Today’s Focus: Only 6 active generals left? Personnel turmoil in the Chinese Communist Party’s military; The insider story of the theft case at the Nanjing Museum that revealed signs over a decade ago.
On December 22nd, the Chinese Communist authorities held a ceremony in Beijing to promote two regional commanders, Yang Zhibin from the Eastern Theater Command and Han Shengyan from the Central Theater Command, to the rank of general. However, the attention-grabbing detail was that only 4 generals attended the ceremony, raising speculation that the remaining generals may have all been purged, including dozens promoted by Xi Jinping personally.
The 4 generals present at the ceremony were Vice Chairmen of the Military Commission Zhang Youxia and Zhang Shimin, Commission Member Liu Zhenli, and Defense Minister Dong Jun.
Notably, Air Force Commander Chang Dingqiu, Air Force Political Commissar Guo Puxiao, and several other generals were absent from the ceremony.
This promotion ceremony was the only one in 2025 where generals were promoted, meaning that throughout the year, only 2 generals were promoted. With the 4 attending generals, there were only a total of 6 generals present at the ceremony.
The last promotion ceremony for generals was held at the end of last year, with about 20 generals in attendance. This means that within a short period of one year, roughly 16 generals were unable to appear in public for various reasons.
Independent commentator Xiang said on X platform, “In less than a year, 16 generals went missing. Xi Jinping’s ‘self-beheading’ is indeed remarkable, creating a miracle in military history with so many generals falling without a war.”
American current affairs commentator Tang Jingyuan told Epoch Times that there are now only 6 active generals in the entire Chinese Communist Party’s military, indicating that since Xi Jinping took office, almost all of the 79 generals promoted have been purged. This mass purge seems to be selectively targeting Xi Jinping’s faction, not likely orchestrated by Xi himself. It goes against basic political logic and common sense for any leader seeking centralization of power to completely destroy their own power base as if undermining themselves.
Tang Jingyuan also believes that while the Chinese Communist military has been severely cleansed, the top-level and systemic purges within the entire military system are not yet complete. Historically, purging such toxic elements from the military has been an extensive process.
Researcher at the Taiwan Institute of National Defense Security Shen Mingshi told Epoch Times that the incidents involving active generals have negative implications for the Chinese Communist Party’s military construction and preparedness. The absence of these generals means that their roles would be filled by acting lieutenant generals. However, since these replacements are temporary, they become hesitant and cautious, focusing on avoiding mistakes rather than making significant contributions. Therefore, the effects of this leadership vacuum may lead to more cautious and conservative military strategies, potentially impacting the military layout leading up to the 21st National Congress in 2027.
Previously, independent commentator Du Zheng pointed out that Xi Jinping personally promoted 79 generals, and nearly half of them have been removed, becoming an international joke and tarnishing their reputation. The current Central Military Commission is dominated by Zhang Youxia alone. Although Zhang Youxia and Zhang Shimin outwardly pledge loyalty to Xi, the power structure has marginalized Xi’s authority. If either of them were to turn disloyal, the situation could develop into a standoff against the Party. Currently, the morale within the Chinese Communist military is wavering, with ‘military tigers’ emerging in droves, indicating the decay of the Red regime. It is clear to those with insight that Xi promoted ‘big tigers’ with their own issues, leading to a loss of his authority, from which there is no return.
In recent times, news emerged about the investigation into Air Force Commander Chang Dingqiu and Air Force Political Commissar Guo Puxiao. Renowned political scientist Liu Junning stated on X platform on December 11th that during the “detention and interrogation period” of the current Air Force Commander Chang Dingqiu, he had a sudden heart attack resulting in his passing.
On December 15th, the Chinese Communist military publicly solicited clues related to corruption in the Air Force. This move was interpreted by outsiders as a signal of the ongoing purges within the Air Force.
The newly promoted generals, Yang Zhibin and Han Shengyan, formerly served in the Air Force and held key positions in the branch.
Current affairs commentator Li Linyi is skeptical about these two individuals, pointing out that while Xi Jinping promoted them, their loyalty to Xi and Xi’s trust in them remain uncertain. Against the backdrop of the ongoing Air Force purges, the risk of these individuals meeting a similar fate in the future cannot be ruled out.
Shen Mingshi noted that being favored in the Air Force does not imply these generals are free from corruption, indicating a disparity between the two. As seen from the incidents involving Air Force Commander Chang Dingqiu and Political Commissar Guo Puxiao, it is evident that the Air Force is not untouched by these issues.
The Nikkei Asia reported that Japan’s Defense Ministry’s Theoretical Research Department Chief, Masafumi Iida, mentioned that the rise of Chinese Air Force leaders is related to the military factors concerning the Chinese Communist Party’s potential use of force against Taiwan. He pointed out that expensive Air Force weapons create opportunities for corruption. Although current anti-corruption actions have minimal impact on the Air Force for now, the possibility of senior officials being purged cannot be ruled out.
However, there are differing opinions, suggesting that while the Air Force is undergoing purges, the impact on senior military figures might be limited. Hong Kong media outlet South China Morning Post believes that Air Force leaders will continue to be appointed. It predicts that at the ceremony, Air Force Chief of Staff Wang Gang and Air Force Discipline Inspection Secretary Shi Honggan will oversee the Air Force’s military and political work.
Apart from these, the appointed Air Force leaders set to play crucial roles include Major General Zhu Jun and Lieutenant General Wen Dong, who will respectively command the Beijing Garrison and the Xinjiang Military District.
In this regard, Tang Jingyuan believes that the Air Force is relatively less affected by the Miao Hua case. Miao Hua has been focusing on the Navy for a long time, and after becoming the Director of the Political Work Department of the Communist Party’s Military Commission, his influence leans more towards leaders with a naval background, sidelining those from the Air Force.
In fact, over a decade ago, the signs of the “Nanjing Museum’s self-theft” case had already surfaced.
According to the mainland media “The Paper,” in 1959, the grandson of the Chinese modern collection master Pan Laichen, Pan Zeng, and his family donated 137 pieces (sets) of Pan Laichen’s “Xuzhai Old Collection of Ancient Paintings” to the Nanjing Museum free of charge. Among them was the Ming Dynasty painter Qiu Ying’s “Spring in Jiangnan” painting scroll. Upon receiving the collection, the Nanjing Museum issued a “Donation of Cultural Relics Receipt.”
In December 2014, in commemoration of Pan Laichen’s 150th birthday, the Nanjing Museum organized the exhibition “Treasures of the World: Masterpieces from Pan Laichen’s Xuzhai Collection,” which included an article that mentioned, “Pan Laichen never expected that his descendants would resort to selling paintings to make a living.”
This article infuriated Pan’s descendants, who claimed that these artifacts were donated free of charge and questioned why they were accused of “selling paintings for their livelihood?”
While demanding an apology from the Nanjing Museum, Pan’s descendants discovered a serious issue. In a news report in late August 2010, it was revealed that in the 90s, the couple Lu Ting and Ding Weiwen of Nanjing Yilan Studio acquired the “Spring in Jiangnan” painting scroll they had donated to the Nanjing Museum. This painting became a prized possession of the museum.
This news was cited by the Nanjing Museum as evidence of the Pan family’s “selling paintings for their livelihood.”
Pan’s descendants were perplexed by this revelation. To verify the incident, in October 2024, Pan Laichen’s granddaughter Pan Shuling wrote to the Nanjing Museum requesting confirmation of the current status of the artifacts, but received no response. In an attempt to view the relics, Pan Shuling filed a lawsuit.
By late June 2025, while Pan Shuling was awaiting the court’s mediation letter, the Ming Dynasty painting of “Spring in Jiangnan” appeared in the spring auction catalog of a Beijing auction house, with a starting price reaching a high of 88 million yuan.
Comparing the donation receipt, Pan Shuling confirmed that “Spring in Jiangnan” was one of the 137 pieces donated by the Pan family.
By the end of June 2025, with the court’s mediation letter in hand, Pan Shuling entered the storage room of the Nanjing Museum to inspect the current status of the 137 pieces (sets) donated items, only to find 132 pieces inside the cabinet. The remaining 5 pieces were unaccounted for. Apart from “Spring in Jiangnan,” the other 4 missing artifacts were Northern Song Zhao Guangfu’s “Double Horse Drawing Axis,” Ming Dynasty Wang Fu’s “Wind through the Pines on Xiao Si Axis,” early Qing Wang Shimin’s “Imitation of Beiyuan Mountain and Water Axis,” and Qing Dynasty Tang Yifen’s “Colorful Mountain and Water Axis.”
In response, the Nanjing Museum claimed that these five artifacts are forgeries and have been processed accordingly.
In contrast, Pan Shuling expressed disagreement. She asserted that her grandfather Pan Laichen’s keen eye for collecting was widely recognized. The donated items were meticulously chosen treasures. She questioned why, if they were deemed “forgeries,” the donors were not informed. The manner in which they were disposed of remains unclear, and their reappearance at an auction raised further doubts.
On December 18th, Red Star News journalists found documentation that on June 18, 2014, Shanghai Jiatai Auction Company auctioned a piece by Zhao Guangfu, “Double Horse Drawing Axis,” for 2.3 million yuan. The blatant appearance of an artwork deemed by Nanjing Museum as a “fake” in the auction market raised public scrutiny.
On December 21st, retired employee of the Nanjing Museum, Guo Lidian, anonymously reported former museum director Xu Huping through a video platform. He accused Xu of embezzlement and smuggling of cultural relics during his term.
Guo claimed that without approval from the State Administration of Cultural Heritage, Xu illegally tore off seals from artifacts dating back to the War of Resistance Against Japan, extracted valuable cultural relics, instructed experts to appraise them as “fake,” sold them off at low prices, and through his son’s auction company in Shanghai, lucratively sold them again. He further alleged that Xu had gifted multiple pieces of calligraphy and paintings to officials from the Jiangsu Provincial Prosecutor’s Office and the Anti-Corruption Bureau.
Guo mentioned that since 2008, over 40 Nanjing Museum staff collectively reported Xu’s corrupt activities on multiple occasions. Even the Xinhua News Agency had published materials exposing Xu’s corruption. However, due to the wide network of bribery and overwhelming influence, these reports were swept under the rug. Starting from 2010, he reported these issues to multiple departments but received “no effective feedback” so far.
On the evening of December 23rd, Hong Kong’s “Asian Weekly” released a video showing that around 10 PM on the 22nd, police surrounded Xu Huping’s villa, leading to his detention, which lasted until around 12:30 PM on the 23rd, involving Xu, his wife, and their maid.
According to Xu’s neighbor, upon the police’s arrival, their villa was fully surrounded until the following afternoon when several official vehicles entered to take the relevant individuals away.
In response to the incident, American student of the history department at St. Anthony Mountain Community College, Zhang Junjie, stated that even if relics were determined to be forgeries, museums should prioritize returning them to the donors rather than disposing of them without consent. He emphasized that donors intended to serve the public, promoting a deeper understanding of Chinese culture among the populace. This act of donation holds a public, non-profit nature, yet museums selling these items for profit contradicts the original intent of the donation.
Zhang Junjie pointed out that the fundamental issue at hand is the lack of oversight over the use of power.
Head of the Overseas Human Rights Lawyers Alliance Wu Shaoping told Epoch Times that this case exemplifies the typical abuse of power for personal gain, with a complete chain of operations: authentic artifacts being devalued as forgeries during the appraisal, sold at low prices, and eventually re-entering the auction market at higher prices, transforming power into financial gains. He mentioned that the relic trade could involve deeper layers of money laundering and bribery: artifact valuations often include extra factors, bribe-givers can use high auction bids for laundering, making bribes appear as legal transactions and thus facilitating money laundering.
Wu Shaoping further stated that within the Chinese Communist regime, museums are powerless entities that must rely on various officials. Should the superiors wish to confiscate relics, museums lack the capacity to resist. If corrupt officials hold positions as museum directors, they exploit relics to advance their careers and wealth. In the Chinese Communist system, museums are subordinate and have to align with officials for survival. If corrupt officials become directors, they utilize relics as a platform for personal advancement.
Zhang Junjie also highlighted the broad implications of this phenomenon from a cultural preservation perspective, pinpointing a paradox of protection. In recent years, the digital-age hype around allegations of looting Chinese artifacts by the British Museum stirred nationalist sentiments. However, the events at the Nanjing Museum reveal that Chinese relics have been damaged by Chinese hands, while the British Museum maintains the best preservation standards. This serves as an exemplification that nationalist propaganda has failed. He concluded that authentic nationalism contributing to national development necessitates a separation of state and power. True protection of national culture and assets requires shielding them from the erosion and control of power.
– Production Team of Melodious Moments