Every Friday, Xinanigans analyzes China’s most consequential moves across geopolitics, military, economy, and propaganda, revealing Beijing’s evolving strategy and its impact on US national security.
Bottom Line: Beijing set October dates for the Fourth Plenum to enshrine the PRC’s 15th Five-Year Plan, mandated the sinicization of religion, reinforced ties with North Korea, staged a sovereignty ceremony at Scarborough Shoal, and ran simulated attack drills on a British warship. These moves harden Party control at home while normalizing coercion abroad, narrowing US strategic space.
1. Xi Jinping Leads Historic 70th Anniversary Xinjiang Delegation
The Politburo announced that the Fourth Plenum of the 20th Central Committee will convene October 20–23 to finalize the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030). Xi Jinping presided over the meeting, which emphasized “Chinese-style modernization” as the guiding framework. In parallel, Beijing appointed new provincial party chiefs in Liaoning and Inner Mongolia, signaling cadre reshuffles designed to align regional leadership with upcoming policy priorities.
Why it matters:
The 15th FYP will be the first fully drafted under Xi’s “new journey” through 2035, shifting the purpose of planning from setting economic targets to embedding ideological loyalty into development strategy. By tying political loyalty to implementation, Xi is transforming FYPs into instruments of Party rule. The reshuffles ensure provincial execution is tightly synchronized with central priorities, reducing space for regional discretion and tightening the feedback loop between ideology and economic governance.
Implications for US National Security:
Geoeconomic Lock-In: Embedding Party leadership into economic planning reduces the effectiveness of external pressure tools by making economic levers subservient to political imperatives.
Authoritarian Coordination: Provincial reshuffles strengthen central command, improving Beijing’s ability to mobilize resources for strategic competition.
Strategic Messaging: Elevating “Chinese-style modernization” as a global model challenges the appeal of market-driven development frameworks.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
Overcentralization Costs: Past rigid campaigns such as zero-COVID enforcement and debt-control crackdowns show how inflexible central directives can magnify economic shocks. This provides openings for US and allied pressure when China doubles down on rigid targets.
Implementation Gaps: Local governments have historically struggled to execute centrally imposed mandates, e.g., Henan’s falsified GDP data and Guizhou’s debt crisis illustrate how loyalty to Beijing often collides with fiscal reality.
2. Politburo Study Session on Sinicization of Religion
Xi Jinping chaired a Politburo collective study session focused on the Sinicization of religion, mandating that all faiths operating in China must “adapt to Chinese civilization” and remain under Party leadership. The session elevated religious policy into the same domain as security and ideology, presenting Sinicization as a pillar of national unity.
Why it matters:
By framing religion as a vector of ideological security, Beijing is weaponizing religious identity as a loyalty test, extending identity control into the cultural and spiritual domain. The move fuses faith practice with political loyalty, reinforcing the Party’s claim that Chinese identity cannot exist outside its governance.
Implications for US National Security:
Identity Weaponization: Religious life becomes another battlefield for loyalty, complicating US engagement with Chinese civil society.
Diaspora Influence: Sinicization pressures extend to Chinese religious communities abroad, creating new vectors for censorship and control.
Narrative Contest: Beijing positions religious control as cultural protection, undermining US advocacy on religious freedom.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
International Pushback: Sinicization policies provide leverage for US-led coalitions on religious freedom, particularly with Muslim-majority and Christian-majority states.
Grassroots Persistence: Despite decades of repression, underground Protestant churches, Hui Muslim communities in Ningxia, and Falun Gong adherents have continued to resist assimilation. These precedents suggest Sinicization will face limits in practice, providing openings for external advocacy and intelligence outreach.
3. China–North Korea Diplomacy Push
Premier Li Qiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi held talks with DPRK Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui in Beijing, pledging to implement the Xi–Kim consensus reached earlier in September. The meetings emphasized deepening economic cooperation, aligning positions against “hegemonism,” and strengthening regional coordination.
Why it matters:
The meetings demonstrate Beijing’s intent to knit Pyongyang more tightly into its strategic orbit, bolstering bloc consolidation against the United States and allies. China’s role as North Korea’s patron ensures that its influence will shape the peninsula’s security dynamics.
Implications for US National Security:
Alliance Stress: Reinforced PRC-DPRK ties pressure South Korea and Japan to recalibrate deterrence strategies.
Strategic Depth: Beijing uses Pyongyang to stretch US and allied resources across multiple fronts.
Asymmetric Partnerships: China showcases its ability to build counter-coalitions that undermine sanctions and isolate Washington diplomatically.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
Chronic Drain: Past attempts to deepen economic ties, such as Beijing’s investments in Rason and cross-border trade zones, produced little sustainable return and often left China subsidizing North Korea’s instability. The same dynamic could undermine current pledges.
Reputational Trap: When Pyongyang has tested nuclear weapons or missiles, Beijing has faced international backlash despite limited control over Kim’s decisions. Renewed alignment risks pulling China into another reputational trap.
4. Scarborough Shoal Flag-Raising
On October 1, the China Coast Guard held a National Day flag-raising ceremony aboard a vessel anchored near Scarborough Shoal, a territory claimed by both Beijing and Manila. Scarborough sits within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, 120 nautical miles off Luzon, making it strategically valuable for both fisheries and military positioning. The act was covered extensively by Chinese state media as a demonstration of sovereignty.
Why it matters:
Linking National Day to an assertive presence in disputed waters reinforces Beijing’s claim of “indisputable sovereignty” while signaling its readiness to normalize administrative control over contested maritime space.
Implications for US National Security:
Alliance Pressure: Manila is forced to respond, testing the credibility of the US–Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty.
Gray-Zone Escalation: Ceremonies like this continue to blur the line between symbolic assertion and incremental occupation.
Regional Signaling: The timing amplifies Beijing’s message that sovereignty disputes are integral to its national identity.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
Regional Pushback: Assertive ceremonies at Scarborough risk hardening Manila’s resolve, as seen in recent moves to expand US-Philippines base access and joint patrols. This provides Washington with fresh leverage in alliance-building.
Exposure Points: Continuous deployments to Scarborough create predictable PLA and CCG operating patterns that US and allied forces can surveil, exploit, or counter.
5. PLA Simulated Attack Runs on HMS Richmond
Chinese fighter jets performed simulated attack runs against the Royal Navy frigate HMS Richmond as it transited near the Taiwan Strait. Reports described the maneuvers as “kill” simulations, representing an escalation in PLA intercept behavior.
Why it matters:
This incident illustrates Beijing’s effort to normalize coercive air and naval maneuvers against non-US allies, extending its deterrence campaign beyond the United States to NATO partners. While tactical, it is designed to erode allied confidence in freedom-of-navigation operations and demonstrate PLA readiness to contest foreign military presence in the Strait.
Implications for US National Security:
Escalation Thresholds: Simulated attacks blur the line between signaling and live combat, heightening the risk of miscalculation.
Alliance Deterrence: Targeting a British vessel pressures NATO to reconsider Indo-Pacific deployments, testing Western coalition durability.
Operational Warning: The exercise demonstrates Beijing’s intent to prepare for high-intensity naval engagements, not just harassment.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
Escalation Backfire: By raising the risk of accidents with non-US allies, Beijing risks expanding the pool of nations willing to align more closely with Washington on deterrence.
Reputational Costs: Aggressive intercepts reinforce perceptions of recklessness, enabling US-led messaging on PLA irresponsibility and strengthening allied resolve.
Training Exposure: Frequent intercepts offer intelligence opportunities to study PLA tactics, pilot proficiency, and command-and-control procedures.
IW Spotlight
China’s gray zone tactics often hide in plain sight. Each week, I will feature one that deserves a closer look.
Talent Warfare through the K Visa
On October 1, China rolled out its new K Visa program to attract foreign STEM graduates, offering streamlined residency and work opportunities to those with advanced technical training. The program arrives as the United States imposes new fees and barriers on H-1B visa applicants, positioning Beijing as an alternative hub for scientific and engineering talent. The policy is framed domestically as part of “opening” to global innovation, but it is tightly integrated into the Party’s strategy of military-civil fusion.
Why it matters:
By institutionalizing pathways for foreign scientists and engineers, China is transforming immigration policy into a lever of irregular competition. The K Visa turns skilled migration into a form of human-capital capture, ensuring that the expertise underpinning next-generation technologies can be redirected into China’s research ecosystem. It strengthens Beijing’s ability to offset export controls and accelerates the Party-state’s long-term bid to dominate emerging industries.
Implications for US National Security:
Talent Drain Risk: The K Visa undercuts US visa competitiveness, drawing away high-value researchers and engineers critical to defense innovation.
Military-Civil Fusion Acceleration: Imported expertise feeds directly into PLA modernization by bolstering China’s domestic tech base.
Narrative Reversal: Beijing presents itself as open and opportunity-rich, contrasting with US restrictions in ways that resonate with global STEM talent.
Chinese Vulnerabilities and US Counter-Opportunities:
Integration Challenges: Foreign professionals may resist assimilation into tightly controlled Party-led institutions, limiting retention and productivity.
Security Exposure: Concentrating foreign talent inside China increases opportunities for US and allied intelligence services to monitor research flows.
Brand Fragility: Heavy surveillance and lack of academic freedom undermine China’s long-term appeal to top-tier talent, creating space for the US to offer a more credible alternative.
Strategic Outlook
China’s actions this week converge around three imperatives: entrenching ideological loyalty at home, consolidating bloc partners, and normalizing coercive signals abroad. The Fourth Plenum will codify “Chinese-style modernization” as the framework for economic and political governance, reducing flexibility in local implementation while aligning resources for long-term competition. The sinicization drive shows identity control expanding into religious practice, reinforcing the Party’s monopoly on loyalty. Beijing’s diplomacy with Pyongyang deepens a patron-client partnership in Northeast Asia, even at the cost of subsidizing an unstable partner. At Scarborough Shoal and in the Taiwan Strait, Beijing turned symbols into signals, demonstrating that sovereignty ceremonies and simulated attacks are now standard tools of coercion. For US national security, the challenge is twofold: China is shaping the rules of internal governance and regional security simultaneously, forcing Washington and allies to confront a system disciplined at home and coercive abroad.