The Russian Academy of Sciences recently announced the opening of the Xi Jinping Thought Research Laboratory, the first program outside of China dedicated to studying the thought of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The founding of this laboratory reflects Russia’s increased reliance on China due to Western economic sanctions.
Data from the Chinese General Administration of Customs show a 75.6 percent increase in Chinese exports to Russia compared with last year. In March, Xi visited the Kremlin to show support for the Russian regime and discuss further partnerships. Despite this close friendship between the two autocracies, China, unlike Iran, has yet to provide weapons to Russia. Furthermore, in April, Xi held a telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and pledged to stay neutral in this war. This careful balancing act shows that China’s strategic thinking is a lot more nuanced and complex than some Taiwanese and Western pundits have described.
Chinese attempts to retain the moral high ground at the expense of Russia’s war efforts most likely frustrate Moscow. China often sends mixed signals to the Russian political elite, which in turn finds it necessary to study Xi Jinping Thought and understand its implementation.
However, their efforts are unlikely to be fruitful. Xi is not as ideologically dogmatic as Mao Zedong (毛澤東) was.
Xi focuses on consolidating his power over the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) while attempting to elevate China’s global influence. Achieving such goals is often justified through realpolitik, rather than on ideological grounds. Hence, Xi’s decisions cannot be extrapolated from the study of Xi Jinping Thought alone. Due to the limited public information and lack of transparency on the inner workings of the CCP’s politburo, the factional dynamics are unlikely to be fully understood by outsiders, including Russian academics.
Nonetheless, the central problem for modern autocracies is how they claim legitimacy. This is often done on shaky grounds, by building uneasy alliances with the elites, keeping overly ambitious subordinates in check, and maintaining some semblance of control over the armed forces.
Behind every ostentatious display of power is an insecure leader reasserting his dominance over the state apparatus. Providing the appearance of stability, strongman rule often involves a brutal crackdown on political dissidents and opponents. This “might is right” attitude encourages fierce power struggles once the strongman leader is perceived as showing signs of weakness, especially in times of national crisis. For instance, Wagner Group leader and founder Yevgeny Prigozhin, citing the ineptitude of Russian Minister of Defense Sergei Shoigu, practically declared war on the Russian Ministry of Defense. Wagner mercenaries shot down several Russian military helicopters and seized military facilities during their advance to Moscow. In response, Russian attack helicopters bombed a fuel depot in Voronezh to harm Wagner’s fuel supply. Prigozhin eventually backed down and ordered his troops to withdraw. Whether Prigozhin would share the same fate as former Chinese vice premier Lin Biao (林彪), who died in a plane crash after allegedly organizing a coup, remains to be seen. Nonetheless, this chaotic confrontation is still a sign of instability of the strongman rule during a national crisis.
For Russia, many of the problems China is facing today hit too close to home, meaning that Russian academics might find it difficult to critically analyze Xi without offending Russian President Vladimir Putin. A critical study of Xi Jinping Thought must be approached by understanding the inherent and unavoidable dilemma of strongman rule.
Linus Chiou graduated from the University of Virginia.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017