Sunday, December 28, 2025

Zelenskyy visits Canada en route to US for Trump meet as Russia pounds Ukraine

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met Canada's prime minister en route to US talks with Donald Trump, hours after Russia launched a massive drone and missile attack on Kyiv and claimed new battlefield gains.



Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney ahead of talks with US President Donald Trump.

Agence France-Presse
New Delhi,

Dec 28, 2025

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrived in Canada Saturday for talks on his way to a meeting with US President Donald Trump, hours after Russia pummelled Kyiv with drones and missiles in its latest attack on the capital.

Later Saturday, Russia also claimed fresh gains on the ground with the capture of two towns at different spots along the frontlines.

Zelenskyy said the Russian onslaught showed Moscow had no intention of ending the invasion it launched in February 2022 and which has killed tens of thousands of people.

Before scheduled talks with Trump in Florida on Sunday, Zelenskyy met in Halifax with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who said the latest Russian attack underscored the need to stand by Ukraine.

"We have the conditions... of a just and lasting peace, but that requires a willing Russia, and the barbarism that we saw overnight... shows just how important it is that we stand with Ukraine," said Carney.

Russia has accused Ukraine and its European backers of trying to "torpedo" a previous US-brokered plan to stop the fighting.

Adding to pressure on the battlefield, Russia announced on Saturday it had captured two more towns in eastern Ukraine, Myrnograd and Guliaipole.

"If the authorities in Kyiv don't want to settle this business peacefully, we'll resolve all the problems before us by military means," Russian President Vladimir Putin said Saturday.

The overnight barrage of drones and missiles targeting Kyiv killed two people, wounded dozens and cut power and heating to more than a million of the region's residents during freezing temperatures, Ukraine authorities said.

Some 2,600 residential buildings were hit in the attack, as well as more than 300 schools, pre-schools or social services buildings, said Kyiv mayor Vitaliy Klitschko.

Zelensky said some 500 drones and 40 missiles had pounded the capital and its surrounding region.

"Russian representatives engage in lengthy talks, but in reality, Kinzhals and Shaheds speak for them," he said.

"They do not want to end the war and seek to use every opportunity to cause Ukraine even greater suffering," he added.

During the Russian onslaught, which lasted 10 hours, AFP reporters in Kyiv heard loud explosions, some accompanied by bright flashes that turned the sky orange.

The Russian army said it used hypersonic missiles and drones to target infrastructure and energy facilities used by Ukraine's military, as well as military sites.
advertisement

Neighbouring Poland, a NATO member, scrambled jets and put air defences on alert during the attack, its military said on social media.

Just as Zelensky flew out of the country, Ukraine's anti-corruption agency announced a new probe which it said implicated some MPs.

SECURITY GUARANTEES SHOULD BE STRONG

Sunday's meeting in Florida is to focus on a new, 20-point plan that would freeze the war on its current front line. It could require Ukraine to pull back troops from the east, allowing the creation of demilitarised buffer zones, according to details revealed by Zelenskyy this week.

The new plan, formulated with Ukraine's input, is Kyiv's most explicit acknowledgement yet of possible territorial concessions.

It is a marked departure from an initial 28-point proposal by Washington last month that adhered to many of Russia's core demands.

Trump, speaking to news outlet Politico on Friday, said of Zelenskyy's plan that "he doesn't have anything until I approve it". He added: "So we'll see what he's got."

Part of the plan includes separate US-Ukraine bilateral agreements on security guarantees, reconstruction and the economy.

Zelenskyy said those were changing daily. "As for sensitive issues, we will discuss Donbas and the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant," he added.

Zelenskyy was to brief EU allies after his meeting with Carney.

Zelenskyy added Saturday that the aim of the Florida talks was to reduce unresolved issues to a minimum.

"Of course, today there are red lines for Ukraine and Ukrainian people. There are compromise proposals. All of these issues are very sensitive," he said on X.

Meanwhile, Ukraine needed European and US support to acquire weapons and funds, both of which were insufficient, Zelensky said "in particular for the production of weapons and, most importantly, drones".

In negotiations, Ukraine's "most important consideration if we take certain steps is that security guarantees should be strong and we should be protected", he said.

Ukraine is working with the US on a roadmap for the country's reconstruction, said Zelenskyy, which will require between $700 billion and USD 800 billion.

- Ends


Published By:
Aashish Vashistha



On His Way to the United States, the President Held a Meeting with the Prime Minister of Canada

27 December 2025 

On His Way to the United States, the President Held a Meeting with the Prime Minister of Canada

On his way to Florida, where on December 28, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy will meet with U.S. President Donald Trump, the Head of State met in Halifax with the Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney.

The President expressed his gratitude to the Prime Minister and to all of Canada for their support of Ukraine throughout these years of war.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted that last night Russia carried out another strike against Ukraine, launching nearly 500 drones and dozens of missiles.

“This attack is another response from Russia to our peace efforts. It once again shows that Putin does not want peace. And we want peace. He is a man of war, but he is afraid to speak about it publicly,” the Head of State emphasized.

Mark Carney stated that there is currently the possibility of achieving a just and lasting peace, but that requires a willingness from Russia.

“The barbarism that we saw overnight, the attack on Kyiv, shows just how important it is that we stand with Ukraine during this difficult time,” the Prime Minister said.

Mark Carney highlighted that Canada supports Ukraine militarily and announced the allocation of 2.5 billion Canadian dollars in economic assistance.

“Moscow has turned down even the proposals for a Christmas ceasefire and is intensifying the brutality of its missile and drone strikes. This is a clear signal of how they truly regard diplomacy there. So far, not seriously enough. Therefore, a sufficient level of support for Ukraine is needed. And a sufficient level of pressure on Russia is needed as well,” Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated.

During the meeting, the leaders discussed the importance of strengthening Ukraine’s air defense and the existing diplomatic opportunities. The President and the Prime Minister share common positions on many key issues.


The President of Ukraine and the Prime Minister of Canada Held a Joint Online Call with European Leaders

27 December 2025 - 22:50

The President of Ukraine and the Prime Minister of Canada Held a Joint Online Call with European Leaders

In Halifax, on his way to Florida for a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, together with Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney, held an online call with President of France Emmanuel Macron, President of Finland Alexander Stubb, Federal Chancellor of Germany Friedrich Merz, President of the Council of Ministers of Italy Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister of Denmark Mette Frederiksen, Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk, Prime Minister of the Netherlands Dick Schoof, Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Støre, Prime Minister of Sweden Ulf Kristersson, President of the European Council António Costa, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and National Security Adviser to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Jonathan Powell.

During the conversation, they went over the most fundamental elements of the draft key documents that the Presidents of Ukraine and the U.S. will discuss tomorrow.

“Strong positions are needed both at the front and in diplomacy to prevent Putin from manipulating and evading a real and just end to the war. The world has sufficient strength to guarantee security and peace,” Volodymyr Zelenskyy emphasized.

The participants coordinated a joint European position on the peace process and expressed support for American efforts and for Ukraine.

The conversation also addressed the security guarantees that Europe will provide to Ukraine.

Additionally, the Head of State proposed a schedule of meetings for the coming days and weeks.

Seven Things To Know About The EU’s €90bn Loan To Ukraine – Analysis


December 28, 2025
ECFR
By Agathe Demarais

European Council meetings are rarely nerve-racking, but the one that took place on 18th-19th December broke the mould. Two topics were at the top of the agenda: a long-awaited free-trade agreement with the Mercosur economies and a loan to Ukraine using Russia’s EU-held immobilised central bank reserves.

The discussion did not unfold as planned. The signing of the Mercosur deal was postponed to January, and while the EU will provide a €90bn loan to Ukraine for 2026-27, the bloc will finance the scheme through EU debt—leaving Russia’s immobilised central bank assets untouched.

Here are seven takeaways on what the EU’s decision to grant a €90bn loan to Kyiv using the EU budget means for Europeans, Ukraine and the fate of Russian reserves.


1. The quick, big picture take: Ukraine gets a much-needed financial lifeline

The main take away from the European Council meeting is that Ukraine has secured a much-needed financial lifeline. The IMF projects that Kyiv faces a funding gap of roughly €130bn for 2026-27. This means that without the EU loan, Ukraine would have run out of money to finance the war in Spring 2026. Such a development would undoubtedly weaken Kyiv’s position in the ongoing peace negotiations between the US and Russia. From that perspective, the EU loan is brilliant news.


2. The underappreciated good news: Russia’s central bank reserves are immobilised indefinitely

The €90bn EU loan to Ukraine is grabbing the headlines, but another recent European move around Ukraine may be almost as consequential. To understand it, it is crucial to know that EU sanctions, including the immobilisation of around $300bn in Russia’s central bank assets, need to be renewed every six months with the unanimous approval of 27 member states.

This situation gave Russia-friendly member states like Hungary leverage to extract concessions from Brussels in return for their backing—with the drama unfolding every six months. Now, Brussels has stripped Budapest of this leverage: in mid-December the EU immobilised Russia’s central bank assets indefinitely, putting an end to Hungary’s blackmailing.

3. The intriguing stuff: The EU is exploring alternatives to unanimity

In theory, the EU’s decision to immobilise Russia’s central bank assets indefinitely should have required the unanimous approval of EU member states, as is customary for sanctions-related policies. To get around Hungary’s and Slovakia’s vetoes, the EU Commission made an unexpected move: it invoked crisis-times powers (Article 122 of the Treaty of the European Union) to adopt the measure with the backing of only a qualified majority of member states (15 countries representing 65% of the EU population).

The fine print of the EU loan to Ukraine further shows how Brussels is increasingly manoeuvring to sidestep the veto of reluctant member states on foreign policy. EU lawyers drafted a workaround using another obscure clause (Article 20 of the Treaty of the European Union) that allows some form of “enhanced co-operation” among a coalition of willing member states. In practice, only 24 member states will contribute to financing the loan for Ukraine–Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are out of the scheme.

4. The not-so-great: Fear of Russian retaliation influences EU policy

It was not just Russia-friendly states that opposed using Russia’s immobilised central bank reserves to grant a loan to Ukraine. Belgium, where 86% of EU-held Russian assets are located, was particularly vocal. “Moscow made it clear that if confiscation happens, Belgium and I personally will feel the consequences for eternity. That seems like a rather long time,” said prime minister Bart De Wever. As Russia ramps up sabotage operations across Europe to instil panic, such fearful declarations must have been music to the ears of Vladimir Putin.

Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni also opposed the issuance of the loan using Russia’s immobilised assets. This was a surprise: Italy holds negligible amounts of Russian central bank reserves and Rome has never been a major player on this matter. The explanation for this U-turn could lie with Italian banks: UniCredit is the second-largest foreign investor in Russia, holding more than $10bn in assets on Russian territory. Kremlin threats to confiscate the assets of EU firms still present in Russia may well explain Meloni’s surprise stance.

5. Also worrying: Russia’s central bank reserves are still not out of America’s reach

The first draft of the proposed US-Russia peace deal showed how US president Donald Trump sees Russia’s immobilised central bank reserves: as a signing bonus. The plan proposed allocating $100bn from these assets to American firms to spend on Ukraine’s reconstruction, with the US government receiving 50% of the profits. Meanwhile, the remainder of the immobilised funds (roughly US$200bn) were to be invested in a joint US-Russia investment fund. One way to put these assets out of America’s reach is a EU loan to Ukraine using them. It is safe to assume that the White House will come back with more demands to the EU regarding Russia’s assets.

6. A pending question: Could the EU loan pave the way for Eurobonds?

The bloc will issue a €90bn loan to Ukraine by raising joint EU debt on capital markets. This is huge, since it means that European member states are taking one more step towards the issuance of Eurobonds. That Germany agreed to this decision is particularly significant, considering Berlin has long opposed the issuance of common EU debt. The move paves the way for the issuance of more joint EU debt for other purposes, like defence spending or future financial schemes supporting Ukraine’s war effort or the country’s reconstruction.

7. The forward-looking take: €90bn is not enough for Ukraine, so this is not the end of the story

A €90bn loan is a great first step, but it will not be nearly enough to plug Ukraine’s €130bn funding gap over the next two years. This means that more wrangling over the fate of Russia’s immobilised reserves likely lies ahead. The conclusions of the European Council support this assumption: “The Union reserves its right to make use of [Russia’s immobilised reserves] to repay the loan.” Such a clause may come in handy if and when the discussion shifts to the reimbursement of the loan (Kyiv does not have to worry about this until Russia pays Ukraine some war reparations). In other words, this is probably not the last chapter of the story of Russia’s central bank reserves.


The European Council on Foreign Relations does not take collective positions. ECFR publications only represent the views of their individual authors.About the author: Agathe Demarais is a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Her areas of interest include the global economy, geopolitics, and sanctions. She heads ECFR’s geoeconomics initiative and co-leads ECFR’s Re:Order project, exploring emerging visions of the global order, as well as the interplay between economic might and geopolitical influence. She is based in London, with frequent trips to Paris.

Source: 

This article was published by ECFR


ECFR

The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) is an award-winning international think-tank that aims to conduct cutting-edge independent research on European foreign and security policy and to provide a safe meeting space for decision-makers, activists and influencers to share ideas. We build coalitions for change at the European level and promote informed debate about Europe’s role in the world.
SURENDER SAYS TZAR PUTIN

Putin warns of force if Ukraine rejects peace talks ahead of Trump-Zelenskyy meet

Putin said Russia would use force if Ukraine rejects peace talks after heavy attacks on Kyiv, while Zelenskyy said the strikes showed Moscow's desire to continue the war.




Russian President Vladimir Putin.

India Today World Desk
New Delhi,
Dec 28, 2025 

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday said Moscow believed Kyiv was in no rush to end the conflict through peaceful means, warning that Russia would achieve all objectives of its so-called “special military operation” by force if diplomacy failed.

Putin’s remarks were reported by Russian state news agency TASS and came amid intensified Russian military action against Ukraine. The statement followed a massive overnight barrage in which Russia launched around 500 drones and 40 missiles at Kyiv and surrounding regions, killing at least one person and injuring about 27 others.
advertisement

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the prolonged, 10-hour bombardment was clear evidence that Moscow had no intention of ending the war it launched in February 2022, a conflict that has since claimed tens of thousands of lives.

The Kremlin earlier said Putin had visited a Russian military command post, where he received briefings from Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov and commanders overseeing the “Centre” and “East” groupings of Russian forces. Russian officials later claimed fresh territorial gains, saying their troops had captured towns in Ukraine’s Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia regions.

Zelenskyy is set to meet US President Donald Trump in Florida on Sunday, as discussions continue on possible pathways to end the nearly four-year-long war. Talks are expected to include security guarantees and territorial disputes, particularly in Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia.


WHAT ZELENSKYY SAID

Zelenskyy arrived in Canada on Saturday for talks, en route to his meeting with Trump, just hours after Russia pummelled Kyiv with drones and missiles in its latest attack on the capital.

Later the same day, Russia claimed further advances along different sections of the frontline. Zelenskyy said the renewed assault underscored Russia’s unwillingness to pursue peace, calling the attacks “Russia’s answer to our peace efforts.”

He reiterated that Ukraine remains committed to a diplomatic resolution, but said Moscow’s actions showed it was determined to prolong the war.

WHAT CANADA PM SAID


Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Saturday said achieving lasting peace in Ukraine would require cooperation from Russia, strongly condemning the latest Russian strikes on Kyiv as “barbaric.”

“We have the conditions for a just and lasting peace, but that requires a willing Russia,” Carney said, according to AFP, while speaking during a stop in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on his way to meet Trump in Florida.

Carney also announced CAN$2.5 billion (US$1.82 billion) in new economic assistance for Ukraine, saying the funds would help unlock international financing needed to begin rebuilding the country even as the war continues.

- Ends

Arms Control Putin-Style Goes Nowhere – Analysis

December 28, 2025 
The Jamestown Foundation
By Dr. Pavel K. Baev

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s offer on September 22 to extend the limitations on the strategic nuclear forces set by the Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START) between the United States and Russian Federation appeared reasonable and meaningful (U.S. State Department, April 8, 2010; President of Russia, April 8, 2010September 22).

New START is due to expire on February 5, 2026, and even experts in Moscow who are loath to join the ranks of “patriotic” drum-beaters found Putin’s proposition timely and useful (Kommersant, October 7). The Kremlin, however, did not pursue follow-up actions. Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov sourly confirmed the failure of opening a dialogue on that traditional high-priority track, despite Russian media celebrating Putin’s offer and U.S. President Donald Trump saying that extending NEW START sounded like a good idea (TASS, October 5; Mezhdunarodnaya Zhizn, December 8).

Putin’s offer has now all but disappeared. The only trace of it is in the leaked memo, known as the “28-point plan,” which was published in all Russian mainstream media (Kommersant, November 21). Russian experts pointed out a mistake in point 17, which confused New START with START I, stating, “The United States and Russia will agree to extend the validity of treaties on the non-proliferation and control of nuclear weapons, including the START I Treaty.” Russian media concluded that the document was an “odd hybrid” of various drafts prepared by incompetent mediators (Rossiiskaya gazeta, November 21). It is unclear whether this point—or the reference to the long-expired treaty—will survive the presumed reduction of the peace plan to 20 points or its division into four separate packages (RBC, December 8). The absence of any mention of strategic arms control in the new U.S. National Security Strategy is clear. Russian commentators appeared to find this omission flabbergasting (Vedomosti, December 5; Kommersant, December 7). Following the document’s publication, the Russian Foreign Ministry expressed disappointment at the lack of a U.S. vision for maintaining the balance of strategic forces (Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, December 8).

Nuclear deterrence has traditionally been central to Russian security thinking. The Russian National Security Strategy approved by Putin in July 2021 places great emphasis on maintaining strategic stability. It prescribes maintaining nuclear capabilities at a level sufficient for neutralizing growing threats, which it claims are caused by the U.S. dismantlement of the system of arms control (Russian Security Council, July 2, 2021). The new Russian Nuclear Doctrine, approved in November 2024, elaborates on this priority and defines conditions for a decision on the first use of nuclear weapons (President of Russia, November 19, 2024). The Kremlin’s preoccupation with nuclear matters came into focus when the Russian Security Council convened an emergency meeting on November 5 to deliberate an appropriate response to Trump’s presumed order to resume nuclear testing (see EDM, November 3; President of Russia, November 5). Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov omitted Russian violations of various agreements when he claimed that the United States would breach the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (1996) (Kommersant, November 5)

That misunderstanding about nuclear testing has been mostly cleared up. The problem of Russia seeking status as an equal nuclear power to the United States, however, remains. The Kremlin’s desire for a leading role on the world stage is underpinned by sustained efforts at modernizing its nuclear arsenal (Rossiiskaya gazeta, December 8). Much of the new U.S. National Security Strategy denies Russia the status of a major global power in the emerging multipolar world, not least due to its full-scale invasion of Ukraine (Nezavisimaya gazeta, December 7). From this perspective, Russia’s role is reduced, and it is uncertain where a possible end to the hostilities will leave Russia (Vzglyad, December 9).

Putin has sought to counter this challenge by simultaneously narrowing and widening the agenda of the ongoing peace talks (see Jamestown, November 26). The former is achieved by focusing peace negotiations on the demand to award Russia the unconquered part of Ukraine’s Donetsk oblast (Republic.ru, December 3). The latter is attempted by impressing upon Washington, D.C., the importance of discussions on strategic stability, primarily by announcing tests of new weapon systems, such as the Burevestnik cruise missile and the Poseidon unmanned underwater vehicle, both nuclear-powered and capable of carrying nuclear warheads (Profile, November 11). The Kremlin has proposed a range of presumably lucrative joint projects, including constructing a tunnel connecting Alaska and Chukotka, to persuade the United States to look beyond what the Kremlin perceives as pesky details of territorial exchanges (Izvestiya, October 20).

Putin’s offer to stick to the limits set by New START was not as far-fetched as the Bering Sea tunnel, and it probably had a hidden agenda. Putin did not suggest an exchange of data or a resumption of verification procedures, which were affected by his February 2023 decree suspending Russia’s participation in New START (President of Russia, February 21, 2023; Forbes.ru, September 25). Moscow has no reason to suspect that U.S. nuclear arms will exceed the agreed-upon ceilings, but it probably seeks to hide the shrinking of its arsenal to well below the limits. The only part of the hugely expensive modernization program that is on track, with only slight delays, is the construction of Borei-class submarines. Putin inaugurated the eighth one (Knyaz’ Pozharsky, Князь Пожарский) in July, which joined the Northern Fleet without performing the mandatory launch of the Bulava missile (see EDM, May 30; President of Russia, July 24; Korabel.ru, August 3). Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces need to retire all of the old heavy intercontinental missiles (SS-18 and SS-19) and the lighter Topol (SS-25) as well, but the new Sarmat (SS-X-29) missile, which Putin announced as ready for deployment in March 2018, failed one test in September 2024 and exploded early in another one on November 28 (Meduza, September 25, 2024; Verstka.media, November 28). Russia’s Long-Range Aviation, which has performed hard combat missions since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, is currently in an even worse state. Poor maintenance has caused many incidents—including the crash of a Tu-22M3 bomber in the Irkutsk oblast last April—while a dozen planes were destroyed and many more seriously damaged in Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb on June 1 (Meduza, April 2; The Moscow Times, June 6). Current production levels of the Tu-160 bombers at the Kazan plant reach only a couple of planes a year, while the PAK-DA project for the stealth bomber has been postponed indefinitely (Radio Svoboda, June 28; 1.ru, September 20).

The scarcity of data due to wartime Russian censorship obscures the true scale of these setbacks. Putin is keen to deny the degradation of Russia’s strategic arsenal by both engaging in nuclear posturing and demonstrating readiness to discuss issues pertaining to strategic stability. This performance is aimed not only at the United States and Europe, but also at the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The PRC is building up its deterrence capabilities and presented many new weapon systems during its Victory Day parade on September 3, marking the end of World War II, which Putin attended (see China Brief, October 1; Top War, November 10). The PRC has so far refused to engage in any talks on limiting its nuclear arsenal. Moscow cannot embrace the PRC as a party to a treaty prohibiting the first use of nuclear weapons, but instead hopes that Beijing would approve its intention to preserve the framework of New START (RIAC, July 14).

Putin’s offer to extend New START reflects a deeper struggle to achieve recognition for Russia’s status as a global power and a peer competitor to the United States. The Kremlin cannot, nevertheless, develop any innovative framework to address the rapid progress in aeronautics, space, and information/artificial intelligence technologies, which are increasingly foreign to its defense-industrial base. These constraints make performative gestures an important tool for projecting strength and relevance as “European allies enjoy a significant hard power advantage over Russia by almost every measure, save nuclear weapons” (The White House, December 4). This reality may compel Putin to resort to nuclear brinksmanship even more often.


About the author: Dr. Pavel K. Baev is a senior researcher at the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO).

Source: This article was published by The Jamestown Foundation

The Jamestown Foundation

The Jamestown Foundation’s mission is to inform and educate policy makers and the broader community about events and trends in those societies which are strategically or tactically important to the United States and which frequently restrict access to such information. Utilizing indigenous and primary sources, Jamestown’s material is delivered without political bias, filter or agenda. It is often the only source of information which should be, but is not always, available through official or intelligence channels, especially in regard to Eurasia and terrorism.


Saturday, December 27, 2025

China Is Now Building a Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier

December 27, 2025
By: Brandon J. Weichert
Blog Brand: The Buzz

The new Chinese carrier—the fourth in its inventory—is expected to enter service in the 2030s, well after China’s projected attack on Taiwan in 2027.

China has initiated construction of its first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at the iconic Dalian shipyards in northeastern China. The National Institute for Basic Policy Research (NIPPR), a think tank, believes that recent satellite imagery of work begun at the Dalian shipyard is consistent with the kind of work that would occur when beginning construction on a technically complex, large, nuclear-powered vessel.


What’s more, the facility where this potential nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is being constructed is run by Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Co, Ltd. This is the same group and facility that produced other, earlier domestically made aircraft carriers for the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).

What (Little) We Know About China’s New Carrier Project

One analysis notes how, in February of this year, large wooden supports used during large ship construction—keel blocks—running more than 886 feet (270 meters) were visible. This indicated that a massive new ship was being built at this facility.

Later, on November 10 of this year, there appeared a 492 foot (150 meter) by 141 foot (43 meter) was in the dock. Defence Blog, an online defense publication, reported that “inside the structure, two rectangular frames, each measuring approximately [52 feet by 45 feet] could be seen.”

The NIPPR report explains that similar structures were not present when the Shandong, the last Chinese aircraft carrier to be built at the facility, was constructed by Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Co, Ltd.

The current rotation of China’s conventionally powered aircraft carriers indicates a clear strategy by the PLAN to use the carriers within the First Island Chain (the region running from the Kamchatka Peninsula through Japan and Taiwan down to the Philippines). Under the protection of China’s massive anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) shield that stretches across most of the First Island Chain, the PLAN could both stunt any US Navy power projection with their A2/AD capabilities while their carriers deployed off the coast of, say, Taiwan to launch massive numbers of warplanes at the island.

Japan’s Ministry of Defense reports that their intelligence indicates a massive expansion occurring at the PLAN base in Qingdao. This base is the current homeport of the Liaoning, China’s first aircraft carrier.

Japan’s Defense Ministry assesses that piers are being expanded, demagnetization facilities are being installed (to reduce a ship’s magnetic signature), and a new naval airfield is being built for carrier landing training facilities and hangars for fighter planes.

Nuclear-Powered Carriers Would Mark a True Strategic Shift for China

The nuclear-powered carrier that China is likely building will not be ready until the 2030s. However, the Pentagon and most experts believe that China will try to attack Taiwan by 2027. In other words, this carrier is likely designed for China’s overarching strategy after they believe Taiwan is successfully absorbed into their new Asian co-prosperity sphere.

A nuclear-powered carrier will project power beyond the island chains. Of course, it will be vulnerable to the same A2/AD systems that American carriers are exposed to. Yet, in terms of showing the flag, a nuclear-powered carrier is still quite a statement.

Unlike the United States, which struggles to build even one ship in less than six years, China’s shipyards are the most robust and efficient in the world. And China’s ability to cheaply, reliably mass produce nuclear-powered aircraft carriers should not be underestimated. What this means is that even Chinese nuclear-powered carriers would be expendable and replaceable.

Of course, there is no guarantee that China can take Taiwan. But there’s also a decreasing chance that the US and their allies will be able to stop China from doing so—especially if the political winds on the besieged islands shift away from the pro-Independence element on the island and toward the pro-China Kuomintang.

What this indicates is that China is not going away. It is not declining. Their leaders, whatever economic or political headwinds they may face, are planning to expand Chinese reach well into the blue waters of the Pacific with nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. And, unlike America, China possesses the means and will to mass-produce the systems they need to achieve such a vision.

About the Author: Brandon J. Weichert

Brandon J. Weichert is a senior national security editor at The National Interest. Recently, Weichert became the host of The National Security Hour on America Outloud News and iHeartRadio, where he discusses national security policy every Wednesday at 8pm Eastern. Weichert hosts a companion book talk series on Rumble entitled “National Security Talk.” He is also a contributor at Popular Mechanics and has consulted regularly with various government institutions and private organizations on geopolitical issues. Weichert’s writings have appeared in multiple publications, including The Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, and the Asia Times. His books include Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His newest book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine is available for purchase wherever books are sold. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.

China's maglev train shatters records, hits 700 kmph in just 2 seconds

The landmark test was conducted on a 400-meter experimental track and demonstrated not only ultra-rapid acceleration but also precise and safe braking.



Footage aired by China’s state broadcaster CCTV showed the test vehicle—appearing as a streamlined chassis—racing along the track at high speed, briefly visible as a blur and leaving smoke in its wake. (Screengrab/X@ChinaDaily))

India Today News Desk
New Delhi
,Dec 28, 2025 
Written By: Vivek Kumar

China has achieved a major milestone in high-speed transportation research by setting a new world record in superconducting magnetic levitation (maglev) technology. Scientists at the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT) successfully accelerated a 1.1-ton experimental maglev vehicle to a speed of 700 km/h in just two seconds, marking the fastest acceleration and peak speed ever recorded for a superconducting maglev system.
advertisement

The landmark test was conducted on a 400-meter experimental track and demonstrated not only ultra-rapid acceleration but also precise and safe braking.

According to NUDT researchers, the vehicle was smoothly brought to a stop after reaching its maximum speed, underscoring the system’s control and reliability at extreme performance levels.

Footage aired by China’s state broadcaster CCTV showed the test vehicle—appearing as a streamlined chassis—racing along the track at high speed, briefly visible as a blur and leaving smoke in its wake.

Researchers confirmed that the trial broke previous global records in both acceleration and speed for maglev platforms.The breakthrough reflects progress across several critical engineering areas.
The test validated ultra-high-speed electromagnetic propulsion
Stable electric suspension and guidance systems
High-power energy storage solutions
The use of high-field superconducting magnets

Together, these technologies allow the vehicle to levitate several centimeters above the track, eliminating wheel-rail friction and enabling extreme speeds with reduced noise and vibration.

Professor Li Jie of NUDT said the success represents a major step forward for China’s ultra-high-speed ground transportation ambitions.

He noted that superconducting maglev systems are not limited to passenger trains but could support next-generation transport concepts and aerospace applications.

HOW MAGLEV TRAINS ARE DIFFERENT

Maglev trains differ fundamentally from conventional rail systems.Maglev systems do not use wheels; movement is achieved through magnetic forces
Powerful electromagnets are installed both on the vehicle and along the track
Like magnetic poles repel each other, causing the vehicle to levitate above the guideway
The train floats a few centimeters above the track, eliminating physical contact
Alternating magnetic fields along the guideway propel the vehicle forward
The absence of wheel–rail contact greatly reduces mechanical wear and tear
Lower wear results in reduced maintenance requirements over time
Electric propulsion improves overall energy efficiency and supports cleaner operation

Beyond rail transport, experts see broader implications. Superconducting maglev technology could underpin hyperloop-style systems operating in low-pressure or vacuum tubes, where speeds approaching or exceeding 1,000 km/h are theoretically possible.

The same technology may also be used to provide initial acceleration for rockets or aircraft, potentially saving fuel and reducing emissions.

NUDT has been involved in maglev research for more than 30 years, having built China’s first manned maglev test system decades ago.
advertisement

The team previously reached 648 km/h earlier in 2025, while Shanghai’s maglev line remains the world’s only commercial maglev service, operating at speeds of up to 430 km/h.

NUMBER GAMETop speed achieved: 700 km/h
Acceleration time: 2 seconds
Vehicle weight: 1.1 tons
Test track length: 400 meters
Previous record: 648 km/h (July 2025)
Commercial maglev speed (Shanghai): 430 km/h

With this new record, China has reinforced its position as a global leader in advanced maglev research, with further large-scale tests expected in the coming years.

- Ends


World’s Fastest Nuclear Force Ramp-Up: Strengthening for China’s 2027 Goal Despite Disciplinary Removals

Andrew S. Erickson, “World’s Fastest Nuclear Force Ramp-Up: Strengthening for China’s 2027 Goal Despite Disciplinary Removals,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 27 December 2025.

Amid the most dramatic military buildup since World War II, as part of the world’s most rapid and extensive nuclear weapons buildup, China continues to develop its nuclear triad. The Pentagon’s 23 December 2025 China Military Power Report assesses that Beijing has grown its operational nuclear warhead stockpile from the “low 200s” circa 2020 to the “low 600s through 2024,” and remains on track to surpass 1,000 warheads by 2030.[1] Among China’s three nuclear-capable services, the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) and its supporting defense-industrial base have experienced particularly extensive removals under Commander-in-Chief Xi Jinping’s intensified anti-corruption campaigns since 2023. Yet the report repeatedly underscores a double-edged theme: these purges may impose short-term churn and readiness costs, but could well yield a more capable force in the medium-to-long run. Meanwhile, the report emphasizes that the PLA continues to advance toward realizing Xi’s 2027 Centennial Military Building Goal (建军一百年奋斗目标),[2] in which strengthened nuclear deterrence and coercive capacity play a central role. Throughout, the report offers specifics and documentation available publicly nowhere else.

Key Takeaways

  • China under Xi is executing a historically rapid nuclear buildup, moving from several hundred operational warheads to the current 600+ to potentially over a thousand within this decade, while simultaneously diversifying its triad.
  • Beijing is pursuing capabilities—a maturing triad, low-yield theater systems, and an early warning counterstrike (EWCS) posture—that offer more flexible options at manifold rungs of the escalation ladder.
  • Massive anti-corruption purges in the PLARF and defense industry supporting it, while destabilizing in the near term, are explicitly framed by Pentagon’s 2025 report as enabling a more effective nuclear force if underlying problems are properly remedied.

Goals and Priorities 

This year’s edition for the Pentagon’s report provides its clearest public articulation yet of Xi’s 2027 goal. It notes that Beijing first publicly unveiled this objective in October 2020 at the 19th Central Committee’s 5th Plenum, but that the target was internally established at an expanded Central Military Commission (CMC) meeting in late 2019. PRC media and commentary link this goal to building capabilities to confront U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific and to “coerce Taiwan’s leadership to the negotiation table on Beijing’s terms.”

The PLA ties achieving the 2027 goal to developing “three major strategic capabilities” that the report interprets as follows (excerpted verbatim from p. 16):

  • “Strategic decisive victory” (战略决胜): This likely requires the PLA to be credibly able to prevail in a conflict at acceptable cost. The PLA probably tracks this requirement to a Taiwan conflict with U.S. involvement, which is the most stressing contingency the PLA plans against.
  • “Strategic counterbalance” (战略制衡): This likely requires the PLA to build up its means of strategic deterrence—including nuclear deterrence—to sufficiently deter or restrain U.S. military involvement. The PLA, viewing itself as militarily weaker than the United States, contextualizes counterbalance as a means by which the weak offsets the advantages of the strong. Accordingly, it views modernizing its nuclear capabilities in line with strategic counterbalance to address a disadvantage vis-à-vis the United States.
  • “Strategic deterrence and control” (战略慑控): This likely requires the PLA to have the force capacity to limit horizontal escalation or dissuade other states from taking opportunistic actions.

Within this framework, Xi has clearly elevated nuclear weapons as core to realizing PRC great-power status, constraining American options, and coercively enveloping Taiwan. The central importance of nuclear weapons capabilities to these top-priority aims readily explains unprecedented nuclear emphasis and development throughout the thirteen years-and-counting of his rule. China’s strategic rocket force was known as the Second Artillery Corps from its establishment in 1966 until its redesignation under Xi as the PLARF at the end of 2015 following its elevation from a military branch to a full-fledged service. In early December 2012, just nineteen days after taking power as General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and Chairman of the CMC on 15 November, Xi convened the generals overseeing the Second Artillery (pre-PLARF), which he termed a “pillar of our status as a great power.” He charged them with advancing “strategic plans for responding under the most complicated and difficult conditions to military intervention by a powerful enemy”—standard PRC wording to describe the United States. Just over thirteen years later, we are witnessing ongoing results of Xi’s effort.[3]

Historical Foundations: From Mao’s Priorities to an Emerging Triad

All great waves originate some distance out at sea. China’s current nuclear force surge rests on decades of sustained investment in warheads and missiles. Developing nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to credibly deliver them was a top priority for Mao beginning in the 1950s as he sought to deter superpower attack while ensuring China’s own great power status. Beijing’s nuclear weapons and strategic missile programs benefitted from consistent top-level resource allocation, as well as the greatest insulation of any military programs from the explosive political disruption that derailed China’s aviation industry and many other sectors. Even as Mao sought to limit overall military expenditures, he lavished tremendous funding on China’s nuclear weapons complex. In their canonical study, China Builds the Bomb, John Wilson Lewis and Xue Litai estimate that by 1964 Beijing had spent more on nuclear weapons development than on the entire defense budgets for 1957 and 1958 combined—extraordinary resource dedication for a then-impoverished, autarkically isolated state.[4]

Mao similarly prioritized nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine (SSBN) and submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) programs after the mutual collapse of a Soviet joint development proposal in 1959, famously vowing: “We will have to build nuclear submarines even if it takes us 10,000 years!”[5] China’s first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), the DF-5/5A, reached initial operational capability around 1981, giving Beijing a rudimentary but genuine ICBM capability. PRC nuclear warheads and associated delivery systems have subsequently become much more numerous, diverse, deployable, and hard to counter. Over roughly three-quarters of a century, China has moved from having no nuclear weapons to possessing the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, trailing only the United States and Russia and increasingly closing key capability gaps.

Current Forces and Activities: A Rapidly Expanding Triad

Since just after coming to power, Xi has directed a major nuclear weapons ramp-up, with important additions and improvements as depicted in the Pentagon’s 2025 report’s “Fielded Nuclear Ballistic Missiles” figure (p. 86, reproduced below). The report puts operational PRC nuclear warheads in the “low 600s through 2024”: “While [an earlier edition of] this report assessed in 2020 that China’s nuclear warhead[s] would double from a stockpile of the low 200s over the next decade, the PLA remains on track to have over 1,000 warheads by 2030.”

It is important to underscore that with regard to PRC nuclear warhead numbers—as with much other data in the Pentagon’s 2025 report—China has had another year of development not captured by the report because of information cutoff and internal review timelines. This lag effect is an unavoidable reality in a U.S. government document prepared systematically for public release, but it is likely accentuated by the fact that this latest Pentagon report—with its 23 December 2025 publication—has appeared the latest in the calendar year of all twenty-five such reports issued to date since the first appeared in 2000. (Thus far, every annual report issued has been published within the same calendar year as that which it is required to report to Congress; none have spilled over into the next calendar year.) At the rate PRC military development is progressing, the 2025 report’s unprecedented latency could well mean that actual statistics and other data currently achieved by China have advanced significantly from those documented in the report. 

In any case, the Pentagon’s 2025 report demonstrates clearly that the PLARF is working hard to strengthen its already-extensive land-based capabilities. The report documents several striking recent developments. A central focus is China’s effort to achieve an EWCS capability, conceptually similar to launch-on-warning (LOW), whereby “warning of a missile strike enables a counterstrike launch before an enemy first strike can detonate.” Accordingly, in 2024 and early 2025 China launched two additional Tongxun Jishu Shiyan (TJS, a.k.a. Huoyan-1) geosynchronous early warning satellites. “China’s early warning infrared satellites can reportedly detect an incoming ICBM within 90 seconds of launch,” the report assesses in exquisite, uniquely authoritative detail, “with an early warning alert sent to a command center within three to four minutes.”

China’s multiple ground-based, large phased-array radars (LPARs) likely support EWCS by detecting incoming ballistic missiles high in the atmosphere thousands of kilometers away; confirming, refining, and fusing data; and thereby facilitating a pre-detonation counterstrike. These radars “probably can corroborate incoming missile alerts first detected by the TJS/Huoyan-1 and provide additional data, with the flow of early warning information probably enabling a command authority to launch a counterstrike before inbound detonation.”

Relatedly, in December 2024, “the PLA launched several ICBMs in quick succession from a training center into Western China, indicating the ability to rapidly launch multiple silo-based ICBMs, as required for an EWCS operation. The PLA has likely loaded more than 100 solid-propellant ICBM missile silos at its three silo fields with DF-31 class ICBMs, which are very likely intended to support EWCS.”

Meanwhile, in the first such open-ocean test since 1980, on 25 September 2024[6] the PLARF launched a DF-31B ICBM from northern Hainan island, which flew roughly 11,000 km before impacting the Pacific near French Polynesia (as seen in figure on p. 29, reproduced above). “The PLA views ICBM launches, including into broad ocean areas during crisis or conflict, as an option for medium-to-high intensity nuclear deterrence operations,” the report judges. “The September 2024 launch probably enabled the PLA to train on the procedures and tactics for this type of operation during peacetime.” It posits that “future launches may occur with some regularity.” Beijing explicitly portrayed the launch as part of routine training but provided pre-notification only to select states.

As part of its nuclear triad’s sea leg, China has now fielded the Julang-3 (JL-3/Great Wave-3) (CSS-N-20) SLBM on its Jin-class (Type 094) SSBNs. The Pentagon’s 2025 report assesses the JL-3 at roughly 10,000 km range, enabling strikes on large portions of the Continental United States (CONUS) from suitable patrol areas. The report’s aforementioned “Fielded Nuclear Ballistic Missiles” figure depicts the JL-3’s 10,000 km range covering Washington, DC and most of the continental United States (CONUS), with the exception of Florida and a swath of the southeast.

JL-3 coverage by the Pentagon report in 2025 and over the past decade traces how the sea-based leg has been maturing into a genuinely intercontinental component of China’s deterrent. The 2024 report depicts the JL-3’s 10,000 km range on a similar “Fielded Nuclear Ballistic Missiles” figure (p. 106) to the one in the 2025 report. The 2024 report states that, in “the PRC’s first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent,” the PLAN’s 6 Jin-class SSBNs, each with 12 vertical launch cells, may be equipped with the 5,400 nm JL-3 or the 3,900 nm JL-2 (CSS-N-14). “The PRC probably fielded the extended-range CSS-N-20 (JL-3) SLBM on the PRC’s JIN class SSBN, giving the PRC the ability to target CONUS from littoral waters and enabling the PLAN to consider bastion operations to enhance the survivability of its sea-based deterrent. The SCS [South China Sea] and Bohai Gulf probably are the PRC’s preferred options for employing this concept,” the 2024 report elaborates. “PRC sources claim the JL-3 has a range of over 5,400 nm, which would allow a JIN armed with this missile to target portions of CONUS from PRC littoral waters. The PLAN’s next generation SSBN, the Type 096, is expected to enter service the late 2020s or early 2030s. Considering the 30-plus-year service life of the PRC’s first-generation SSNs, the PRC will operate the Type 094 and Type 096 SSBNs concurrently.”

The Pentagon’s 2023 report has a similar figure and similar wording. The 2022 report does not depict the JL-3 in its “Nuclear Ballistic Missiles” figure. It states that “The PRC probably fielded the extended-range CSS-N-20 (JL-3) SLBM on the PRC’s JIN class SSBN,” followed by the aforementioned bastion-related wording. In its sole mention of the JL-3, the 2021 report explains that “The current range limitations of the JL-2 will require the JIN to operate in areas north and east of Hawaii if the PRC seeks to target the east coast of the United States. As the PRC fields newer, more capable, and longer ranged SLBMs such as the JL-3, the PLAN will gain the ability to target the continental United States from littoral waters,” followed by the aforementioned bastion-related wording. The 2020 report contains a shorter version of this single mention. The 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016 reports posit that the JL-3 will be deployed on the Type 096 SSBN. Pentagon reports from 2015 and earlier do not mention the JL-3 at all.

As the third leg of its nuclear triad, China is also building a nascent air-delivery capability. The PLA Air Force (PLAAF) is modernizing its bomber fleet and developing nuclear-capable air-launched ballistic missiles (ALBMs) for the H-6N. Moving forward, the report suggests Beijing is pursuing sub-10-kiloton-yield warheads to fulfill doctrinal aspirations of limited nuclear counterstrikes against military targets while controlling escalation. Among fielded systems, the report identifies the DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) and the H-6N bomber’s ALBM as “highly precise theater weapons…well suited for delivering a low-yield nuclear weapon.” On 29–30 November 2024, Beijing deployed nuclear weapons-capable bombers for the first time as part of the PRC and Russian Air Forces’ combined strategic aerial patrol over the Sea of Japan, East China Sea, and Miyako Strait. In this ninth such patrol, PLAAF H-6N bombers joined two Russian Tu-95 bombers.

Corruption, Purges, and Potential Long-Term Strengthening

From mid-2023 onward, the PLARF has been at the center of the most dramatic leadership shakeup in any PLA service in decades. With regard to the personnel leading and supporting China’s nuclear weapons-related operations and the industry supplying them, the report emphasizes both short-term challenges and the potential for medium-to-longer term improvements.

PLARF removals have been widespread and significant: two Commanders and several deputy commanders and Chief of Staff members of the force; related state-owned defense industry seniors; and a top PLARF engineer—all involved in nuclear weapons. As part of replacing the removed, in 2023 China unprecedentedly transferred flag and general officers from the PLAN and PLAAF into the PLARF’s top two leadership positions. Such simultaneous replacement of an existing PLA service’s two top positions—with both posts swapped out on the same day—is likewise unprecedented.

CMSI research documents further that on 31 July 2023, in the PLA’s most dramatic instance to date of a cross-service transfer, Vice Admiral Wang Houbin was appointed PLARF Commander and promoted to full General (3-star).[7]General Xu Xisheng, previously a career PLAAF officer, became PLARF Political Commissar. Notably, CMC second Vice Chairman General He Weidong presided over the promotion ceremony and General Li Shangfu and Admiral Miao Hua both attended; all three CMC Members were later removed—together with General Wang Houbin himself, now deemed a failed replacement.

As further detailed in CMSI research, following reportedly extensive procurement-related corruption during a rapid, massive PLARF buildout, the service was purged severely and continuously from July 2023 to August 2024. At least eight generals were removed, including former Commanders Generals Wei Fenghe and Zhou Yaning, and then-Commander Li Yuchao—the last of whom Wang replaced (for a time); former Deputy Commanders Lieutenant Generals Zhang Zhenzhong and Li Chuanguang; former Chief of Staff Sun Jinming; former Equipment Department Director Lü Hong; and Major General Li Tongjian. On a likely related note, General Li Shangfu was removed in October 2023; before becoming PRC Minister of National Defense, Li had led the CMC’s Equipment Development Department (EDD) (2017–22), where he approved PLA weapons acquisitions.[8]

Disciplinary measures in China’s nuclear industry have been no less extensive, the product of expanded investigations across the defense industrial base. At least five defense-industry leaders—including the head of China’s largest missile manufacturer—were detained by the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection for graft associated with weapons procurement; nine related officials were removed from the National People’s Congress (NPC).

“Looking at the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), for example,” the Pentagon’s 2025 report relates, “between December 2023 and December 2024, the Central Commission for Discipline Investigation announced investigations of at least two former division chiefs, one former deputy division chief, and former heads of two CNNC subsidiaries. Yu Jianfeng, the head of CNNC, has missed public activities since at least January 2025, including the March 2025 NPC meeting, indicating that he may also be under investigation. Other personnel moves within CNNC may indicate additional investigations are ongoing.”

The Pentagon’s 2024 report relayed that “At least five PRC defense industry leaders, including the head of the PRC’s largest missile manufacturer, have been detained for investigation by the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection [CCDI], the CCP’s top corruption watchdog, likely for engaging in bribery and graft with PLA officers during the acquisition process. In December, nine officials—primarily PLARF and CMC EDD leaders as well as defense industry leaders—were removed from the NPC, the PRC’s national legislature, presumably because of their connections to corruption. In late July 2023, the PLA made a rare announcement, launching a wide-ranging investigation into weapon procurement programs dating back to 2017, signaling significant concerns with the PLA’s modernization efforts more broadly.”[9]

A striking counterpoint to the recent PLARF-linked leadership removals has been the rise of one of the service’s most politically seasoned senior officers: General Zhang Shengmin (张升民).[10] The Pentagon’s 2025 report did not profile his steady, successful career through the service to the pinnacle of PLA power, so it is worth reviewing here. Zhang spent the bulk of his career within the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force and its predecessor, the Second Artillery Corps, developing expertise in political work and disciplinary oversight. In January 2017, he was appointed Secretary of the CMC’s Discipline Inspection Commission (DIC), making him the top military anti-corruption official and a Deputy Secretary of the CCP Central Commission for Discipline Inspection. In October 2017, among other positions, Zhang became one of the four CMC members and one of the eight CCDI deputy secretaries, charged with investigating Party members’ corruption. On 2 November 2017, Zhang was promoted to full General (3-star).

In October 2025, General Zhang was elevated to one of the two vice chairmanships of the CMC. On 28 October 2025, Zhang became the second-ranked CMC Vice Chairman, succeeding General He Weidong following He’s removal amid corruption investigations. On 23 October 2025 General Zhang was added as second-ranked CMC Vice Chairman in a CCP plenary announcement,[11] and subsequent state confirmation on 28 October 2025 finalized his appointment as the second-ranked vice chairman of the CMC.[12] Zhang’s extensive background in internal PLA discipline and oversight positions him as a central figure in Xi Jinping’s ongoing military anti-corruption campaign and may help shape internal reform as the PLARF and broader PLA navigate continuing modernization and accountability pressures. General Zhang’s knowledge of PLARF personnel and investigations must be truly extraordinary, with details that even the Pentagon itself would struggle to deliver. His extensive PLARF and anti-corruption background likely gives him unparalleled insight into internal rocket force dynamics and its associated military-industrial complex—exactly the profile Xi appears to be privileging to steer the force through its current turbulence.

Eyes on the Prize: Xi’s Personal Involvement and Pursuit of 2027 Goal

The report underscores that Xi is personally engaged in managing these risks while pushing to achieve his 2027 goals. In addition to inherent churn, the Pentagon’s 2025 report suggests, the extensive PLARF removals and underlying reasons for them “may be raising questions among leadership about force readiness.” The issue clearly has Xi’s personal attention and prioritization: in October 2024, in his first visit to the PLARF since the recent fusillade of corruption allegations surfaced, Xi inspected the service’s 611th Brigade (in Chizhou, Anhui Province). He addressed Brigade leaders regarding the importance of “military policy, commitment to deterrence, and showing strength and preparedness.” Photos of Xi’s October 2024 visit, not included in the 2025 Pentagon report, follow below.[13]

In sum, the Pentagon’s 2025 report suggests, Xi’s “ongoing anticorruption campaign could have short-term effects on readiness while potentially setting the stage for long-term PLA improvements overall.” Despite the breadth and depth of removals, China under Xi “remains committed” to its 2027 modernization objectives. The 2025 report invokes this bifurcated theme repeatedly when juxtaposing removals in other PLA services with progress toward Xi’s 2027 goal. Relatedly, the Pentagon’s 2024 report seems to further suggest that the PLARF has had serious problems; but, through drastic efforts, has already been strengthened with their being addressed. On the one hand, the 2024 report recapitulates, “The wholesale dismissal of senior PLARF leadership may be connected to fraud cases involving the construction of underground silos for ballistic missiles during a period of rapid expansion for the PLARF and the PRC’s missile industry. The impact on PRC leaders’ confidence in the PLA after discovering corruption on this scale is probably elevated by the PLARF’s uniquely important nuclear mission.” On the other hand, the 2024 report concludes, “This investigation likely resulted in the PLARF repairing the silos, which would have increased the overall operational readiness of its silo-based force.”

As with other aspects of PLA development, multiple things are true at once: short-term readiness risks coexist with the possibility of future advancement if China proves successful in fixing what have clearly been identified as systemic problems. Discoveries of disciplinary violations within the PLARF and its supporting industry have clearly shaken PRC leadership confidence and generated organizational churn. Yet the Pentagon’s 2025 report explicitly warns against assuming long-term weakness: it states that while these purges “very likely” create short-term disruptions to operational effectiveness, China’s nuclear forces could very well emerge more reliable and capable than ever before.

Endnotes

[1] Office of the Secretary of War, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2025 (Washington, DC: Department of Defense/War, 23 December 2025), 28, https://media.defense.gov/2025/Dec/23/2003849070/-1/-1/1/ANNUAL-REPORT-TO-CONGRESS-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA-2025.PDF.

[2] Andrew S. Erickson, “PRC Pursuit of 2027 ‘Centennial Military Building Goal’ (建军一百年奋斗目标): Sources & Analysis,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 19 December 2021, updated 18 April 2023, https://www.andrewerickson.com/2021/12/prc-pursuit-of-2027-centennial-military-building-goal-sources-analysis/.

[3] Chris Buckley, “China Expands Nuclear Arsenal Under Xi, Bracing for Growing Rivalry With U.S.: Fear and Ambition Propel Xi’s Nuclear Acceleration,” New York Times, 4 February 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/04/world/asia/china-nuclear-missiles.html.

[4] John Wilson and Lewis and Xue Litai, China Builds the Bomb (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1988), 107–08.

[5] John Wilson and Lewis and Xue Litai, China’s Strategic Seapower: The Politics of Force Modernization in the Nuclear Age (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995), 18.

[6] Greg Torode, “Beyond the Politics, China’s Missile Test Reflects Military Need,” Reuters, 9 October 2024, https://www.reuters.com/world/china/beyond-politics-chinas-missile-test-reflects-military-need-2024-10-09/.

[7] See Andrew S. Erickson and Christopher H. Sharman, “Replacement Removed: VADM/General Wang Houbin—Naval Star Turned Rocket Force Commander’s Terminal Trajectory,” CMSI Note 17 (Newport, RI: Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute, 20 October 2025; officially published 13 November 2025), https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cmsi-notes/17/.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2024 (Washington, DC: Department of Defense, 18 December 2024), 159, https://media.defense.gov/2024/Dec/18/2003615520/-1/-1/0/MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA-2024.PDF.

[10] Yuanyue Dang, Alcott Wei, and William Zheng, “PLA Anti-Graft Chief Zhang Shengmin Promoted to Vice-Chair of Central Military Commission,” South China Morning Post, 23 October 2025, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3330061/china-makes-anti-graft-chief-zhang-shengmin-vice-chair-central-military-commission.

[11] “张升民升任中共中央军委副主席” [Zhang Shengmin Has Been Promoted to Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party], 联合早报 [Lianhe Zaobao], 23 October 2025, https://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/china/story20251023-7706798.

[12] 林韵诗 [Lin Yunshi], “⼈事观察|上将张升⺠获任中华⼈⺠共和国中央军委副主席” [Personnel Watch | General Zhang Shengmin Appointed Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the People’s Republic of China], 财新 [Caixin], 28 October 2025, https://china.caixin.com/2025-10-28/102376607.html.

[13] For details that the Pentagon’s report lacked the space to provide, see “习近平在视察火箭军某旅时强调 坚持政治引领 强化使命担当埋头苦干实干 提升战略导弹部队威慑和实战能力” [During His Inspection of a Brigade of the Rocket Force, Xi Jinping Emphasized the Importance of Adhering to Political Guidance, Strengthening Mission Responsibility, And Working Diligently to Enhance the Deterrence and Combat Capabilities of the Strategic Missile Force], 新闻联播」[News Broadcast], CCTV, 19 October 2024, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLdvaIqYzDU.