Who Is in Control of China's Aircraft Carriers?

http://en.epochtimes.com/news/7-3-9/52602.html

When the U.S. dispatched two aircraft carrier fleets in the spring of
1996 for cruising in the vicinity of the Taiwan Strait, China quickly
ended its military maneuvers that were intended to threaten Taiwan's
presidential election.

China's ex-Chairman, Deng Xiaoping, once said, "Development is the
ultimate principle." When reflected on international affairs, his
words are equivalent to saying, "Power substantiates the right to
speak."

Immediately following Chinese New Year's Day of 2007, China openly
declared that it now possesses the capability to build aircraft
carriers.

Hu Jintao recently emphasized at a meeting of delegates to a navy
forum of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), "We should strive to build
a powerful navy that adapts to the needs of our military's historical
mission in this new century and at this new stage."

Seeing as how Taiwan is very close to China, it is unlikely that
Taiwan is the exclusive strategic consideration behind China's
motivation to build aircraft carriers.

Aircraft carriers are the core foundation behind long distance
offensives, and they are the indispensable cornerstone for a modern-
day navy that is capable of global sailing. The underlying reason for
China's development of aircraft carriers is the promotion of and
enhancement of its naval strength, which will enable it to impose the
nation's influence over international affairs.

This has brought forth a major question of concern when considering
the issue of China's ambition; that is, who is in control of China's
aircraft carriers?

China's military forces are still dominated by the CCP. They bear no
responsibility for the people, for the government, or for the
international society. They obey the orders of the CCP's Central
Military Commission and the CCP's highest leader and are responsible
for the fundamental interests of the CCP alone. If the CCP is merely
capable of managing gunboats for defense purposes along its coast,
China would not be able to jeopardize regional safety and global
stability directly. However, if the CCP can command carrier fleets to
pursue the global interest of communist China, such as supporting
rogue regimes like North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, Sudan and Cuba, or to
terrorize small countries into submission, the international society
will face an unprecedented threat.

Therefore, as China beefs up its military strength with a special
focus on developing the capability for remote aggression, the
international society should pay closer attention to the outdated
leadership system found within China's military forces. The CCP's
dominance over China's military forces is against the trend of
democracy and international common practice. It also hinders the
establishment of mutual military trust with other countries.

Not only is the leadership of China's military forces superannuated,
the internal system is also obsolete as symbolized by the existence of
party commissar and political commissar. Starting from the "company"
level of the military organization, a party commissar presenting a
party chapter is designated to each level. A corresponding political
commissar (or instructor), who works as the actual deputy of the party
commissar, is also designated to every level. The political commissar
has the same power as the military commander. Party commissar and
political commissar segment the military system, enrich the armed
forces with political flavors and back up CCP's dominance of the
military.

The first political commissar was nominated by Lenin during Russia's
civil war about 90 years ago. The system positioned the Red Army as
the cornerstone for the Bolshevik autocracy. The first party commissar
("building party branches on the company level") was assigned by Mao
Zedong at Jinggang Mountains, Jiangxi Province about 80 years ago.
When compared with Lenin's political commissar, Mao's party commissar
enhanced the CCP's control over the military forces and the People's
Liberation Army became the "iron wall" to fend off challenges against
the CCP's one-party dictatorship. If the same party commissars as
those at Jinggang Mountains are also assigned to the aircraft carriers
or the same political commissars as those in Lenin's era are standing
beside the commander of China's aircraft carrier fleet, the
international society will have even better reasons to ponder as to
whether such aircraft carriers would still sail along the track of the
cold war.

So far, China has been reluctant to move toward democratization or
nationalization of its military forces. It also rejected the proposal
of making its military policies transparent or rationalizing its
military expenditure. Therefore, the international society should
restrain China's military buildup and, especially, take precautions
against China's ambition for gaining the capability of distant-sea
aggression. Otherwise, the aircraft carriers commanded by the
communist regime might show up in the quiet harbors of other countries
in no time at all.

Originally published in the February edition of Trend Magazine