Barackface: Xi Jinping’s Power Struggles: Fact, Fiction, or Fog of Speculation?

Saturday, July 12, 2025

Xi Jinping’s Power Struggles: Fact, Fiction, or Fog of Speculation?

Xi Jinping’s Power Struggles: Fact, Fiction, or Fog of Speculation?

Recent reports about Chinese President Xi Jinping’s grip on power have sparked global speculation. Whispers of internal dissent, reemergence of party elders, and military unease—particularly regarding Taiwan and India’s Ladakh region—have led some to believe Xi's leadership might be under threat. But how credible are these claims? Are they grounded in concrete evidence or are they the product of opaque Chinese governance, external wishful thinking, or misinformation? This article critically examines the speculation and underlying dynamics surrounding Xi Jinping’s alleged decline.

The Context: Xi’s Consolidation of Power

Since ascending to leadership in 2012, Xi Jinping has dramatically reshaped China's political structure. Named General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and Chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) in 2012, he became President in 2013. The 2018 removal of presidential term limits effectively granted Xi indefinite rule. His sweeping anti-corruption campaigns sidelined rivals, while "Xi Jinping Thought" was enshrined in the party constitution—a move reminiscent of Mao Zedong’s era.

Xi's dominance has appeared total, bolstered by loyalists across key institutions and extensive control over the military. However, recent developments—such as his absence from public appearances, skipping the 2025 BRICS summit, and ongoing military purges—have reignited speculation about a potential decline in his authority.

Are Party Elders Reasserting Control?

The Claim: Reports suggest party elders, including those aligned with former President Hu Jintao, are regaining influence, potentially sidelining Xi.

Analysis: Historically, CCP elders have held informal sway, most notably during Deng Xiaoping's tenure. However, Xi systematically dismantled these power centers. The 2022 removal of Hu Jintao from the Party Congress was widely seen as symbolic of Xi's dominance.

Recent changes—including revised CCP regulations that appear to decentralize authority—have been interpreted by some observers as a shift in power dynamics. Posts on X allege that elders orchestrated purges while Xi was recovering from a rumored stroke in 2024. Yet, hard evidence is lacking.

Credibility Check: Xi’s 22-day absence from front-page coverage and his BRICS no-show are conspicuous but not definitive. He re-emerged in public, including a July 2025 meeting with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Rumors of a stroke are unverified, and prominent China analysts, including Michael Sheridan, see no credible sign of a leadership challenge. Xi’s grip on the Politburo and CMC remains strong, and the new rules may reflect strategic delegation rather than a surrender of power.

Military Purges and Taiwan Tensions

The Claim: Xi faced resistance from military leaders over plans to invade Taiwan. Purges, including the disappearance of General He Weidong, suggest internal discord or a weakening grip.

Analysis: Xi has repeatedly vowed to pursue reunification with Taiwan. U.S. and Taiwanese military sources anticipate possible action by 2027. Over a dozen generals have been removed or have disappeared, including key figures in the Eastern Theater Command.

Some analysts interpret these purges as an erosion of Xi’s authority. Others argue they signify his desire to eliminate corruption and consolidate control ahead of potential military action.

Credibility Check: The purges are well-documented. However, China’s military has long suffered from corruption, and Xi’s anti-corruption drive since 2013 has often targeted military brass. There is no public record of dissenting military voices opposing Taiwan plans. Rumors of a "soft coup" remain speculative and unsupported by credible sources. Taiwan’s active defense drills underscore the ongoing threat of invasion, not its cancellation.

The Ladakh Confrontation: Power Play or Distraction?

The Claim: Xi initiated the 2020 Ladakh clash with India to boost domestic credibility ahead of his third term.

Analysis: The Galwan Valley clash in June 2020 resulted in casualties on both sides and escalated tensions along the Line of Actual Control. Some suggest Xi sought to rally nationalist sentiment during a time of economic slowdown and COVID-19 fallout.

Credibility Check: While nationalism often strengthens political standing, the connection between Galwan and Xi’s third term is tenuous. Term limits were removed in 2018, paving the way for his continued leadership. China’s border disputes with India have deep historical roots. The Galwan clash likely stemmed from strategic calculations rather than purely political motives.

Broader Implications: Xi’s Grip and China’s Trajectory

Several factors contribute to the perception of Xi’s waning control:

Economic Pressures: China's post-COVID slowdown, youth unemployment, and faltering property sector have raised questions about Xi's economic stewardship.
International Relations: Xi’s absence from key summits, including BRICS 2025, is interpreted by some as diminished international standing, though it may reflect delegation strategies.
Military Discipline: Ongoing PLA purges may signify internal tensions or a drive to ensure readiness for high-stakes conflict scenarios, particularly concerning Taiwan.
Opacity and Rumors: China’s opaque political system fuels speculation. In the absence of transparency, even routine decisions can appear suspicious.

Conclusion: Signal or Noise?

The idea that Xi Jinping is losing control remains largely speculative. While real issues exist—economic headwinds, international scrutiny, and military reshuffling—the evidence of a coordinated challenge to Xi’s leadership is minimal.

Xi continues to command loyalty across the party and military hierarchy. Until credible information to the contrary emerges, reports of his political downfall remain unsubstantiated. As it stands, Xi is still firmly at the helm of the Chinese state.

Sources:

South China Morning Post
India Today
The Telegraph
Australian Financial Review
Times of India
Tibetan Review
The Economic Times
Politico
Reuters
Newsweek
The Indian Express
The Star
X posts (used cautiously for sentiment analysis)

Note: This analysis is constrained by the inherent opacity of Chinese political processes. Readers should treat sensationalist claims with skepticism and prioritize credible, well-sourced reporting.