Politics, 

1927–1971 (New York: Praeger, 1973). For a more 

rigorous discussion of factional explanation of 

Chinese political-military politics, see William 

Parish, Jr., “Factions in Chinese Military Politics,” 

China Quarterly, no. 56 (December 1973). 

3. See Nan Li, “Political-Military Changes in China, 

1979–1989,” Security Studies 2, no. 4 (Winter 

1994/1995).

4. David Shambaugh, “The Soldier and the State in 

China: The Political Work System in the People’s 

Liberation Army,” China Quarterly, no. 129 

(September 1991), pp. 551–68, and Modernizing 

China’s Military: Progress, Problems, and Prospects

(Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 2002), pp. 

11, 20–31.

5. See Andrew Scobell and Larry Wortzel, eds., 

Civil-Military Change in China: Elites, Institutes, 

and Ideas after the 16th Party Congress (Carlisle, 

Pa.: U.S. Army War College, 2004), mainly chapters by James Mulvenon and John Tkacik. 

6. For the underlying premise, see Morris Janowitz, 

The Military in the Political Development of New 

Nations (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1964), 

pp. 1, 27–29; and W. H. Morris Jones, “Armed 

Forces and the State,” Public Administration, no. 

25 (Winter 1957), pp. 411–16.

7. See Samuel Huntington, The Soldier and the State

(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1957), 

pp. 80–85, and Political Order in Changing Society

(New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 1968), pp. 

193–94.

8. For a theoretical argument that a military focus 

on external threats makes civil-military relations 

easier to manage, see Michael Desch, Civilian 

Control of the Military: The Changing Security 

Environment (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Press, 1999). Desch’s prediction on China, 

however, reflects the conventional wisdom and 

contradicts the findings of this study.

9. You Ji, “Jiang Zemin’s Command of the Military,” 

China Journal, no. 45 (January 2001); and James 

Mulvenon, “China: Conditional Compliance,” in 

Coercion and Governance: The Declining Political 

Role of the Military in Asia, ed. Muthiah Alagappa 

(Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univ. Press, 2001), p. 

318.

10. See Dennis Blasko, “Servant of Two Masters: The 

People’s Liberation Army, the People, and the 

Party,” in Chinese Civil-Military Relations, ed. 

Nan Li (New York: Routledge, 2006). In 1999, 

the Chinese government labeled Falun Gong an 

“evil cult” and began a campaign to eliminate 

the movement. While such a campaign was also 

waged within the PLA, no evidence exists that it 

was mobilized to suppress Falun Gong outside 

the service by force.

11. You Ji, “Hu Jintao’s Consolidation of Power and 

His Command of the Gun,” in China into the 

Hu-Wen Era: Policy Initiatives and Challenges, ed. 

John Wong and Lai Hongyi (Singapore: World 

Scientific, 2006), p. 59.

12. James Mulvenon, “Party-Army Relations since 

the 16th Party Congress: The Battle of the ‘Two 

Centers’?” in Civil-Military Change in China, ed. 

Scobell and Wortzel, pp. 27–38. SARS (severe 

acute respiratory syndrome), which spread from 

Guangdong Province in early 2003, reached nearpandemic status by that summer. 

13. Wang Chu, “Power Struggle in Beijing: Hu vs. 

Jiang,” Asia Times, 8 July 2004.

14. Compare tables 1 and 2 for changes in the CMC 

membership at the Sixteenth CCP Congress.

15. Mulvenon, “Party-Army Relations since the 16th 

Party Congress.”

16. Conversations with the Chinese security and 

military analysts and officials during trips to 

China in 2003. The Chinese term for such a 

cooperative leadership transition is 扶上马, 送

一程—the predecessor assisting the successor to 

“mount the horse and accompanying his journey 

for a short while.”

17. This is discussed in detail in a following section. 

18. Appointments of senior officers had largely been 

worked out by Zhang Zhen (CMC vice chair), 

Liu Huaqing (CMC vice chair), and Yu Yongbo 

(CMC member and director of the General Political Department) and approved by Jiang during 

the 1992–97 period. See 张震[Zhang Zhen], 张

震回忆录,下册 [Zhang Zhen’s Memoirs, Book 

2] (Beijing: Liberation Army Press, 2003), pp. 

377–78. 

19. Willy Lam, “Hu Moves to Exert Added Control 

over PLA,” China Brief, 20 September 2006.

20. See 国防大学军队建设研究所 [Army Construction Studies Institute of National Defense 

University (NDU)], 江泽民国防和军队建设

Notes
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 43

思想学习读本 [A Reader for Studying Jiang 

Zemin’s Thought on National Defense and Army 

Construction] (Beijing: CCP History Press, 

2002), p. 309.

21. See Blasko, “Servant of Two Masters,” pp. 118–19. 

22. The military, for instance, may insist on staying 

out of the dispute between the party and society. 

Or it may decline to intervene to suppress social 

protest but instead join the protesters against the 

party. Also, the military, disappointed with the 

way the party handles a crisis, may even attempt 

to overthrow party rule through a military coup. 

Finally, if the party leadership fractures over 

how to handle a crisis, the chances are that the 

military may fracture as well if it is ordered to 

intervene. This may lead to a civil-war situation, 

where different political-military factions fight 

one another to seize state power. For instance, 

while the execution of the Romanian communist 

dictator Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife in late 

December 1989 was largely the result of a military decision to stay out of conflict between the 

party leader and society, the failed August 1991 

Soviet coup and the subsequent collapse of the 

Soviet Union show what serious consequences 

a fractured military mobilized along different 

political persuasions can cause. 

23. See 郭德宏 [Guo Dehong] and 李玲玉 [Li 

Lingyu], eds., 中共党史重大事件述评 [Review 

of Major Events in CCP History] (Beijing: Central Party School Press, 2005), pp. 310–19.

24. For the PAP, see Blasko, “Servant of Two Masters,” pp. 126–27.

25. See Army Construction Studies Institute of NDU, 

A Reader for Studying Jiang Zemin’s Thought, pp. 

56, 232–44.

26. 江泽民 [Jiang Zemin], “军队必须停止一切经

商活动” [The Army Must Stop All Its Business 

Activities] (speech, 21 July 1998, at a CMC meeting), in Jiang Zemin, 论国防和军队建设 [On 

National Defense and Army Construction] (Beijing: Liberation Army Press, 2002), pp. 321–34.

27. The policy was formally endorsed by Zhao 

Ziyang (first CMC vice chair) in 1988. But Zhao 

was likely to have consulted Deng, the CMC 

chair at the time. See Zhang, Zhang Zhen’s Memoirs, p. 399. 

28. Conversations with the Chinese security and 

military analysts and officials during trips to 

China in 2003.

29. Conversations with the Chinese security and 

military analysts and officials during trips to 

China in 2005.

30. 陈锡文 [Chen Xiwen], cited in “中央三措施

应对群体事件, 原则上不使用警力” [Three 

Measures of the Central to Cope with Mass Incidents, Not to Use Force in Principle], 中国评论

社 [China Review News], 2 February 2009. Chen 

is the deputy director of the State Council Office 

of Central Finance and Economics Leadership 

Small Group and director of the State Council 

Office of Central Rural Work Leadership Small 

Group. See also “群体性事件应对之忧” [Worries about How to Cope with Mass Incidents], 

瞭望新闻周刊 [Outlook News Weekly], 30 June 

2009.

31. See 杨章怀 [Yang Zhanghuai] and 陈雨 [Chen 

Yu], “中纪委集训2,000县纪委书记, 主要内容

是群体事件” [CDIC Assembles 2,000 CountyLevel Disciplinary Inspection Commission 

Secretaries for Training, Mass Incidents Being the 

Primary Content], 南方都市报 [Southern Metropolis News], 14 May 2009; Shi Shan, “China 

Trains 3,000 Public Security Bureau Directors 

to Cope with Mass Incidents,” Radio Free Asia,

19 February 2009; and “中国首次大规模培训

基层检察长” [China for the First Time Trains 

Basic-Level Prosecutors on a Large Scale], 新华

网 [Xinhua Net], 17 June 2009.

32. “中办国办印发 ‘关于实行党政领导干部问责

的暂行规定’” [CCP Central General Office and 

State Council General Office Issue “Provisional 

Regulations on Interrogating Accountability 

of Party and Government Leading Cadres”], 

Xinhua Net, 12 July 2009.

33. “中共中央印发 ‘中国共产党巡视工作条例 

(试行)’” [CCP Central Issues “Regulations on 

CCP Inspection and Supervision Work (Trial 

Implementation)”], Xinhua Net, 13 July 2009. 

34. Public security bureaus at the provincial, city, 

and county levels, for instance, have specialized 

units, known as “state security teams” (国保大

队),for domestic political surveillance. 

35. So far, China has installed 2.75 million surveillance cameras in public areas across the country, 

mostly in urban communities. See “Rural Areas 

to Get Surveillance Cameras,” Shanghai Daily, 11 

August 2009, p. A8.

36. Many of the seven hundred thousand PLA billets 

to be downsized in the near future are likely to be 

transferred to the PAP.

37. For a detailed account of civil-military issues 

in the 2008 unrest in Tibet, see Edward Cody, 

“Backstage Role of China’s Army in Tibet Unrest 

Reflects Heed for Reaction Abroad,” Washington 

Post, 13 April 2008, p. A17. 

38. For an example, see “乌维稳部队换防, 南京

武警接替兰州武警” [Change of Guard in 

Ürümqi’s Stability-Maintaining Force: Nanjing 

PAP Replacing Lanzhou PAP], 大公报 [Ta Kung 

Pao (Hong Kong)], 11 July 2009.
44 china maritime studies

39. For Zeng Qinghong’s evolving behavior, see Joseph Kahn, “Former Rival Helps Hu Solidify Grip 

on China,” New York Times, 25 September 2005.

40. Lyman Miller, “More Already on Politburo 

Procedures under Hu Jintao,” China Leadership 

Monitor, no. 17 (Winter 2006), p. 22. 

41. “航天功臣多获要职” [Many Space Heroes Hold 

Vital Positions], Ta Kung Pao, 9 September 2009. 

Among many reasons, familiarity with the role 

of space in future military operations was clearly 

important in the appointment of Li and Chen to 

their current positions. 

42. 张建军 [Zhang Jianjun], “树立新观念, 履行

新使命” [Develop New Concepts, Accomplish 

New Missions], 国防大学学报 [Journal of the 

National Defense University], no. 12 (2005); 龙

义和 [Long Yihe] (Senior Col.), “新世纪新阶

段我军创新的治军思想” [Creative Thought of 

Our Army to Manage the Army at the New Stage 

of the New Century], 军事学术 [Military Art 

Journal], no. 3 (2006).

43. See 杨春长 [Yang Chunchang] (Maj. Gen.) and 

刘义焕 [Liu Yihuan] (Senior Col.), “科学认

识和把握我军新的历史使命” [Scientifically 

Comprehend and Handle the New Historical 

Missions of Our Army], Military Art Journal, no. 

11 (2005).

44. Yang Chunchang, “‘政工条例’ 的一次重大修

改”[A Major Revision of Political Work Regulations], Liberation Army Daily, 19 October 2008, p. 

3, available at www.chinamil.com. 

45. For an explanation of “important period of 

strategic opportunity,” see 徐根初 [Xu Genchu] 

(Lt. Gen.), “对我军维护国家发展重要战略机

遇期的思考” [Reflections on Safeguarding the 

Important Period of Strategic Opportunity for 

State Development by Our Army], Military Art 

Journal, no. 11 (2005).

46. Hu, cited in 陈振阳 [Chen Zhenyang] and 孙艳

红 [Sun Yanhong], “贯彻落实科学发展观与全

面提高我军的威慑和实战能力” [Implement 

Scientific Development Concept and Comprehensively Enhance the Deterrence and Real Warfighting Capabilities of Our Army], Liberation 

Army Daily, 28 February 2006, available at www 

.chinamil.com. 

47. See Desch, Civilian Control of the Military.

48. The military rank system was restored in 1988. 

Seventeen senior officers were given the rank of 

general by Deng in September 1988. Between 

1989 and 2004, Jiang’s fifteen years as the CMC 

chair, eighty-one officers gained the rank of 

general, an average of slightly fewer than eleven 

every two years. Hu’s promotion of ten to general 

rank in slightly less than two years as the CMC 

chair is a promotion rate quite similar to Jiang’s. 

Hu presided over the ceremony to promote 

Zhang Dingfa (navy commander) and Jin 

Zhiyuan (commander of the Second Artillery) to 

the rank of general several days after he became 

the CMC chair. The two were counted as Jiang’s 

appointments, because he had approved their 

promotions. By 2006, only thirty-six generals 

were on active duty. See “胡锦涛主席授予十

位将军上将” [Chairman Hu Jintao Confers the 

Rank of General on Ten Senior Officers], 南方周

末 [Southern Weekend], 6 July 2006. 

49. See “全军领导干部经济责任审计领导小组成

立” [Economic Accountability Auditing Leadership Small Group for All-Army Leading Cadres 

Is Established], Xinhua Net, 20 July 2006; James 

Mulvenon, “So Crooked They Have to Screw 

Their Pants On: New Trends in Chinese Military 

Corruption,” China Leadership Monitor, no. 19 

(Fall 2006). 

50. See “中央军委通报: 空军运输机失事责任人已

严肃处理” [CMC Circulates the Notice: People 

Responsible for Loss of Air Force Transport 

Plane Have Been Dealt with Seriously], Xinhua 

Net, 7 September 2006. 

51. In Mao’s time, party-army symbiosis was 

pervasive not only at the highest level but also 

at the provincial and local levels. A major 

reason why Mao had to mobilize the centrally 

controlled field armies (野战军) to “support the 

left” during the Cultural Revolution (1966–76) 

at provincial and local levels is that provincial 

military district–controlled local units (地方部

队) tended to protect the provincial and local 

party secretaries and governors, or “those who 

took the capitalist road.” That was because most 

military-district (MD) commanding officers had 

developed highly personal relationships with 

provincial and local party and state officials over 

time. This had happened mainly because most 

civilian party and state officials had served in 

the PLA and most MD officers had local civilian 

working experience during the war years, as well 

as because of a lack of career mobility stemming 

from a lack of age and term limits and retirement 

requirements. In the post-Mao era, however, the 

relationship between the provincial and local 

party secretaries and governors and MD commanding officers has become highly impersonal, 

formal, and bifurcated. This has happened 

mainly because officials on both sides are regularly rotated within their own systems, because 

of the introduction of age and term limits and 

retirement requirements. In the meantime, little 

cross-boundary circulation of elites occurs—that 

is, few military officers have had any civilian 

experience, and few civilian officials have had any 

military experience. Provincial party secretaries 

also serve as first party secretaries of provincial 

MDs, but they are largely part-timers, and their 
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 45

ties to the military are only nominal. For this 

post-Mao change at the provincial and local levels, see Zhiyue Bo, “The PLA and the Provinces: 

Military District and Local Issues,” in CivilMilitary Relations in Today’s China: Swimming 

in a New Sea, ed. David Finkelstein and Kristen 

Gunness (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 2006).

52. See “Hainan Island Incident,” Wikipedia.com; 

and “Chinese Poker,” Economist, 17 April 2001.

53. See “Chinese Submarine Enters Japanese Waters,” 

Wikinews.org, 18 November 2004; and Sean 

Curtin, “Hu Warns Koizumi against Going to 

Yasukuni,” Asia Times, 23 November 2004. 

54. See “2007 Chinese Anti-satellite Missile Test,” 

Wikipedia.com; and “Space to Maneuver: Satellite Attack Upsets U.S. Space Supremacy,” Jane’s 

Intelligence Review, 7 February 2007. 

55. See James Pomfret, “China Opens Hong Kong to 

U.S. Carrier,” Reuters, 22 November 2007; and 

Richard Halloran, “Looking beyond the Kitty 

Hawk Incident,” Honolulu Advertiser, 10 December 2007. 

56. “U.S. Navy Provoked South China Sea Incident, 

China Says,” New York Times, 10 March 2009. 

57. See Chong-Pin Lin, China’s Nuclear Weapons 

Strategy: Tradition within Evolution (Lexington, 

Mass.: Lexington Books, 1988). 

58. 金一南 [Jin Yi’nan], “美在南海活动严重破坏中

国国家安全” [U.S. Activities in the South China 

Sea Seriously Harm China’s National Security], 

中国广播网 [China Broadcast Net], 13 March 

2009.

59. See 陈炳德 [Chen Bingde], “回忆汶川地震救灾

决策指挥过程” [Recollect Command and Decision Processes for Wenchuan Earthquake Relief], 

Liberation Army Daily, 9 December 2008, available at www.chinamil.com; and “国防部: 解放军

四级指挥体系确保地震高效救援” [Ministry of 

National Defense: PLA’s Four-Level Command 

System Ensures Highly Effective Earthquake 

Relief], 中国新闻网 [China News Net], 11 June 

2008.

60. See “Ministry of National Defense: PLA’s FourLevel Command System Ensures Highly Effective 

Earthquake Relief.”

61. Chen, “Recollect Command and Decision Processes for Wenchuan Earthquake Relief.” 

62. This paragraph is largely based on conversations with informed sources in Beijing in late 

December 2008 and with Chinese scholars and 

officials in Shanghai in early August 2009. For 

an example of various interpretations of Wen’s 

famous quotation from major Chinese websites, 

see blog.sina.com.cn/. 

63. For these events, see “地震救援13.7万军队是

如何调配?” [How Were 137,000 Earthquake 

Rescue and Relief Troops Deployed?], 中国新闻

周刊 [China Newsweek], 6 June 2008; and Chen, 

“Recollect Command and Decision Processes for 

Wenchuan Earthquake Relief.”

64. Conversations with informed sources in Beijing 

in late December 2008. 

65. See 戴旭 [Dai Xu] (Col., PLAAF), “中国应建立

常备救难体系” [China Should Establish Permanent Disaster Relief System], 环球时报 [Global 

Times], 2 July 2008; and 刘世青 [Liu Shiqing] 

and 潘杰昌 [Pan Jiechang], “提高预备役部队

执行处置突发事件任务的能力” [Enhance the 

Ability of the Reserve Units in Executing Tasks in 

Handling Emergency Incidents], 27 May 2008, 

in Liberation Army Daily, available at www 

.chinamil.com. 

66. For issuing different types of equipment, see 

Chen, “Recollect Command and Decision 

Processes for Wenchuan Earthquake Relief.” For 

inappropriate equipment and lack of training, 

see “李运之: 关注非战争军事行动装备建

设” [Li Yunzi: Show Concern for Equipment 

Construction of Nonwar Military Operations], 

Liberation Army Daily, 11 March 2009, p. 1; and 

Dai, “China Should Establish Permanent Disaster 

Relief System.” Li Yunzi is a former deputy political commissar of the Shenyang MR.

67. For PLA interpretations of the new core-value 

concept and ways to internalize it, see 李亚萍

[Li Yaping] and 张涛 [Zhang Tao], “我军核心价

值观的精辟概括” [An Incisive Summary of the 

Core-Value Concept of Our Army], Liberation 

Army Daily, 2 February 2009, p. 7; and 占国桥

[Zhan Guoqiao], “把握军人核心价值观的内

在逻辑” [Grasp the Internal Logics of the CoreValue Concept for Military Men], Liberation 

Army Daily, 29 March 2009, p. 7. 

68. “兵马未动, 军法先行—中国军队也需要法

律 ‘掩护’” [Military Law Precedes Movement of 

Troops and Horses: The Chinese Military Also 

Needs “Cover” of Law], Southern Weekend, 2 

April 2009. According to this story, on 28 March 

2009 a research seminar was held at China Politics and Law University in Beijing involving legal 

experts from the CMC Legal Bureau, AMS, NDU, 

PLA Science and Engineering University, PLA 

Xian Political College, and the PLAN.

69. See 霍小勇 [Huo Xiaoyong], “锻造有多样化

能力的现代化军队” [Forge a Modern Military 

with Diversified Capabilities], Liberation Army 

Daily, 24 June 2008, p. 11; and 韩志庆 [Han 

Zhiqing], “‘能战度’—非战争军事行动新课题” 

[“The Levels of Ability to Fight”: New Issue for 

Nonwar Military Operations], Liberation Army 

Daily, 24 June 2008, p. 11.
46 china maritime studies

70. See Dai, “China Should Establish Permanent 

Disaster Relief System.” It is important to note 

that Dai’s article was published on 2 July 2008.

71. Hu, cited in 张兆垠 [Zhang Zhaoyin] (Maj. 

Gen.), “坚持不懈地加强我军核心军事能力

建设” [Resolutely and Steadily Strengthen the 

Core Military Capabilities Construction of Our 

Army], Liberation Army Daily, 2 December 2008; 

and “胡锦涛强调军队重点加强核心军事能

力建设” [Hu Jintao Stresses That the Military 

Should Place Emphasis on Enhancing Core Military Capabilities Construction], Xinhua Net, 12 

March 2009. Zhang is deputy commander of the 

Fourteenth Group Army, stationed in Yun’nan 

Province.

72. See 陈学武 [Chen Xuewu], “科学推进核心军

事能力建设” [Scientifically Move Forward Core 

Military Capabilities Construction], Liberation 

Army Daily, 12 March 2009, p. 10; and 王西欣

[Wang Xixin], “打造与时代同步的核心军事

能力” [Forge Core Military Capabilities in Step 

with the Time], Liberation Army Daily, 2 May 

2009, p. 6.

73. See 李飞 [Li Fei], “中国需强大内卫力量, 增强

对内维稳能力” [China Needs Powerful Domestic Security Force to Enhance Ability to Maintain 

Domestic Stability], Global Times, 5 June 2009. 

Li, a PAP major, is a doctoral student at NDU in 

Beijing.

74. See “非战争军事行动有精兵” [Nonwar Military 

Operations Have Elite Forces], Liberation Army 

Daily, 16 September 2009.

75. See “交通部国际合作司长透露海军护航决策

由来” [Head of International Cooperation Department of Ministry of Transportation Reveals 

Origins of Decision on Naval Escort], 三联生活

周刊 [Sanlian Life Weekly], 16 January 2009; and 

“Military Law Precedes Movement of Troops and 

Horses.”

76. See “Head of International Cooperation Department of Ministry of Transportation Reveals 

Origins of Decision on Naval Escort.” 

77. Conversation with Chinese scholar visiting the 

U.S. Naval War College on 16 September 2009.

78. See “Military Law Precedes Movement of Troops 

and Horses.”

79. Nominally, the CMC also answers to China’s 

legislature, the National People’s Congress.

80. It is important to note, however, the PLA ground 

force is also undergoing transformation in terms 

of “mechanization” and “informatization.”

81. For a discussion of the special characteristics of 

the PLAN, see also 田中 [Tian Zhong], “海军

非战争军事行动的特点, 类型及能力建设” 

[Characteristics, Types, and Capability 

Development of Naval Nonwar Military Operations], 中国军事科学 [China Military Science], 

no. 3 (2008). Tian is the commander of the 

PLAN’s North Sea Fleet.

82. For Liu’s advocacy of an aircraft carrier program, 

see Liu Huaqing, 刘华清回忆录 [Liu Huaqing’s 

Memoirs] (Beijing: Liberation Army Press, 2004), 

pp. 477–81. 

83. Conversation with informed sources in Guangzhou in 2003. See also “凤凰网专访马辛春: 十

年前就该造航母” [Phoenix Net’s Special Interview with Ma Xinchun (former PLAN North Sea 

Fleet commander): Aircraft Carrier Should Have 

Been Developed 10 Years Ago], Phoenix Net, 14 

October 2009. In the interview, Ma makes the 

point that someone was criticized for advocating 

aircraft carriers ten years ago. He actually refers 

to an incident where a North Sea Fleet senior 

officer was reprimanded by Jiang at a National 

People’s Congress annual meeting for advocating 

aircraft carriers.

84. See note 45.

85. Hu, cited in 瞿健文 [Qu Jianwen] (deputy dean 

of International Relations Research Institute of 

Yunnan University), “中缅油气管道, 两国人

心所向” [Sino-Burmese Oil and Gas Pipeline Is 

Favored by the People of Both Countries], 中国

青年参考 [China Youth Reference], 1 July 2009.

86. “碧海铸剑: 党中央, 中央军委为海军现代化建

设科学决策” [Forge Sword in Blue Seas: Party 

Central and CMC Make Scientific Decisions for 

Navy Modernization Construction], Xinhua Net,

18 May 2009. 

87. See “远征索马里背后: 中国海军为国家利益

挺进深蓝” [Behind the Expedition to Somalia: 

The Chinese Navy Advances to Deep Blue for 

National Interests], China Newsweek, 1 February 

2009; and “海军2006年服役两艘新型核潜

艇, 胡主席亲自授旗” [Two New-Type Nuclear 

Submarines Entered Service in 2006: Chairman 

Hu Personally Conferred the Flag], 人民日报

[People’s Daily], 18 May 2009. 

88. See “Two New-Type Nuclear Submarines Entered 

Service in 2006.”

89. “China Parades Naval Might,” Agence FrancePresse, 23 April 2009.

90. PAP members are excluded from the PLA 

membership mainly because the PAP has a 

separate budget and its senior officers are not 

represented in the CMC or the PLA’s four 

general departments. 

91. PLAN members are 吴胜利 (Wu Shengli, PLAN 

commander), 刘小江 (Liu Xiaojiang, PLAN 

political commissar), 童世平 (Tong 

Shiping, NDU political commissar), 孙建国
chinese civil-military relations in the post-deng era 47

(Sun Jianguo, deputy chief of PLA General Staff), 

苏世亮 (Su Shiliang, PLAN chief of staff), 徐

一天 (Xu Yitian, National Defense Science and 

Technology University political commissar), and 

丁一平 (Ding Yiping, deputy PLAN commander). This paragraph is based on materials from 军

政在线 (Military and Politics Online), www 

.chinajunzheng.com, a Chinese website on 

military and political personalities in China. 

Similarly, PLAAF members grew from five to 

eight and Second Artillery members from two 

to three. PLAAF has one more member than the 

PLAN, because Yang Liwei, China’s first astronaut, became a member.

92. “中国海军四化舰长将领领航, 清一色科班出

身” [Ship Captain Admirals of the Chinese Navy 

in Command, All Having Professional Origins], 

Ta Kung Pao, 7 April 2009. Wang Zhaohai, 

however, recently became the director of PLAN 

Political Department, and his AMS billet was 

filled by Rear Adm. Xu Lili, former political commissar of PLAN Logistics Department. 

93. See Nan Li, “The Evolution of China’s Naval 

Strategy and Capabilities: From ‘Near Coast’ and 

‘Near Seas’ to ‘Far Seas,’” Asian Security 5, no. 2 

(May–August 2009), pp. 161–63. 

94. See Wu Shengli, “万里海疆推进暖心惠兵工程” 

[Move Forward the Project of Warming Hearts 

and Benefiting Soldiers along the 10,000 Li Sea 

Frontier], Liberation Army Daily, 20 January 

2009, p. 11, available at www.chinamil.com. 

95. For examples, see Tian, “Characteristics, Types, 

and Capability Development of Naval Nonwar 

Military Operations”; and 沈金龙 [Shen 

Jinlong], “海军非军事行动面临的挑战及对

策” [Naval Nonwar Military Operations: Challenges Faced and Coping Strategies], 人民海军

[People’s Navy], 20 January 2009, p. 4. Shen is 

commander of a North Sea Fleet support base.

Abbreviations and Definitions

A AMS Academy of Military Science

ASAT antisatellite

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations

C CCP Chinese Communist Party

CDIC Central Disciplinary Inspection Commission

CMC Central Military Commission

E EEZ exclusive economic zone

G GAD General Armament Department

GLD General Logistics Department

GPD General Political Department

GSD General Staff Department

M MD military district 

MFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs

MND Ministry of National Defense (of the State Council)

MR military region

MT Ministry of Transportation

N NDU National Defense University 

P PAP People’s Armed Police

PLA People’s Liberation Army

PLAAF People’s Liberation Army Air Force

PLAN People’s Liberation Army Navy

R RMA revolution in military affairs
About the Author

Nan Li is an associate professor at the China Maritime Studies Institute, in the Strategic Research Department, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, of the U.S. Naval War 

College. He has published extensively on Chinese security and military policy. His 

writings have appeared in Security Studies, China Quarterly, China Journal, Armed 

Forces & Society, Issues and Studies, and many other journals. He has contributed to 

edited volumes from RAND Corporation, the National Defense University Press, 

Clarendon Press, M. E. Sharpe, U.S. Army War College, and National Bureau of Asian 

Research. He has also published a monograph with the United States Institute of Peace. 

He is the editor of Chinese Civil-Military Relations (Routledge, 2006). His most recent 

publication is “The Evolution of China’s Naval Strategy and Capabilities: From ‘Near 

Coast’ and ‘Near Seas’ to ‘Far Seas’” in Asian Security (Spring 2009). Nan Li holds a 

PhD in political science from the Johns Hopkins University.