PLA reorganisation ... from 7 military regions to 4 strategic regions

abc123 said:

Well, if anywhere, in Soviet Union military WAS under full control of the Communist Party ( they even had Zampolit's )... And Soviet Union is no longer with us not because of some non-existing non-politisation of their military, but because their economy crumbled.

Click to expand...

PRC also face some severe economic problem in 1989 with inflation running at 15% and the divide between rich and poor is growing, that what precipitate the 1989 demonstration.

When PRC face the mortal challenge to her legitimacy, Deng take the most difficult decision he ever face and decide to quash the demonstration. Now who has to do the dirty job You guess is PLA . Were not PLA stand of backing up the CCP , China will suffer the same fate like Arab Spring.

Like they say the party control the gun and that what save China from regime change
All the western press at that time predict that CCP is on the rope.
Economic problem come and go but Soviet Union fail because the weak knee of Gorbachev and his desire to move Soviet toward the west!

abc123 said:

I know it is. But they also have the Ministry of Defence. I don't see the need to have the MoD if you use CMC as alternative MoD.

Click to expand...

CMC is not an alternative of Chinese MoD. Chinese MoD carries out a small area of functions within CMC's functions. It is same as other departments directly within CMC, but under state consul. In a way, MoD is the liaison office of PLA in the state consul.

So, it is still needed for its function.

Your confusion stems from equating Chinese MoD with MoD of other countries including former Soviet Union's. It is instead CMC that should be equated to other MoDs.

P.S. there is no reason or need for China to follow practices of anybody else regardless of their political similarity or otherwise. China should and will always do things in a way that is rooted from its own experience, with learning from others but NOT emulating or copying.

abc123 said:

I wonder, does PLA has Military Police units? Or the PAP is also Military Police for PLA personell?

Click to expand...

PAP is Gendarmerie without organizational jurisdiction or responsibility within PLA. In a way you can say PAP is just another branch of PLA which assist civilian government.

There is no formal internal organization that carries out Military Policing function. A policing unit within Chinese military is against Communist ideology because the military is meant to be people's army driven by ideology commitment and guided by political indoctrination (the political commisars and CCP party cells). Having a police unit would defeat that funding principle in that the soldiers are not self motivated and committed but rather contractors who need some sort of law inforcement. This is the principle.

In practice,

Outside of barracks there can be an ad-hoc group of soldiers who is charged to carry out disciplinary duties. They are called "纠察"/"Jiu Cha". You may see them on the street to watch out soldiers dress and behavior outside of barracks in big cities during holidays, or regularly in Beijing. In this case, both PAP and PLA have "Jiu Cha" troopers and they have jurisdiction over one another as both PAP and PLA personnel are equally soldiers.

Here is the "Jiu Cha" drawn from PAP members. See the helmet badge is of PAP.


Here is the "Jiu Cha" drawn from PLA members in Tiananmen square. See the helmet badge is PLA.


You can also see the two Chinese characters "警备" on the helmets of both PLA and PAP. The words designate troops that carries out local defense of major cities. They are mostly part of PAP except in Beijing where they are part of PLA. Either way, they carry out the same duty.

This again tells that PAP and PLA is very closely related.

Within barracks, "Jiu Cha" does not exist. Any soldiers may and will carry out disciplinary duties put on them at any time by their commanders. I was once charged to be a "Jiu Cha" trainee during my military training to experience how life is in the barrack, that role rotates among persons who is well regarded as good soldiers (disciplined, well dressed, well walked etc.).

Hendrik_2000 said:

PRC also face some severe economic problem in 1989 with inflation running at 15% and the divide between rich and poor is growing, that what precipitate the 1989 demonstration.

When PRC face the mortal challenge to her legitimacy, Deng take the most difficult decision he ever face and decide to quash the demonstration. Now who has to do the dirty job You guess is PLA . Were not PLA stand of backing up the CCP , China will suffer the same fate like Arab Spring.

Like they say the party control the gun and that what save China from regime change
All the western press at that time predict that CCP is on the rope.
Economic problem come and go but Soviet Union fail because the weak knee of Gorbachev and his desire to move Soviet toward the west!

Click to expand...

It is no wonder that the Soviet Union didn't fall in the 70s when the economy was still goeing relativly well, but in the 80s. Same thing for China, while in 1989 still was some problems like you mentioned, but since Deng's takeover in late 70s China was progressing, and progressing pretty rapidly and things were much better than 10 or 20 years before- and that's the reason why Tiennanmen failed.

Mind you, I do not think that TNM protestors were some liberal democrats ( like most in the West thinks ), they were mostly people that were dissapointed that communism didn't work 100% as advertised and wanted to change that. Or am I wrong in that?

Taxiya, interesting. So we can compare "Jiu Cha" with Soviet Komandantura troops?

A practical question, if a PLA member does something bad ( there's a fight among soldiers or kills someone or steals weapons etc. ) who is charged to investigate that and arrest him?

abc123 said:

Taxiya, interesting. So we can compare "Jiu Cha" with Soviet Komandantura troops?

A practical question, if a PLA member does something bad ( there's a fight among soldiers or kills someone or steals weapons etc. ) who is charged to investigate that and arrest him?

Click to expand...

Glad that you asked, however I wasn't aware that you have a question to me. If you want an answer from me in the future, I suggest that you either reply my post or put "@taxiya", so I will get an alarm flag.

To your first question, I don't know what Soviet Komandantura troop is. I can't find anything from Google. What is it exactly? Without knowing Komandantura, I can only repeat that "Jiu Cha" is an ad-hoc (temporary) unit outside of barrack, it is not a permanent unit, it does not exist inside the barrack, it does not have its own command structure/chain. Put it this way, you are an ordinary solider of company A, tomorrow is a national holiday, there will be some soldiers visit the city, your lieutenant (by order from the commander of the barracks) picks you and some other guys to form a "Jiu Cha" unit for the next 3 days, after that you come back as usual. That is all what "Jiu Cha" is about.

To your second question, I assume that your premises is within the barrack (see item 1 to 3).

1. The perpetrator is ordered to surrender himself without resistance. Resistance means almost certain death by either shoot on site or death penalty if resistance related to firearm and murdering someone. It is essentially treated as mutiny.
2. If he refuses to surrender and force is needed, then it is the other soldiers in the same barrack who is to carry out the arrest, very likely his buddies in the same unit.
3. If he managed to escape outside the barrack, it will be the civilian police taking the lead of arresting with assistance of the PLA unit. Note, the civilian police would not have enough firepower to handle someone with an assault rifle, so it is likely that civilian police will call in PAP who is better trained to handle something similar to a urban warfare. Also note, PAP is subjected to dual command (civilian and military), local police chief above a certain level usually carry two ranks (PAP and civilian), so outside the barrack it is the police taking the lead. An example is that the chief of police of a province would (not always) be (deputy) commander or commissar of the garrison PAP division. The PLA unit may not be required when PAP unit is called in as a better option. The choice really depends on which is easy at hand.
4. If the crime is done outside of the barrack and not involving heavy weapon, it is the civilian police's (still) responsibility to arrest the soldier and hand him over to his superior.

The investigation of a military person is always the sole jurisdiction of military procurator regardless where the crime is committed. The investigation and prosecution are carried out by the same office, different from civilian and other countries that have dedicated MP.

abc123 said:

Taxiya, interesting. So we can compare "Jiu Cha" with Soviet Komandantura troops?

A practical question, if a PLA member does something bad ( there's a fight among soldiers or kills someone or steals weapons etc. ) who is charged to investigate that and arrest him?

Click to expand...

another thought, there is a unit within PLA above certain size of formation. It is called "警卫"/"Jing Wei"/guard. It may be a platoon within a battalion, or a company within division/regiment. They are fixed unit and charged to a wide range of duties from protecting the commanding officers and sites in battle field, guarding ammunitions in peace time and maybe guarding misbehaved soldiers in "禁闭" (detention). Is that what Komandantura is? But again, Jiu Cha is something outside of the barrack, guarding unit is within, it is not necessary members of the guarding unit being charged to be Jiu Cha.

Thousand appologies.

@Deino, I realized that two of my posts were deleted due to OT.

I believe those two posts were trying to answer the question why PLA did not take up much of Soviet organizational model by presenting the historical development of PLA from its infancy.

I agree that these posts are of historical nature and deeply related to politics. But I don't agree that they are OT (PLA organization). Otherwise, how could one understand why the PLA is organized in its current form without understanding its history? Is our topic only limited to number of units, size of units and locations? If so, I have nothing to say.