The US military has identified three American “centers of gravity” under sustained attack by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as part of a broader effort to weaken and ultimately defeat the United States, according to a Washington Times report.
A center of gravity refers to a military’s primary source of power, strength, and will to act — a concept introduced by 19th-century Prussian military theorist Gen. Carl von Clausewitz.
According to the report, citing defence officials, the first and most critical target is US political decision-making, including the ability of civilian and military leaders to make rapid, coordinated decisions during crises.
Responsibility for targeting this center of gravity rests largely with China’s United Front Work Department, an intelligence and influence organisation with an estimated annual budget of up to $11 billion.
The US military has identified the department as the driving force behind China’s expansive information warfare campaign, which uses disinformation, propaganda, and financial influence to manipulate American decision-making.
The second center of gravity under assault is America’s network of allies and partners, particularly in the Indo-Pacific.
For years, Chinese civilian and military operations have sought to weaken US alliances in Asia through propaganda and political warfare portraying the United States as a destabilising force.
Beijing’s messaging promotes the idea that “Asia should be for Asians” and that the US should remain confined to its own hemisphere.
Those efforts have largely failed, US officials say, with China instead damaging its own reputation through aggressive actions and attempts to turn regional partners into vassal states.
More recently, Beijing has adjusted its narrative, asserting through information operations that the US is a hostile power seeking to drag Taiwan, the Philippines, and other regional states into war. Chinese strategists now claim — falsely, according to the US — that China, Russia, and the US jointly defeated fascism in World War II and that Taiwan represents the final fascist remnant requiring “unification.”
The CCP has also asserted that its forces, not US forces, were the true victors of World War II — despite historical evidence that party forces largely avoided combat and seized power only after the war’s conclusion in 1949.
Regional leaders have so far rejected Beijing’s revised narrative, US officials say.
The third center of gravity under attack is US power projection capability, particularly the military’s ability to deploy and maneuver forces.
This effort is evident in major cyber intrusions such as Vault Typhoon and Salt Typhoon, which US officials assess were designed to enable large-scale cyberattacks during a future crisis.
The goal, officials say, would be to cause widespread civil disruption, sow chaos, and slow US leaders’ decision-making.
Chinese cyber operations are intended to prevent US forces from deploying, provide the People’s Liberation Army with dominance across information, air, and maritime domains, and block US and allied intervention in Chinese military actions.
Kerry K. Gershaneck, a professor at National Chengchi University in Taipei, said China’s strategy centers on cognitive warfare aimed at achieving “mind superiority.”
“China identifies cognition — how we think — as the ‘ultimate domain’ in conflict and war,” The Washington Times quoted Gershaneck as saying.
The CCP employs algorithmic social media warfare, United Front operations, cyberattacks, and other forms of warfare to disrupt American reasoning, decisions, and actions, he added.
“Specifically, China hopes to disrupt our political decision making, split us off from our allies and friends, and block our ability to militarily respond to China’s aggression in Asia,” Gershaneck said.
Beijing’s view of high-level military purge
Chinese officials, typically outspoken on global affairs, have remained notably silent following the abrupt purge of Gen. Zhang Youxia, the People’s Liberation Army’s most senior general.
Gen. Zhang, a vice chairman of the Central Military Commission, is under investigation for political and financial crimes, the Defense Ministry said in a brief statement Saturday.
Despite the lack of public comment, The Washington Times has obtained the Chinese Communist Party’s internal view of what is being described as the most senior military purge since the fall of PLA Marshal Lin Bao. Lin died in a 1971 plane crash while fleeing China after an alleged coup attempt and was later branded a traitor.
Like Lin, Gen. Zhang reportedly fell under suspicion for political and financial misconduct, including allegations that he leaked nuclear secrets to the United States—an act the CCP considers high treason.
The removal stunned many inside China, where Gen. Zhang was widely seen as a close ally of President Xi Jinping, chairman of the Central Military Commission. As with earlier purges, the move is viewed as part of Xi’s effort to consolidate power and eliminate rival centers of influence.
Beijing also signaled that military pressure on Taiwan — including large-scale exercises — will continue, though officials assess that military action against the island is neither imminent nor likely as a result of the dismissal.
The purge is expected to trigger short-term risk aversion within the PLA and create a leadership vacuum until replacements are named, temporarily disrupting decision-making and operational continuity.
The timing is significant, coming weeks before a key CCP meeting in March and ahead of the 21st Party Congress in late 2027, where major leadership changes are expected to further cement Xi’s authority.
Gen. Zhang was not spared in the party’s anti-corruption campaign, and several subordinate generals were also purged. No reliable information has emerged regarding his current status. Political stability remains intact, with no visible signs of unrest in Beijing.
U.S. analysts dispute Beijing’s framing of the purge as anti-corruption, arguing instead that Xi is clearing the way for more capable commanders aligned with his plans for Taiwan.
K. Tristan Tang, a China expert at the Secure Taiwan Associate Corporation and National Taiwan University, said evidence points to policy disagreements with Xi.
Gen. Zhang and Gen. Liu Zhenli likely clashed with the Chinese leader “over PLA development, particularly the joint operations training timeline, and may have pursued policies or issued orders that ran counter to Xi’s directives,” The Washington Times quoted Tang as saying in a Jamestown Foundation report.
“The simultaneous announcement of investigations into Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli indicates the decision stemmed from the same underlying cause,” he said.
Pentagon urged to adopt decision-based AI warfare
The Pentagon’s push to integrate artificial intelligence into military operations must move beyond large language models and toward what a technology firm calls “agentic warfare,” according to a new report by Scale AI.
“Genuine strategic advantage in this new era will not come from stealthier jets, faster missiles or larger drone swarms alone; it will come from new kinds of human-machine teaming that drive accelerated decision-making,” the company said.
Agentic warfare centers on delivering “decision advantage” at every level of command, enabling U.S. forces to outpace adversaries. “The United States must capitalise on its first-mover advantage before adversaries do,” the report said.
Scale AI executives Dan Tadross and Jared Jonker said current military uses of AI are largely limited to administrative tasks. “Clever junior staffers” benefit from tools that summarize emails or draft memos, they wrote, but such systems cannot execute complex operations or interact with the physical world.
Future warfare, they argue, will rely on networks of AI agents capable of monitoring the battlespace, planning, testing, and executing actions faster than human commanders.
“We still rely on linear, manual workflows that produce static Operational Plans in physical binders that take two years to write and are often obsolete by the time they are printed,” Tadross and Jonker said.
“In a conflict with a near-peer adversary like China, we will not have two years; we may not even have two days.”
The authors warn that China is already restructuring its forces around “intelligentised warfare” and so-called “command brains,” designed to overwhelm opponents cognitively and collapse decision-making in forces that lack comparable AI-enabled systems.
With inputs from agencies
End of Article
