The China coup rumors fueled by an Opium War article

The China coup rumors fueled by an Opium War article

A coup in China, the deposition of Xi Jinping, a military government prepared for "total war" against "Western demons," and calls between Moscow and Beijing to seal an alliance against Europe and the United States. This was the narrative spread under the label of a "very powerful" rumor, and four years later, not a single verifiable element remains. The most elaborate piece of evidence offered was not a military report, but a text published on the website of the People's Liberation Army newspaper regarding the Opium War and the more than 750 unequal treaties imposed on ancient China.

What the China coup narrative claimed

The script was textbook. The Army would have deposed the Chinese president; the new military government would favor total war against the West; Moscow and Beijing would have increased calls to clarify their alliance; and nuclear war could break out at any moment. No names, no sources, no confirmation. Only the warning that the rumor was powerful.

The details did not help either. One of the messages added that the massive flight cancellations from the previous day were consistent with the coup, illustrating it with a link to a media outlet that has made unverified leaks its editorial line. The conclusion drawn was that everything fit. Of course it did.

The 14th, the 16th, and an 80-kilometer column

As the days passed, a more elaborate version emerged. According to that account, Beijing was surprised to learn that on the 14th, Xi Jinping had visited Central Asia; that same afternoon, a veteran of the Standing Committee would have convinced another historical figure and taken control of the Central Security Office that night. Xi returned to Beijing on the night of the 16th and was allegedly placed under control at the airport, with house arrest at his Zhongnanhai residence. The message itself ended with an awkward admission: it is not possible to seek confirmation.

From there, the narrative grew. An 80-kilometer column of military equipment advancing toward Beijing and the country's leaders under arrest. A message broadcast by an Indian television channel claiming the Chinese president had been removed as head of the People's Liberation Army and placed under house arrest. And, as the final authority, that military newspaper article about the humiliation of ancient China at the hands of foreign powers. In other words, a history text.

Why the coup was dismissed: Tanks and the Party Congress

The most sober explanation came from within the matter itself: the tanks were on the streets because the Chinese president had convened a Party congress, including a vote for his reelection, and the deployment was a security operation. The parallel with Western summits—where, in addition to detection dogs, security forces are deployed—is far more plausible than a silent insurrection.

There was more. The People's Army responds to the Party, not to the State, so the idea of a military leadership acting independently clashes with the system's architecture. And the most stable country on the planet, with an internal organization that amazes even its critics, does not risk its position for a bellicose adventure that yields nothing. The underlying calculation is different: long-term economic plans, nuclear and technological rearmament, and Taiwan through economic and social pressure rather than a landing. With Europe copying the Chinese model and Washington sidelined, why the bomb?

Add a detail that the narrative preferred to ignore: the Asian giant maintained its position on Ukraine without joining Moscow's bandwagon.

Who benefits from the "total war" narrative?

Here the analysis becomes less friendly. The thesis circulating most strongly maintains that behind everything lies an interest in Russian resources—water, hydrocarbons, cereals, minerals—and that Europe is bleeding out with the enthusiastic collaboration of its Atlanticist elites. A coup in Beijing would justify rearmament, the breaking of supply chains, and increased military spending without going through parliament. The nuclear threat, as a permanent horizon, is the best commercial argument there is.

Not everyone buys the framework. There were also those who simply asked where the coup had taken place—on the dark side of the moon—and those who pointed out that the star forecast—October, according to the most repeated version—had passed without incident. Four years later, the matter has aged poorly: the links that were supposed to prove it lead to the homepage of a generalist media outlet and nothing more.

---

The uncomfortable question remains. If the coup never existed, why was such a fragile narrative held with such faith? Perhaps the demand for simple explanations in a reorganizing world always outweighs the supply of data. Or perhaps that is exactly what suits someone.