Zhang Youxia's Downfall Shakes PLA, US Scholar Questions China's Military Capabilities

China's Ministry of Defense recently announced that Central Military Commission Vice Chairman Zhang Youxia and Chief of Joint Staff Liu Zhenli are under investigation for serious disciplinary and legal violations. This development means five of the seven-member Central Military Commission leadership have now fallen from power, leaving only Chairman Xi Jinping and Vice Chairman Zhang Shengmin in their positions—raising questions about potential future military action against Taiwan.

Against this backdrop, RAND Corporation Senior International Defense Researcher Timothy R. Heathargued in an editorial published on January 15 that what truly makes China a unique threat is not its weapon systems, but its substantial financial resources and advantageous geographic position. As the world's second-largest economy, China's 2025 defense budget reaches $249 billion, enabling large-scale weapons procurement.

However, Heath strongly challenges assumptions that China's military can defeat U.S. forces or inflict such devastating damage that America could achieve only a pyrrhic victory at best. （Related： TSMC at the Core of the AI Hardware Age as Taiwan Ranks Among the World’s Top Innovators ｜ Latest ）

Notwithstanding these doubts, he acknowledges that Chinese forces could leverage massive air defense and anti-ship missile inventories to prevent U.S. military access to waters surrounding Taiwan. 

Heath suggests that American defense assessments of Chinese military capabilities may repeat historical errors made when evaluating previous adversaries, such as Iraq—overestimating combat potential and the enemy's ability to defeat U.S. and allied forces, arguing that acquiring good weapons does not translate directly into enhanced combat capability.

His analysis indicates that without land-based missile support, Chinese forces would need to rely on military leadership, joint operations capability, training standards, modern warfare knowledge, and command culture to defeat American forces, further claiming that they fall short of U.S. military standardsacross all these dimensions.  （Related： TSMC at the Core of the AI Hardware Age as Taiwan Ranks Among the World’s Top Innovators ｜ Latest ）

Is China's Military a "Political Army"?

Heath characterizes the People's Liberation Army as fundamentally a political rather than a combat force, designed at every level to preserve Chinese Communist Party rule. Forty percent of PLA personnel training time focuses on political indoctrination, requiring soldiers to study speeches and commentaries from Communist Party publications covering topics from economic development to Marxist ideology. He argues that the PLA prioritizes social stability and regime security over direct combat effectiveness, creating a severe dilemma for Beijing.

Consequently, Heath assesses that while the PLA might achieve victory in initial conflicts near Taiwan, America's formidable military power would likely hold decisive advantages in prolonged global warfare against China's untested and highly politicized forces. 

He argues China's response to this strategic limitation manifests in rapidly expanding nuclear capabilities. Over the past five years, China's nuclear arsenal has doubled in size, with U.S. government estimates projecting 1,000 warheads by 2030.

Cross-Strait Military Conflict Probability Exaggerated?

The Chinese-speaking Heath joined RAND Corporation in 2014 after over fifteen years in U.S. government positions focused on China-related military and political analysis. His extensive PLA research includes a December 2025 report arguing that Chinese authorities view Taiwan primarily as a political rather than military issue, showing virtually no indication of a willingness to start a warover the island. （Related： TSMC at the Core of the AI Hardware Age as Taiwan Ranks Among the World’s Top Innovators ｜ Latest ）

Additionally, his January 2025 research report characterizes Western perceptions of Chinese leadership conducting military mobilization to conquer Taiwan as "problematic." He argues that Taiwan's importance to Communist Party legitimacy, while evidently significant, has likely been severely exaggerated in Western academic circles.

Heath notes that Chinese leaders have never issued statements glorifying war, promoting warfare, or describing conflict as "inevitable" or "desirable." Furthermore, no evidence suggests China is mobilizing forces for combat or adopting any other form of war posture.

Amidst China's economic decline, Heath suggests the PLA's domestic stability mission may intensify, further reducing motivation for large-scale, high-intensity external warfare.

Heath's conclusion maintains that while the Communist Party genuinely values Taiwan unification, it remains more concerned with urgent domestic social, political, and economic threats to Party rule. （Related： TSMC at the Core of the AI Hardware Age as Taiwan Ranks Among the World’s Top Innovators ｜ Latest ）