Hello everyone, welcome to “Tang Qing Reports on Current Affairs”. Today is Thursday, April 10th in the US Eastern Time. Let’s first take a look at the latest news. According to the report by the Financial Times on April 10th, it has been revealed by five informed sources that He Weidong, the Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party, has been removed from his position in recent weeks.
The report cited five sources (including current and former US officials) indicating that He Weidong has been purged. A sixth source confirmed that He Weidong no longer holds the position. One of the sources stated that He Weidong has been undergoing questioning since his detention.
68-year-old He Weidong, a general, had long served in the 31st Group Army of the Nanjing Military Region. He held roles such as Deputy Commander of the Western Theater Command and Commander of the Eastern Theater Command. He was promoted to Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission at the 20th Party Congress by Xi Jinping, also a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee, and the third-ranked figure in the PLA.
After the closing of the National People’s Congress on March 11th, He Weidong did not make any public appearances. His absence from important events indicated signs of being implicated. Even when questioned about his status at a Ministry of National Defense press conference, the spokesperson neither denied nor refuted the rumors, essentially acknowledging them.
Rumors about He Weidong’s arrest had been circulating for some time, even in foreign media reports.
Next, let’s discuss the escalating trade war between China and the US. Trump has raised tariffs to 145%, while Xi Jinping seems hesitant to even make a phone call. Why has the Chinese Communist Party fallen into a deadlock of “not daring to talk, not willing to compromise, not willing to retreat”? How has Trump managed to secure allies and counter the CCP moves? Additionally, what obstacles has the CCP faced in its united front strategy?
Stay tuned for exciting content, and remember to like, subscribe, and turn on the notification bell.
In recent days, the tariff war between China and the US has heated up. Have you noticed that Beijing has remained silent? They haven’t even given a hint of wanting to talk. Why? It’s not that they don’t want to talk, but they dare not.
Renowned China expert Zhang Jiadun stated that Xi Jinping is trapped by his own “wolf warrior diplomacy” system. In theory, making a phone call to Trump to ease tensions would be a rational choice for economic stability. However, under the current rigid system, showing any sign of softness would immediately label one as a “traitor” within the party.
Therefore, Xi may want to talk, but he cannot. A phone call could jeopardize his position and power; it’s not just a diplomatic issue but also an internal party struggle. Beijing’s dilemma is clear: knowing they should talk but afraid to initiate contact.
What about the US side? Commerce Secretary Lutnick stated on April 10th, “This is between them (Trump and Xi), we won’t proactively reach out, but if they call, we will hand it over to the President.” Trump also mentioned he expects Xi to “call at some point.” Essentially, the US is waiting for China to take the initiative while Xi seems unable to make the first move.
So, who is in the more passive position here? It’s quite evident.
Zhang Jiadun used a poker analogy, saying, “The CCP only has a pair of twos, while Trump holds a royal flush.” Originally, the CCP tried to intimidate Trump into backing down, but he responded by escalating tariffs to 145%, cornering them.
Even more tactically, just hours after the new tariffs took effect, Trump unexpectedly announced a 90-day “pause” on retaliatory tariffs for other countries, only charging 10%. Many believed Trump’s policy was wavering, but in reality, it was a well-thought-out negotiation strategy.
According to the Wall Street Journal, this move was planned in advance. Last Sunday, Treasury Secretary Bessent flew to Florida for a strategy session with Trump on Air Force One. On Wednesday morning, Trump, Bessent, and Lutnick finalized the details at the White House, releasing the 90-day buffer period to allow allies to gain leverage and focus on countering the CCP.
Bessent stated that more than 75 countries had already reached out to the US for discussions, with Japan being given priority. Trump seized this opportunity, showing goodwill, not as a concession but to expand US dominance.
Newsweek also quoted several economists’ analysis, pointing out that the 90-day pause was also a timely response to financial market volatility. Christopher Breen, Director of Economic Analysis at the UK Economic and Business Research Centre, acknowledged that the strategy was aimed at creating space and stabilizing the situation.
However, some scholars have questioned the rationale behind this approach. Peter Simon, an economics professor at Northeastern University, admitted that this move effectively placed other countries at the negotiation table, possibly even prompting China to join the negotiations in the end.
As you can see, the current predicament in Beijing is both diplomatic and internal, with reluctant talks and the inability to appear weak within the Party. Even making a simple phone call requires careful consideration, showcasing self-imposed limitations that have trapped them.
What are your thoughts on the current situation? Do you believe Xi will eventually make that phone call? Share your views with us in the comments.
As the CCP hesitates to engage in talks and refuses to retreat, how will they proceed? Resorting to their usual tactics, they attempt to unify allies to counter the US. However, this time, their efforts to replicate a Cold War-style “pulling together” strategy have hit roadblocks. The CCP’s typical tactics seem ineffective at this point.
Let’s start with Europe. While Beijing vocally insists on standing firm domestically, they extend an olive branch to the EU. On April 8th, Premier Li Keqiang spoke with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, expressing interest in cooperation while criticizing the US tariffs.
The result? The EU had been preparing to impose retaliatory tariffs on over 21 billion euros worth of American goods starting next Tuesday (April 15th). But with the US announcing a 90-day tariff halt, the EU immediately followed suit, suspending their retaliation plans. Von der Leyen even stated, “We welcome Trump’s concession as an important step in stabilizing the global economy.”
Furthermore, she directly called out the CCP, warning them against diverting exports from the US to Europe, avoiding market disruption. The clear message here: the EU does not want to be tied to the CCP’s agenda.
Can Asia be swayed? It seems not.
Despite multiple calls and meetings from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Commerce, attempting to persuade ASEAN countries to join them against the US, the ASEAN bloc unanimously expressed willingness to negotiate rather than retaliate.
Countries like Vietnam and Cambodia – highly reliant on exports – despite facing high tariffs of 46% to 49% from Trump, are leaning towards negotiations with the US. It’s evident that market dominance, technology, and capital are currently under Washington’s control, not Beijing’s.
China’s assertive approach only pushes other countries towards risk-taking, steering clear of entanglement. Even India and Australia outright declined, with India rejecting CCP invitations, and Australia affirming, “We speak for our own interests and won’t pick sides.”
Most notably, Russia, once China’s closest ally, surprisingly found itself excluded from the tariff list by the US, opting not to participate in this trade showdown. By isolating and targeting the CCP directly, the US effectively created a wedge, cutting off China from vital partners.
How well do you think this united front is working out for the CCP? Attempting to convene an “anti-US alliance summit,” countries worldwide have politely declined: thanks for the invite, but no thanks.
While Beijing continues to chant slogans of “justice will prevail, and the US will be defeated,” major economic powers are already engaging in negotiations with Trump, leaving the CCP isolated on the opposing side, feigning control in a losing position.
Moving forward, let’s shift our focus to the Taiwan Strait.
Last week, the CCP conducted large-scale military exercises around Taiwan, simulating a blockade operation. An aircraft carrier approached Taiwan’s air defense identification zone, while maritime police practiced “inspections and detentions” in nearby waters. The CCP openly declared the exercises as a simulation of “comprehensive control, land-sea strikes, and blockades.”
This is not just sabre-rattling; it’s a rehearsal for how to “choke” Taiwan. Taiwan’s Navy Commander Tang Hua had previously warned that this was part of the CCP’s “python strategy,” gradually tightening the encirclement without outright declaring war, continually probing boundaries – a hallmark tactic of the CCP.
In response, the US has been proactive. On April 9th, US Indo-Pacific Commander Samuel Paparo unequivocally stated during a congressional hearing that the US would create a “hellish scenario” to dissuade CCP aggression.
What does a “hellish scenario” entail? Paparo explained that it didn’t involve direct military conflict but rather strategies to trap the CCP in an inescapable disaster upon initiating hostilities.
How? Utilizing a vast array of underwater, surface, and aerial unmanned systems, along with “loitering attack munitions,” all integrated into a cohesive operational framework. Even if the CCP aims to contest air and sea dominance, they would face dire consequences.
Paparo also revealed that Taiwan was bolstering investments in this area, closely coordinating with the US to ensure the ability for a swift and effective counterattack, dissuading the CCP from rash actions.
Beyond military means, US think tanks have proposed new measures. Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Sobolik, in an article for the Wall Street Journal, suggested countering the CCP’s vulnerabilities with what they fear most – not missiles, but student visas.
He recommended a rule: for every CCP warship or aircraft crossing certain lines, the US would reduce the quota for Chinese student visas by 100.
What makes this plan effective? It targets the CCP privileged class’s soft spot – their children. By denying them the opportunity to study abroad, it hits the CCP’s elite right in its future prospects. For the CCP leadership, this would be more painful than a military confrontation as it directly affects their progeny.
Such a measure has low risk, minimal cost, and direct impact. Every provocation from the CCP receives a response, sending a clear message that every action incurs a higher cost.
The key now is not just whether to retaliate but how to do so effectively. With a well-controlled pace, this conflict may not even require actual combat; the CCP may begin to question their path forward.
What is your take on this? If you were part of the Trump team, would you strengthen military deployments or prioritize hitting non-military vulnerabilities such as student visas? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Beyond the battleground confrontations, the CCP’s infiltration in speech and technology is triggering a new storm.
During a congressional hearing on April 9th, former Meta (Facebook’s parent company) executive Sarah Wynn-Williams revealed startling revelations: Meta had longstanding “cooperation” with the CCP, designing speech censorship tools specifically for them.
These tools were tailored to review content related to sensitive regions like Taiwan and Hong Kong, automatically submitting posts for manual review if they exceeded ten thousand views. Even more alarming, CCP officials were involved in testing these tools and making demands for additional functionalities.
Williams disclosed that beyond content moderation, the CCP could “suggest features,” including image filtering and message interception. They could even disrupt services, such as network blackout during sensitive times like the anniversary of June Fourth.
The bigger concern, however, lies in the implications for US national security.
As early as 2015, Meta had been providing AI technology briefings to the CCP, aiding in the development of their own models like DeepSeek. The underlying aim was to secure opportunities for conducting a $18 billion worth of business in China.
Senator Josh Hawley chastised Facebook during the hearing, with Meta currently denying these allegations. Meta’s Communications Director Andy Stone refuted Williams’ testimony as “unrealistic and full of false accusations,” asserting, “We currently don’t provide any services in China.”
That concludes today’s program. Feel free to share your opinions in the comment section. Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and share with your friends. Join us for the next episode. Goodbye.
Subscribe to the YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/@tangqingnews
Subscribe to the GJW channel:
https://www.ganjingworld.com/channel/1eiqjdnq7go2ebXA2yTPUSg631de0c