Michael D. Swaine
{
"authors": [
"Michael D. Swaine"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Military"
]
}Source: Getty
China's Assertive Behavior—Part Three: The Role of the Military in Foreign Policy
Although much about the interaction between China’s military and those who decide its foreign policy remains unknown or only dimly understood by outsiders, a close look reveals that the military does not wield ongoing decisive influence over fundamental aspects of Beijing’s foreign policy.
Source: China Leadership Monitor

As previous CLM articles in this series have indicated, at least some senior PLA officers have probably played an important role in instigating or intensifying several of these actions. However, clear and conclusive evidence of the precise role of the PLA in China’s foreign policy formulation and implementation processes remains elusive.
Indeed, very little is known about China’s military-related policy decision-making structure and process in general, both in normal times and especially during political-military crises. Most of the available information on civil-military relations and the policy process relates to the formal organizational structures involved, and less to those internal formal and informal processes and activities that produce decisions and actions throughout the process. Also, more is known about interactions between major bureaucratic players at the ministerial level and below than about interactions among the most senior civilian and military leadership and their staffs.
Moreover, it is extremely difficult to verify what little information is obtained about such policy processes. Some sources (such as many Hong Kong and Taiwan media) are notoriously unreliable; others (such as interviewees) are highly subjective and possibly biased in their interpretation, and in many cases are relating information or rumors obtained from other unverifiable sources.
In this article, we will attempt to summarize and assess what is reliably known, on an unclassified level, about the role of the PLA in China’s foreign policy and foreign policy-related policy processes. We begin with a background overview of the changing relationship of the PLA to the overall PRC leadership system and political power structure in China.
The Chinese military would presumably play a significant role in any major policy process if it wields significant power at the apex of China’s political system. This is followed by a look at the organizational and procedural relationship of the PLA to the foreign policy process in particular. This includes an examination of both senior-level interactions and those occurring at subordinate, operational levels. The article concludes with a summary and some general observations. The next CLM will examine what is known in unclassified circles about the role of the PLA in the decision-making process involving foreign political-military crises.
About the Author
Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Swaine was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and one of the most prominent American analysts in Chinese security studies.
- What Kind of Global Order Should Washington and Beijing Strive For?Other
- A Smarter U.S. Strategy for China in Four StepsCommentary
Michael D. Swaine
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- Why Has Tokyo’s Response to Kremlin Challenges Been So Muted?Commentary
Japan’s long-term security policy is driven by concerns about China, and there is little appetite for (or interest in) pursuing a confrontation with Moscow.
James D.J. Brown
- The Future of Russian-European Relations Is BleakCommentary
The truth of the strategic situation is that Europe and Russia are extremely unlikely to be able to “turn the page” on their confrontation within the next two decades.
Arkady Moshes
- How the Latest Election Changed the Role of Russia’s ParliamentCommentary
Putin’s conservative staffing policies and search for ever greater control have cemented parliament’s transformation into a bureaucratic appendage of the executive branch.
Andrey Pertsev
- In the Kremlin’s AI Propaganda Blitz, the Noise Is the SignalCommentary
Russia’s AI-driven propaganda campaigns operate in a fragmented, chaotic, and often illogical manner. That’s not necessarily a problem for the Kremlin, though: It’s much easier to mimic genuine public debate that way.
Ilya Klishin
- Stalled at the Front, Russia Seeks to Undermine Ukraine’s Economic CapacityCommentary
Russian strikes are weakening the economy sustaining Ukraine’s war effort. Closing the growing funding gap will require more European support and politically contentious reforms in Kyiv.
Balázs Jarábik