Xi Confirms Zhang Youxia’s Rebellion? CCP Spreads Fake News on the Iran War! Is China Next?

A small change at the two sessions in Beijing has sent a chill through political observers. Xi Jinping was no longer seated in the familiar center of power. Instead, he unexpectedly appeared below the podium, among the delegates, an image not seen in more than a decade of his rule. At the same time, Xi issued an unusual warning that there are people in the military with divided loyalties, raising suspicions about internal power struggles and even the risk of dissent within the PLA. Meanwhile, the US-Iran conflict is escalating. Washington is preparing for potential confrontation with major rivals, while the Chinese Communist leadership has remained unusually quiet and has flooded the internet with waves of disinformation. So what will Beijing do next? And why is the United States preparing a strategic plan to counter China before 2027? These seemingly disconnected details may actually be revealing a volatile shift in the balance of power inside Zhongmenhai. Let's take a closer look. Why was Xi Jinping sitting below the podium? Each year, the two sessions in Beijing seem to unfold like a familiar political stage play, moving with the steady rhythm of a long-running political machine. Yet sometimes, a single small detail can reveal subtle political signals. One detail captured by cameras this year immediately caught the attention of many observers. Xi Jinping's seating position in the Great Hall of the People was completely different from what it had been over the past 13 years. Previously, he always sat in the front row of the Presidium, occupying the absolute center, a visual symbol of concentrated power. But this time, the image startled many viewers. Xi Jinping was seated below the podium, and from a distance, it looked as though he was sitting among the delegates, almost blending into the crowd. The sense of an unmistakable center of authority suddenly seemed to disappear. This change in seating has led to two completely different interpretations from outside observers. The first interpretation is that it might signal preparation for a possible step back from power. In highly symbolic political ceremonies, seating arrangements often represent the structure of authority. If the supreme leader's position changes, people naturally wonder whether the internal power arrangement is being adjusted. The second interpretation points to security concerns. After the assassination of Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, in a highly precise attack, Xi Jinping may feel deeply uneasy about his own safety. Sitting within the crowd, surrounded by others, could reduce the risk of becoming a single, clearly identifiable target. According to Da Xiju, while debate over the seating arrangement continues, another dramatic video has been circulating online. In the clip, several Two Sessions delegates are asked an extremely sensitive question by foreign journalists, who will succeed Xi Jinping? In the context of Chinese politics, this has always been an extraordinarily delicate topic. The reactions on the spot resembled a small psychological test of political loyalty. The first type of response was direct avoidance. Delegate Cai Peihui admitted, and we don't have the authority to discuss them. Another delegate, Tang Chunyu, did not even attempt to answer and hurried away. The second reaction was accidentally revealing a bigger truth. This happened with Jian Weidong, a delegate from Shandong. When asked the question, he paused for a moment before blurting out, well, the whole nation is thinking about that. After saying it, he seemed to realize he had gone too far and quickly added safer remarks like, we hope the country continues to improve, and our leadership is very capable. Such candid responses are rare and potentially dangerous because from Xi Jinping's perspective, they could easily be interpreted as a serious offense. It remains unclear whether this video truly originated from this year's Two Sessions, but it reflects a broader reality. Across Chinese society, many people appear both anxious and quietly anticipating the question of Xi Jinping's eventual succession. Did Xi hint at another rebel knight inside the military? According to Li Muyong, during the meeting, Xi Jinping reiterated that the party must control everything, that everyone must listen to the party and follow the party, and that corruption must not be tolerated. These phrases are nothing new. He has repeated them on many different occasions before. However, one statement stood out. There must absolutely be no one in the military who harbors divided loyalties toward the party. This wording is new, and its tone was particularly strong. Everyone familiar with Chinese Communist Party political language knows that harboring divided loyalties usually implies forming factions or building rival power bases. In other words, it almost sounds like a direct acknowledgement that someone inside the Chinese military is building an independent power center and refusing to fully obey Xi Jinping. Although Xi did not mention any names, many observers would immediately think of John Yoshia. Put bluntly, Xi Jinping may be publicly signaling that John Yoshia has engaged in behavior resembling rebellion. If that were indeed the case, it could lend weight to a piece of information that commentator Li Muyang said he received on October 6, 2024. In a program aired on October 3, he shared the following claim. Before the Third Plenum, there were reports that Kai Qi had diverted a large amount of military funding from the Western Theater Command. Generals from that command allegedly went to Liu Yuan, the son of Liu Shaoqi, to complain about the issue. Together, they tried to approach Xi Jinping to explain the situation. However, Xi reportedly used various means to place Liu Yuan under house arrest. After that, the Western Theater Command generals supposedly contacted Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, and John Yoshia, all former senior leaders. According to the claim, John Yoshia then led 200 special forces soldiers, accompanied by the former leaders, to confront Xi Jinping. The special forces first detained Kai Qi and Wang Xiaohong, and then John Yoshia reportedly slammed the table and challenged Xi. Do you really think you're an emperor? With the backing of the retired leaders, John Yoshia allegedly took control of the military, while Xi Jinping was temporarily left on stage as a figurehead. But on January 19th of this year, the story took an almost ironic twist. Rumors spread that John Yoshia and Liu Zhenli had themselves fallen from power. Five days later, on January 24th, China's Ministry of National Defense officially announced John Yoshia's downfall, suggesting that Xi Jinping had successfully launched a counterattack. However, that does not necessarily mean Xi has fully regained control of the situation. At present, he faces serious internal tensions as well as international pressure from the escalating US-Iran conflict. Under such circumstances, some observers believe the authorities may once again resort to some very troubling tactics. Chinese State Media's Disinformation Caught by the US The Chinese Global Times has repeatedly claimed that the US and Israel's attacks on Iran are actually aimed at regime change in Iran. It has also argued that previous nuclear negotiations were merely a cover, portraying the entire situation as if the United States were carrying out an extremely sinister conspiracy. But the reality is quite different. President Donald Trump has stated clearly that the objective of the current US operation is very specific— to destroy Iran's missile and naval forces and prevent it from developing nuclear weapons. According to Sound of Hope, as soon as the conflict erupted, the internet was flooded with dramatic claims. A wave of false images and videos spread rapidly online. Some claimed that the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier had been struck by Iranian missiles. Others said US warships had been destroyed inside Iranian territory. Still others circulated videos alleging that Iranian missiles had destroyed Israeli military facilities. These narratives closely matched the anti-American messaging often seen in the Chinese Communist Party's propaganda system. However, closer examination revealed that many of these images were old videos from years ago, and some were even AI-generated content. One video claimed to show a US aircraft being shot down, but it was actually footage taken from a military video game. As netizens continued sharing the clips, many people eventually mistook them for real battlefield footage. As for the most widely circulated rumor— that the USS Abraham Lincoln had been hit— US Central Command directly refuted the claim. On its official website, it stated that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' assertion that it struck the carrier was completely fabricated. The Lincoln had not been hit by any missiles, and the missile's launch did not even come close to the vessel. Independent fact-checking organizations have also reported that social media is currently flooded with AI-generated images and unrelated old videos, falsely labeled as footage from the 2026 US-Iran conflict. One old video was even misrepresented as showing Iran attacking a CIA facility in Dubai. In fact, for years, the US government and Congress have warned that China and other authoritarian regimes are increasingly combining propaganda, censorship, and disinformation to reshape global public opinion. The U.S. House Select Committee on China has previously pointed out that the Chinese Communist Party uses propaganda, censorship, and misinformation to advance its global interests. Members of the committee have also warned that Beijing funds propaganda campaigns around the world designed to polish the image of Xi Jinping and the Chinese government while discrediting democratic countries. This tactic is nothing new, spending vast sums of money to manipulate public opinion, promote its own image, and portray the democratic world as the villain. The U.S. views the CCP as its biggest rival. According to Li Muyam, the Pentagon reportedly has a classified document titled Operation Sovereign Dawn. It is said that this document was signed by Donald Trump on the third day after taking office in 2025. The document allegedly lists seven countries, with the first three identified as Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela. The identities of the remaining four countries have not been made public. However, according to intelligence sources, the fourth country possesses nuclear weapons, and its leadership has secretly cooperated with Iran's weapons program for the past 15 years. Based on these clues, observers have tried to speculate which country it might be. Could the Chinese Communist Party China be on that list? If so, where would it rank? Not long ago, the Chief of Naval Operations of the United States Navy publicly introduced Project 33, a strategic plan aimed at preparing the Navy for a possible conflict with China by 2027. The plan emphasizes improving readiness and strengthening technological capabilities, such as expanding the use of robotic and autonomous systems to ensure the U.S. Navy is better prepared if tensions with China escalate. If China truly is one of the seven problematic countries the United States believes it must address, and if Washington has already developed detailed warfighting plans related to China, then some analysts argue that the possibility of a U.S.-China confrontation could be quite high, perhaps even difficult to reverse. But Beijing does not appear eager for such a conflict. At least in recent years, China has shown little desire to fight the United States. Chinese leaders are well aware of their own military capabilities and fear that if they lost such a war, the consequences could be catastrophic. Recently, a post circulating online, allegedly written by an active-duty Chinese soldier, expressed this anxiety. It stated, Talk about reclaiming the Diaoyu Islands In the South China Sea disputes, even if we are pushed away, we still would not dare fire a single shot. The post continues, What if the world discovers the military is hollow inside? What if even the blankets aren't folded properly? What if there isn't enough Mao-Tai liquor? Most importantly, what if the troops turn their guns around after being deployed? And what if we lose the war and can't preserve the red regime? This series of what-if questions in the post reflects concerns that critics believe the Chinese leadership repeatedly asks itself. And each question seems to strike directly at what they view as the system's most vulnerable points. What do you think about these developments? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below. Thank you for watching, and see you next time.