China released its first-ever white paper on national security in May. It’s titled ‘China’s National Security in the New Era’. It’s an extensive, all-encompassing document that defines security in the broadest terms possible. From AI to air pollution, outer space to online fraud, and even culture, Beijing has declared that virtually every domain falls under the umbrella of national security. It’s not just a paper; it’s a proclamation of how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sees the world and its place in it.
To do a deep dive into this White Paper and what it mentions and means, we spoke to Rahul Karan Reddy, Senior Research Associate at the Organisation for Research on China and Asia.
“To the international audience, it’s signaling China’s reliability in the face of West unpredictability,” says Rahul Karan Reddy while speaking on The Gist. “There are lots of signals being sent out via this paper, and one of which is to present China as a positive force and to communicate that China is strong and will act accordingly. But yes, the paper is definitely about the growing insecurity, or rather, the growing forces of insecurity. The party sees a threat in all domains, and it seeks to identify the threats before they emerge, forestall them, and then counteract them before they have any adverse effect on China’s ability to modernize or project power.”
This white paper arrives at a time of deep global turmoil: conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, and South Asia, and an increasingly hostile trade and tech standoff with the United States. For China, it’s an opportunity to project itself as a stabilizing force while accusing the U.S. of being the main source of global unpredictability. Interestingly, while the paper paints the U.S. as the primary external threat, often indirectly, it also outlines China’s growing partnerships, especially its ‘strategic coordination’ with Russia. Surprisingly absent from the document is Pakistan, despite it being a long-standing strategic partner.
“The white paper lists and discusses China’s security relationships with Russia, with the US, with the EU. I find it interesting that Pakistan does not appear anywhere in this discussion in this section of the White Paper, which is interesting because China and Pakistan have a strategic partnership, too,” says Reddy. As China lists a sort of hierarchy of its relations with other nations like Russia, which country it chooses to leave out also sends out its own message.
The white paper’s tone may appear confident, but it also betrays a deep anxiety. There’s an obsessive focus on internal threats – telecom scams, online gambling, ideological dissent, ethnic unrest, and the dreaded “colour revolutions” seen as Western attempts to destabilise regimes.
The party clearly views national security and party survival as one and the same. Corruption, oddly, gets no mention, despite Xi Jinping’s long-standing war on it. Instead, the paper reiterates the need to maintain the party’s absolute control and authority in every sphere, including in volatile regions like Tibet and Hong Kong. Security, in Beijing’s view, begins and ends with loyalty to the party.
Taiwan features briefly, with language that may seem conciliatory at first glance but quickly circles back to the hardline stance: unification at any cost, and a refusal to rule out the use of force.
“It is interesting how Taiwan is mentioned because on the surface of it, the Taiwan question appears as if the party is taking a conciliatory approach to it. It gives the impression that China is taking a softer line. But the idea is that this initial carrot resembles a stick,” explains Rahul Karan Reddy.
This duality – projecting calm while issuing veiled threats – is repeated in China’s mention of its Global Security Initiative, a vague promise of peace rooted in territorial integrity and multipolar cooperation. It’s a message crafted more for optics than action, given the continued military buildup near Taiwan’s coast and broader assertiveness in the Asia-Pacific.
Ultimately, this white paper is less about policy shifts and more about strategic signalling. It aims to show strength in the face of perceived threats, both within and without. But its sweeping definitions of security, backed by sweeping powers, raise concerns about growing authoritarianism at home and sharpened assertiveness abroad.
