A sharply worded editorial published by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Daily has cast an unusually stark spotlight on the political significance of the investigations into two of China’s most senior military leaders, Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, underscoring what analysts describe as a profound breakdown in trust at the very apex of the country’s armed forces.
The editorial, which appeared prominently on the front page of the PLA Daily’s physical edition on Sunday (Jan 25), followed an official announcement a day earlier that both generals were under investigation for “serious violations of discipline and law” — a phrase commonly used by Chinese authorities to signal corruption probes but one that often masks deeper political accusations.
What set this editorial apart was not merely its timing, but its language. In an unusually forceful formulation, the PLA’s official mouthpiece accused Zhang and Liu of having “seriously trampled on and undermined the system of ultimate responsibility resting with the Central Military Commission (CMC) chairman,” a direct reference to President Xi Jinping, who occupies the CMC chairmanship and sits at the pinnacle of China’s military command.
Analysts say the phrasing represents a significant escalation from previous high-profile military purges and suggests that the case goes beyond graft to touch on issues of authority, loyalty and control — core pillars of the Chinese Communist Party’s rule over the armed forces.
“The bitterness is unmistakable,” said Yang Zi, a research fellow at Singapore’s S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), noting that only a small portion of the editorial focused on corruption. “Most of it reads like a list of political grievances.”
According to Yang, the emphasis on alleged challenges to the authority of the CMC chairman marks a qualitative shift in how senior military investigations are being framed. “The use of the phrase ‘seriously trampled on’ is much stronger than what we’ve seen before,” he said. “It reflects a very severe breakdown in the relationship.”
Zhang Youxia, 75, is the first-ranking vice-chair of the CMC and one of the most powerful figures in the PLA. A veteran of the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War and the son of a revolutionary general, Zhang has long been regarded as one of Xi’s closest allies within the military, having worked alongside him for decades.
Liu Zhenli, 61, is also a member of the CMC and serves as chief of the Joint Staff Department, a role that places him at the centre of PLA operational planning, training coordination and combat readiness across services.
Their simultaneous investigation has stunned observers, both because of their seniority and because of Zhang’s longstanding reputation as a trusted political and military insider.
While anti-corruption rhetoric remains a staple of official messaging, the PLA Daily editorial framed the probe as a validation of Xi’s sweeping campaign to clean up the armed forces, calling the investigation a “major achievement” and urging officers to demonstrate absolute obedience to the party centre, the CMC and Xi personally.
Yet the article went much further, levelling a barrage of political accusations that portrayed Zhang and Liu’s alleged misconduct as a fundamental threat to the Communist Party’s control of the military.
The editorial accused the two generals of “gravely betraying the trust and expectations” of the party leadership, fostering “serious political and corruption-related problems” that weakened the party’s absolute leadership over the PLA and endangered the party’s governing foundations.
It further alleged that their actions damaged the authority and image of the CMC leadership, undermined unity within the ranks, and inflicted “immense damage” on the PLA’s political ecology and combat effectiveness, with “extremely negative consequences” for the party, the state and the military.
Such sweeping language, analysts say, signals a judgement that goes beyond personal misconduct to suggest political disobedience — a grave charge in a system where the party’s control over the gun is sacrosanct.
The severity of the wording has drawn particular attention from China watchers. In past editorials following the downfall of former CMC vice-chairs Xu Caihou and Guo Boxiong — both purged under Xi’s earlier anti-corruption drive — officials accused them of “undermining” the CMC chairman responsibility system.
More recently, similar language was used in commentary surrounding the fall of He Weidong. However, none of those cases employed the far harsher accusation that the individuals had “trampled on” the system itself.
“The shift in language points to a sharper political judgement,” said Chong Ja Ian, a non-resident scholar at Carnegie China and associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore. “It suggests insubordination.”
At the same time, Chong cautioned against reading too much into the specifics. “The public-facing elements are deliberately vague, even though they signal great seriousness,” he said. “What the messaging clearly does is reinforce three points: that Zhang and Liu committed grave wrongdoing, that no one is beyond party discipline, and that Xi’s authority is unchallengeable.”
Complicating the picture further, a report published by The Wall Street Journal on Sunday cited unidentified sources familiar with a high-level briefing as alleging that Zhang is suspected of passing secret information about China’s nuclear weapons programme to the United States.
The report also claimed that Zhang was accused of forming political cliques within the military and abusing his authority in decision-making. Chinese authorities have not commented on the allegations.
Yang urged caution, noting that in elite political struggles, severe accusations can sometimes be deployed to legitimise the removal of powerful figures. “An attacker will always try to use smears to discredit the one being attacked,” he said. “This kind of character assassination has appeared repeatedly in past political purges.”
Zhang’s background raises additional questions about the plausibility of such claims. As a deeply embedded party insider and the son of a revolutionary general tied to the Communist Party’s founding generation, Zhang has long been seen as part of the system’s inner core.
“There’s an accusation about leaking nuclear secrets to the US,” Yang said. “But what would be the motivation? What would he get in return? These questions remain unanswered.”
Chong echoed the call for restraint, warning that speculation thrives in the absence of transparency. “Rather than get caught up in breathless claims, a more even-handed approach is to wait for corroborating evidence,” he said, adding that clarity may not emerge for some time, if at all.
Beyond the immediate political drama, the investigation has exposed widening gaps at the top of China’s military command, raising concerns about continuity, confidence and succession within the PLA.
The current CMC began its term after the 20th Party Congress in 2022 with seven members. Since then, an intensified anti-corruption campaign has steadily hollowed out the body.
Former defence minister Li Shangfu was expelled from the Communist Party in June 2024. Former CMC vice-chair He Weidong and ex-Political Work Department chief Miao Hua were expelled only months ago.
With Zhang and Liu now under investigation, key roles at the apex of military decision-making are effectively in limbo. Liu’s position as Joint Staff chief is particularly critical, as it oversees joint operations planning and combat readiness across the services.
While day-to-day functions may continue, analysts say prolonged uncertainty at this level carries real consequences.
The absence of swift replacements has fuelled speculation about deeper issues of trust between Xi and the military elite. Yang noted that no new members have been brought into the CMC for months, even after earlier removals.
“This suggests hesitation at the very top,” he said. “I feel like Xi doesn’t have a lot of trust and confidence in military officers, especially those who are more professional and more adamant about their operational opinions, rather than being pure loyalists.”
Repeated purges, Yang added, may be reshaping incentives within the PLA, encouraging conformity and political caution at the expense of initiative and professional debate.
Morale within the upper ranks could also suffer. Zhang, in particular, spent decades rising through the system and played a role in promoting many officers now serving in senior positions. His investigation inevitably casts a shadow over associates and subordinates, potentially fostering risk aversion in an already inward-looking leadership environment.
Looking ahead, analysts say the most revealing signals will come not from official rhetoric, but from personnel decisions — specifically who is promoted next and how quickly.
Rapid appointments of younger officers with long career horizons could suggest an effort to lock in control and stability beyond the current political cycle. Continued delays, by contrast, may reinforce perceptions of mistrust and paralysis at the top.
Chong warned that the growing concentration of authority around Xi carries longer-term risks, particularly regarding leadership transition.
“When Xi is unable to personally manage the politics of the CCP and there is no clear successor who can replicate his authority, more severe internal cleavages could emerge,” he said.
Such fractures, Chong added, could reverberate far beyond the military, with implications for China’s economic policy, domestic stability and foreign relations.
The PLA Daily editorial stands as one of the clearest public signals yet that the investigations into Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli are not merely another chapter in China’s anti-corruption drive, but a high-stakes political reckoning with implications for the balance of power within the Chinese armed forces — and for Xi Jinping’s grip on the gun.
