Xi calls for smaller but more capable army

• A good move or bad one ?
• China is feeling economic pressure ?
• how it will impact in case of war with any neighboring country ?

BEIJING, Dec. 3 (Xinhua) -- Chinese President Xi Jinping has called for a smaller army with better combat capability and optimized structure as the military reform deepens.

Xi, who is also chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) and head of a leading group for deepening reform on national defense and the armed forces, made the remarks at a two-day conference on military reform, which ended Saturday.

"This is a major, inevitable change," Xi told the meeting. "We must seize the opportunity and make breakthroughs."

The president said changes must be made if China is to build a strong world-class army.

Xi announced in September last year that the armed forces would be cut down by 300,000 troops from the original 2.3 million.

Citing rapid changes to the global military environment, Xi spoke about the informationized modern warfare, noting that joint operations have grown to be the basic form of combat.

"Accordingly, there have been new changes in terms of the military's size, structure, and formation, which features smaller in size, more capable in strength, modulization and multi-functionality, with scientific factors playing bigger roles," Xi said.

The president, who is also general secretary of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, said the military's structure must be readjusted and optimized, new type of forces be developed, the ratios between different types of forces be rationalized, and the number and the scale of the military be downsized.

The Chinese army must grow into modern armed forces with Chinese characteristics, which can win informationized wars and implement their missions, the president said.

"Quantity should be reduced, quality improved to build a capable and efficient modernized standing army," Xi said, adding that China must develop a joint operation force system with the elite force at its core.

Xi also urged the armed force to take the reform as a major political issue, strengthen rules and disciplines in the work, and further purge the pernicious influence of Guo Boxiong and Xu Caihou, two corrupt former CMC vice chairmen.

A total of 230 high-ranking military officials, including members of the CMC, attended the meeting.

High priority shall be given to airborne and marines. I can see PLAN has one of the best marines in the world in terms of equipment. Just short of LHD to complete it.

I think China already have the largest armed forces in the world so cutting 300,000 soldiers is not a big deal If it does help them few billion dollars to use the same money for higher end purchases, why not?

The secong largest armed nation has about 30% less forces and still manage to be the Super Power. If only China had a direct threat under present circumstances, it would have made sense to keep 2.3 million soldiers

The highest priority should be professional military education (PME).

Many long term visitors to the US are usually perplexed at how much the military is revered by the general population. Sure, we often joke about 'military intelligence' as an oxymoron and also often the military is seen as the final repository for the society's problematic children. But behind all the jokes and insults, there is a seriousness about the military as a science about people, philosophy, corporate structure, education, etc...etc...And geared towards how to wage a war and win. We have PhDs in the senior NCOs as well as the generals and admirals. Our mid-rank NCOs have the education and responsibilities of mid-rank commissioned officers of other armies.

A 'must do' is an across the board pay raise. Then do away with the conscription policy. While the PLA maybe selective, that is not the same thing as allowing people the choice of not to serve. Abolish the conscription policy with a hefty pay raise and see attitudes change. Patriotism is not the issue here, but patriotism does not put food in larder.

If the PLA is serious about reforming into a professional military -- get rid of the political officers. Regardless of country, political officers are always looked down upon. No one like and want to be around them. They are viewed by the ranks as snitches and despised, sometimes even openly. Leadership development courses should be offered whether the person is commissioned or non-commissioned. It is inside these leadership development courses that a person explores his/her own political views with respect to patriotism to country and people, and then how to lead those under him/her.

Put egos in the closet. Believe it or not, the US military is the most self critical organization in the world, civilian and military. Five minutes for self congratulations, then five hrs of debrief and third party analyses after a sortie is not unusual. If you win a battle or succeeded in your mission, it is the highest importance that you put down why you won and where things could have gone wrong.

And finally...The most difficult thing...Get the PLA out of businesses. Nothing is more conducive to corruption by its leadership than to have financial interests in businesses. Defense of country and people should be portrayed as a noble calling similar to the priesthood who is challenged by a higher power to serve higher ideals. Unfortunately, this is going to feel like a root canal without anesthetics while being thumbscrewed. Like it or not, the PLA's generals and admirals love money more than the organization they lead.

gambit said:

The highest priority should be professional military education (PME).

Many long term visitors to the US are usually perplexed at how much the military is revered by the general population. Sure, we often joke about 'military intelligence' as an oxymoron and also often the military is seen as the final repository for the society's problematic children. But behind all the jokes and insults, there is a seriousness about the military as a science about people, philosophy, corporate structure, education, etc...etc...And geared towards how to wage a war and win. We have PhDs in the senior NCOs as well as the generals and admirals. Our mid-rank NCOs have the education and responsibilities of mid-rank commissioned officers of other armies.

A 'must do' is an across the board pay raise. Then do away with the conscription policy. While the PLA maybe selective, that is not the same thing as allowing people the choice of not to serve. Abolish the conscription policy with a hefty pay raise and see attitudes change. Patriotism is not the issue here, but patriotism does not put food in larder.

If the PLA is serious about reforming into a professional military -- get rid of the political officers. Regardless of country, political officers are always looked down upon. No one like and want to be around them. They are viewed by the ranks as snitches and despised, sometimes even openly. Leadership development courses should be offered whether the person is commissioned or non-commissioned. It is inside these leadership development courses that a person explores his/her own political views with respect to patriotism to country and people, and then how to lead those under him/her.

Put egos in the closet. Believe it or not, the US military is the most self critical organization in the world, civilian and military. Five minutes for self congratulations, then five hrs of debrief and third party analyses after a sortie is not unusual. If you win a battle or succeeded in your mission, it is the highest importance that you put down why you won and where things could have gone wrong.

And finally...The most difficult thing...Get the PLA out of businesses. Nothing is more conducive to corruption by its leadership than to have financial interests in businesses. Defense of country and people should be portrayed as a noble calling similar to the priesthood who is challenged by a higher power to serve higher ideals. Unfortunately, this is going to feel like a root canal without anesthetics while being thumbscrewed. Like it or not, the PLA's generals and admirals love money more than the organization they lead.

Click to expand...

China had lots of talented generals and marshals in world war 2. China is very good at war. Don't look down on China when it comes to war. You had got your lessons in Korean War. Now the gap between us is smaller than ever before, we stand a chance especially at our doorway. FYI, the PLA is not allowed to do business anymore cause that leads to corruption. i have to admit that USA is more experienced at how to fight a war, PLA need to gain more experience. One child policy is a huge challenge for China.

The move is to make PLA more effiient in modern environment, new technology render requirement of less number of peronnels to operate weapons and equipment.

The increased mobility via more tranport aircraft, ships and mechanised infantry also means there is no need for deploying large numbers of soldiers at every hot or potentially hot spots. A slimmed but highly mobile force can be quickly positioned in place in short notice.

I'll address some of the concerns you have raised, Gambit.

gambit said:

And finally...The most difficult thing...Get the PLA out of businesses. Nothing is more conducive to corruption by its leadership than to have financial interests in businesses. Defense of country and people should be portrayed as a noble calling similar to the priesthood who is challenged by a higher power to serve higher ideals. Unfortunately, this is going to feel like a root canal without anesthetics while being thumbscrewed. Like it or not, the PLA's generals and admirals love money more than the organization they lead.

Click to expand...

The PLA had fully divested its commercial business by the early 2000s under Jiang Zemin. Hu Jintao presided over the divestiture, and he eventually succeeded Jiang Zemin as General Secretary.

gambit said:

If the PLA is serious about reforming into a professional military -- get rid of the political officers. Regardless of country, political officers are always looked down upon. No one like and want to be around them. They are viewed by the ranks as snitches and despised, sometimes even openly. Leadership development courses should be offered whether the person is commissioned or non-commissioned. It is inside these leadership development courses that a person explores his/her own political views with respect to patriotism to country and people, and then how to lead those under him/her.

Click to expand...

This is a misunderstanding of the role of political officers in the modern PLA. Their primary role is to ensure the upkeep of morale, and to educate the troops on what they are fighting for. They do not engage in witch hunts. They do not impede combat readiness. If a soldier has been found wanting, he will face a military court, not his political officer.

gambit said:

A 'must do' is an across the board pay raise. Then do away with the conscription policy. While the PLA maybe selective, that is not the same thing as allowing people the choice of not to serve. Abolish the conscription policy with a hefty pay raise and see attitudes change. Patriotism is not the issue here, but patriotism does not put food in larder.

Click to expand...

The PLA has consistently put emphasis on increasing pay and pensions for its soldiers and veterans. Living conditions have improved a lot for soldiers and families, and they are generally protected from hardship.

As for conscription, currently there are so many ways to opt out of military service, it is generally considered to be optional. Abolishing conscription would be a mistake, in fact I feel things have already become too lax. Military service should be the bedrock of society, and a common experience that every citizen can relate to regardless of social class. Conscription should be reformed in China, to be more broad and all encompassing, but not as long in duration as some other countries such as Singapore. It should focus on instilling civic values and discipline among the younger generation.

Now I'll add my thoughts to what I'd like to eventually see in the PLA. This is not conclusive, just whatever comes to mind.

1. Devolution of responsibilities. This will require the formation of a strong NCO corps. NCOs and lower ranked officers should be given the power to exercise more independent initiative at the small unit level. To my knowledge, this is being done in the ongoing military reform.

2. The formation of a joint special operations command at the national level, to deal with serious domestic incidents. This has been announced personally by Xi Jinping, so I'm confident this will be accomplished.

3. More joint operations between the 4 combat arms of the PLA, this is definitely being done as evidenced by recent exercises. Both the tempo and quality of the exercises have improved vastly in recent years.

4. Firing of careerists and incompetent officers. This is necessary to prevent institutional rot and nepotism. I'm very glad to say that this is a particular area of emphasis in the ongoing reforms. It was announced a while ago by I think Peoples Daily, a number of incompetent officers have been told to resign, in my opinion this was long overdue.

There is much more, but then I'd have to write a book on it. The recent shakeups in military leadership were very important. There were also key changes in the ORBAT, units have become smaller, but more mobile, and better equipped. The formation of the Rocket Force and Strategic Support Force, were in my opinion, the most significant announcements for the PLA in a decade.

I don't know much about the SSF, but the rocket force always needed to be their own branch, and not under the ground force or air force where competing priorities could impede the development of rocket and missile power.

wanglaokan said:

China had lots of talented generals and marshals in world war 2. China is very good at war. Don't look down on China when it comes to war. You had got your lessons in Korean War. Now the gap between us is smaller than ever before, we stand a chance especially at our doorway. FYI, the PLA is not allowed to do business anymore cause that leads to corruption. i have to admit that USA is more experienced at how to fight a war, PLA need to gain more experience. One child policy is a huge challenge for China.

Click to expand...

It is not merely on how to fight a war.

Here is something for you to mull over...

In combat, if a soldier is hit on the torso and is suspected of having internal injuries, the first thing in trauma treatment is for the doctor to shove two fingers up the soldier's rectum, even if the soldier is conscious, to see if there are any blood. Then triage and treatment plan can progress from there.

http://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/FMTBE/Student Materials/FMST/509.pdf

Your PLA have not experienced this kind of combat where this kind of knowledge is learned -- the hard way.

It is not just how military doctors learned to save lives, it is also about the warfighters themselves on how they learned to use their training and combat experience from previous generations of warfighters to accomplish modern day objectives.

Wise up. This is no longer the Korean War type of warfare and China learned her lessons as well and that was why the PLA never got involved in the front lines in Viet Nam. The US military re-wrote the book on war and we did it several times over since the 1950s.

The PLA is not allow -- ANY MORE -- to get involved in business ? That begs the question of why the generals and admirals were involved IN THE FIRST PLACE.

It is good that you finally admit there is a problem and it is good that the Chinese leadership took steps to correct that problem. But is the original problem remains ? Namely, what were the philosophical and institutional conditions that made it possible and so enticing for the PLA to get involved in businesses in the first place ? Supposedly, there are unregistered businesses down to the unit level that the PLA command does not want to dissolve. In other words, they know about this and is resisting change. This is an ideological and philosophical issue.

DCS said:

This is a misunderstanding of the role of political officers in the modern PLA. Their primary role is to ensure the upkeep of morale, and to educate the troops on what they are fighting for. They do not engage in witch hunts. They do not impede combat readiness. If a soldier has been found wanting, he will face a military court, not his political officer.

Click to expand...

You can call it a 'misunderstanding' if you want. From me being a veteran, we call this 'spin'. If the political officers do not impede combat readiness or engage in ideological witch hunts, then do away with them. Remove the position from the career paths.

Morale and readiness ? That is the responsibility of every leadership position, from officers to non-coms. Or are you saying that your PLA is not capable of handling multiple responsibilities ?

Do you now see why we call it 'spin' ?

gambit said:

You can call it a 'misunderstanding' if you want. From me being a veteran, we call this 'spin'. If the political officers do not impede combat readiness or engage in ideological witch hunts, then do away with them. Remove the position from the career paths.

Morale and readiness ? That is the responsibility of every leadership position, from officers to non-coms. Or are you saying that your PLA is not capable of handling multiple responsibilities ?

Do you now see why we call it 'spin' ?

Click to expand...

Why doesn't the US Army do away with its Chaplain Corps? Isn't it the responsibility of officers and non-coms to lead faith services and provide faith counseling?

gambit said:

You can call it a 'misunderstanding' if you want. From me being a veteran, we call this 'spin'. If the Chaplain Corps do not impede combat readiness or engage in ideological witch hunts, then do away with them. Remove the position from the career paths.

Click to expand...

Do you now see why we call it 'spin'?

gambit said:

The PLA is not allow -- ANY MORE -- to get involved in business ? That begs the question of why the generals and admirals were involved IN THE FIRST PLACE.

It is good that you finally admit there is a problem and it is good that the Chinese leadership took steps to correct that problem. But is the original problem remains ? Namely, what were the philosophical and institutional conditions that made it possible and so enticing for the PLA to get involved in businesses in the first place ? Supposedly, there are unregistered businesses down to the unit level that the PLA command does not want to dissolve. In other words, they know about this and is resisting change. This is an ideological and philosophical issue.

Click to expand...

You have a tendency to throw out strawman arguments when you have nothing left to say.

We don't do fuzzy "ideological and philosophical" issues here. We stick to the facts. You claimed the PLA is still engaged in business, I refuted it with facts.

Now you resort to terms like "Supposedly, there are unregistered businesses down to the unit level".

That's funny. Supposedly, Adm. Harris is running a ramen shop on the side. Supposedly, Petraeus is running a whorehouse out of his office (plausible). This is what happens when you allow yourself to conjure up fantasies to fit a narrative.

I won't indulge in that.

@gambit don't bluff, you got your A$$ kicked hard in Vietnam. You only defeated Japan by frog leap in those Island, you never engaged their army front side. All you did was giving them two nuclear bombs. To be honest, USA army is not that good compared with navy and airforce.

You didn't win the Korean War and you loosed the Vietnam war.

gambit said:

It is not merely on how to fight a war.

Here is something for you to mull over...

In combat, if a soldier is hit on the torso and is suspected of having internal injuries, the first thing in trauma treatment is for the doctor to shove two fingers up the soldier's rectum, even if the soldier is conscious, to see if there are any blood. Then triage and treatment plan can progress from there.

http://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/FMTBE/Student Materials/FMST/509.pdf

Your PLA have not experienced this kind of combat where this kind of knowledge is learned -- the hard way.

It is not just how military doctors learned to save lives, it is also about the warfighters themselves on how they learned to use their training and combat experience from previous generations of warfighters to accomplish modern day objectives.

Wise up. This is no longer the Korean War type of warfare and China learned her lessons as well and that was why the PLA never got involved in the front lines in Viet Nam. The US military re-wrote the book on war and we did it several times over since the 1950s.

The PLA is not allow -- ANY MORE -- to get involved in business ? That begs the question of why the generals and admirals were involved IN THE FIRST PLACE.

It is good that you finally admit there is a problem and it is good that the Chinese leadership took steps to correct that problem. But is the original problem remains ? Namely, what were the philosophical and institutional conditions that made it possible and so enticing for the PLA to get involved in businesses in the first place ? Supposedly, there are unregistered businesses down to the unit level that the PLA command does not want to dissolve. In other words, they know about this and is resisting change. This is an ideological and philosophical issue.


You can call it a 'misunderstanding' if you want. From me being a veteran, we call this 'spin'. If the political officers do not impede combat readiness or engage in ideological witch hunts, then do away with them. Remove the position from the career paths.

Morale and readiness ? That is the responsibility of every leadership position, from officers to non-coms. Or are you saying that your PLA is not capable of handling multiple responsibilities ?

Do you now see why we call it 'spin' ?

Click to expand...

From what I've heard within the folks I know here, there is a lot of information gathering going on within the PLA of warfighting procedures that seem to point to key leaks/hacks/moles within the US DoD networks(civ contractors); however, it also seems these counter strategies seem to be laid out on EXACTLY the kind of weaknesses expressed in Air-Sea Battle early on in its inception. As if the PLA gets a hold of the closed door briefings and plans their counter strategies on what someone in the pentagon identifies as a weakness in their strategy and then sends out RFI for equipment to counter it. Out of nowhere, that sort of equipment ends up being seen at the next Chinese Def Expo.

However, how well that is ACTUALLY integrated into the PLA warfighting doctrine remains to be seen. I think what is being witnesses is the transformation of a communist style steam roller mentality cumbersome behemoth with a high officer to enlisted ratio(and the associated corruption that comes with political entanglement) towards a leaner mobile fighting force.

So just as there are those pro-change and pragmatic, there are those resisting it due to either vested interests and/or resistance to change. Thing is, the PLA began this only in the early 90s and started implementing it in the early 2000s.

One can remember that the US DoD and US mil also have a history of massive corruption with the recent Naval base support scandal with the Malaysian just one tip of the public iceberg. In addition, there is also vested interests that while on the surface may not be classified as corruption; its negative impact on the warfighitng capabilities could be classified as such.

The reorganisation after the end of the Cold war is one such example, how the pentagon was at loggerheads with Congress and some within it in the process with base closures being stopped or units being kept on.

At the end of the day, the supply and sustainment of a military force is a VERY profitable business in any nation; regardless of the nobility seen in the profession.

President Regan choosed B1B rather than B2 for election campaign funds and supports from it very manufacturer. please don't tell me this is a right decision. Every single weapon developed, be DF21D, YJ91, DF41,HQ26, PL21 is for countering USA in a in-symmetric way. pLa always bears USA army in mind, our target is to cause severe damage to them. All I can say is that USA can't afford a war with PRC now future, all they can do is some tricks under the table to overthrow our government. That's why those malign NGO is forbidden to register in China.

All we do now is to endure USA won't harm China due to powerful deterrence.

DCS said:

Why doesn't the US Army do away with its Chaplain Corps? Isn't it the responsibility of officers and non-coms to lead faith services and provide faith counseling?

Click to expand...

No, it is not.

To start off, it is a matter of logistics. Simply because there are multiple religions in the US military. One chaplain of a faith cannot cater to the religious aspects of other faiths.

Second, on the philosophical side, the chaplain do not answer to the Pentagon, but to God.

Finally, the Chaplains Corps are not institutionally tasked by the US military to monitor the ideological bent of the troops.

https://jamestown.org/program/chinas-military-political-commissar-system-in-comparative-perspective/

The three levels of political officers above have basically the same key responsibilities:

• Implementing decisions made by the party committee;
• Instilling party discipline among party members;
• Providing political education to the troops within their organization;
• Working with other components of the political work system.

Click to expand...

There are none equivalent in the US military and the Chaplain Corps are not even 1/1000000000000th close to what your PLA expects of its political commissars.

As usual, it is evident that these responses came from those who have never served and do not know what they are talking about.

DCS said:

Do you now see why we call it 'spin'?

Click to expand...

We do. Apparently, you do not.

DCS said:

You have a tendency to throw out strawman arguments when you have nothing left to say.

We don't do fuzzy "ideological and philosophical" issues here. We stick to the facts. You claimed the PLA is still engaged in business, I refuted it with facts.

Now you resort to terms like "Supposedly, there are unregistered businesses down to the unit level".

Click to expand...

Right...You really expects these generals and admirals to drop their lucrative businesses just because of an order ? How naive are you ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/235592.stm

Last July President Jiang Zemin ordered the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and armed police forces to give up their commercial interests in 20,000 companies by 15 December 1998.

Click to expand...

Twenty thousands companies ? And that was a low side estimates back in 1998. You really think that these generals and admirals are so altruistic that they will drop control in a matter of a few months ? If they are such morally upright troopers, they would have recognized the potential for corruption and would not have engaged in businesses in the first place.

DCS said:

That's funny. Supposedly, Adm. Harris is running a ramen shop on the side. Supposedly, Petraeus is running a whorehouse out of his office (plausible). This is what happens when you allow yourself to conjure up fantasies to fit a narrative.

I won't indulge in that.

Click to expand...

Sure, you can make those charges. Unfortunately, it is easier to believe that of your PLA than of the US military.

No fantasies here, young man...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-china-military-idUKBREA300G920140401

Lieutenant General Gu Junshan, 57, who was sacked as deputy logistics chief of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in 2012, has been charged with corruption, taking bribes, misuse of public funds and abuse of power, state news agency Xinhua said late on Monday in a brief report without giving details. He will be tried by a military court, it added.

Click to expand...

Ranks and assignments selling have been going on inside the PLA for decades. It exists -- to this day. Essentially, the PLA have incompetent officers at all levels and in all branches responsible for everything from training to nuclear weapons. Mid grade officers can, have, and still extort from their own commands.

http://www.economist.com/news/china...-muscle-against-army-corruption-rank-and-vile

SO EXTENSIVE was the stash of jade, gold and cash found in the basement of General Xu Caihou’s mansion in Beijing that at least ten lorries were needed to haul it away, according to the Chinese press last October. Given General Xu’s recent retirement as the highest ranking uniformed officer in the armed forces, this was astonishing news. General Xu, the media said, had accepted “extremely large” bribes, for which he now faces trial. It will be the first of such an exalted military figure since the Communist Party came to power in 1949.

Click to expand...

Ten eff-ing trucks to move the loot ?

A retired US Army general signed a consultancy gig to Fox News or CNN and everyone questions his integrity. But in your PLA, a general for decades offered his position and connections to the highest bidders and no one batted an eye.

Yeah...You go on believe that there are no unregistered PLA businesses.

old man @gambit always talk about conscription. LOL to him, conscription = unprofessional. The US have conscription during war time and that's why you got your *** handle during the VN war. It's a misconception that China selective conscription meant everyone in the PLA is a conscript. By law, if China needs you, you are to serve at all cost, no different than the US does in war time. However, in reality, no one is forcing the citizens to serve in the PLA.

xunzi said:

old man @gambit always talk about conscription. LOL to him, conscription = unprofessional. The US have conscription during war time and that's why you got your *** handle during the VN war. It's a misconception that China selective conscription meant everyone in the PLA is a conscript. By law, if China needs you, you are to serve at all cost, no different than the US does in war time. However, in reality, no one is forcing the citizens to serve in the PLA.

Click to expand...

Yep.The proportion of NCOs in PLA has surpassed 50% since more than 10 years before as I know