China Mil Watch Mandarin-source monitoring · Chinese military & security reporting
Independent monitor
Official PRC military media, read in the original
← Daily Brief
Internal Security Political Work

Special Issue on Political Strengthening of the Military · Political Rectification Training | Evaluating Leaders Must Use "One Measuring Stick"

政治建军专刊·政治整训丨考核领导,要用“一把尺”衡量
PLA Daily (解放军报) 25 May 2026
View original source ↗
A brigade of the Tibet Military District ran two political rectification training (政治整训) case studies through PLA Daily: a brigade commander who failed a high-altitude physical fitness assessment retook it on the record after a grassroots examiner tried to falsify his result, and a deputy brigade commander who had layered ten unauthorized vehicle-control measures onto existing regulations—土政策、土规定—rescinded them after the extra paperwork stalled an urgent logistics mission. Both cases document the brigade Party committee using concrete disciplinary failures by named leaders as the teaching material for rectification, rather than directing criticism downward at enlisted personnel. The framing points to a persistent institutional problem the campaign is designed to address: that enforcement of standards bends upward toward senior cadres, and that middle-level officers compensate for weak rule-of-law awareness by inventing procedural complexity that mimics strictness while degrading readiness.

Editor's Note: Governing the military according to law and governing the military with strict discipline are the basic strategies of our Party for building and managing the military, and are also the intrinsic requirements for building a powerful military. At all levels, leading cadres of the military, as the organizers, participants, and practitioners of law-based military governance, set an example through their every action and every word for the broad ranks of officers and soldiers. Only when leading cadres take the lead in respecting and applying the law, and strictly handle affairs in accordance with the law, can they inspire and motivate the broad ranks of officers and soldiers to jointly advance the construction of a law-governed military (法治军营). In this issue, we present two experiences of leading cadres from a brigade of the Tibet Military District, offering a glimpse of the new outlook of the military's law-based and strict governance.

Evaluating Leaders Must Use "One Measuring Stick"

■ PLA Daily Special Correspondent Li Songyuan

Some time ago, a brigade of the Tibet Military District organized a physical fitness assessment for headquarters and staff organs. The brigade adjusted its examination model, no longer having organ personnel organize and judge the entire process, but instead selecting officers and soldiers from grassroots companies to serve as dedicated examiners.

On the day of the assessment, a cold wind blew in gusts. As the command was issued, participants quickly threw themselves into the assessment. In the high-altitude, oxygen-deficient environment, after one lap of assessment, many participants had beads of sweat across their foreheads and faces that had turned slightly pale.

Crossing the finish line, the brigade commander stopped and grabbed the railing beside him, gasping for breath. The young soldier conducting the examination pressed the stopwatch the moment he crossed the line, stared at the numbers on the dial, and was suddenly at a loss: the brigade commander's time was several seconds slower than the passing standard stipulated in the syllabus.

Looking at the exhausted brigade commander before him, the soldier could not help but hesitate: high-altitude physical fitness assessments are already far more difficult than those on the plains, the leader is relatively older, and he also has to coordinate all the work of the entire brigade on a daily basis—it was already remarkable that he had pushed himself to complete all the assessment events. If the result were reported truthfully, it would inevitably cause the leader to lose face, and as a grassroots soldier himself, how could he be so ignorant of the "rules"?

"Commander, you were only a few seconds short—it can count as passing." The soldier crossed out the original recorded time and prepared to write "pass" in the results column. The brigade commander, seeing this, immediately waved his hand: "If it's a fail, there's a make-up exam. We cannot falsify results. You look out for me on the examination ground—who will look out for us on the battlefield? If the results of leading cadres are not truthful, how can we strictly demand the same of grassroots officers and soldiers?"

"I understand, Commander!" The soldier instantly felt his cheeks burn hot. He hastily recorded the actual result and returned to his post to continue conducting examinations.

When the assessment ended, the relevant personnel immediately reviewed the assessment footage and cross-checked the timing data, discovering that the recorded results of several cadres did not match their actual assessment performance.

The problem was quickly placed before the brigade Party committee. The group, in connection with the deepening of political rectification training (政治整训), launched an analysis and discussion around this matter, digging deep into the underlying hidden risks to work style: the key to governing the military lies in strict discipline, and what is even harder is treating everyone equally. The slightest relaxation of rules and regulations makes it easy for the military to develop problems of lax management, a hollow work style, and soft enforcement of discipline. Once this kind of ideological deviation takes root and spreads, the rigid authority of laws and regulations will gradually weaken, and problems of acting on subjective will and enforcing discipline outside the institutional framework will quietly emerge.

"The root of individual grassroots officers and soldiers bending rules out of personal considerations still lies with the leading organs." During the discussion, the brigade commander proactively examined and reflected on himself: "Before discipline and rules, there is no distinction of rank and no special exceptions. Governing the military with strict discipline means being strict from every assessment and every detail. In our day-to-day work, when we tighten work style and grasp training, we habitually direct the strict standard at the grassroots and at the officers and soldiers, yet when it comes to ourselves, we always want to loosen the yardstick and leave room for leniency. This breeds the ideological deviation of being strict with others but not with oneself, strict with subordinates but not with superiors—and this itself is a departure from the requirements of governing the military with strict discipline."

In the course of this reflection, the brigade commander proactively proposed retaking the assessment according to assessment standards, with no special arrangements of any kind and not a single concession throughout the entire process.

After the meeting, the organ re-clarified assessment conduct and discipline (考风考纪), and strengthened discipline education for participants. After receiving criticism and education, the soldier who had conducted the examination also candidly admitted his mistake: "I failed to uphold my duties as an examiner and nearly violated assessment discipline. In the future, I will absolutely hold to principles, act according to regulations, and never bend rules out of personal considerations."

On the day of the make-up examination, the training ground was unusually quiet, with discipline supervisors participating throughout. "Prepare—begin!" At the command, the brigade commander quickly adjusted his state and once again threw himself fully into the assessment. The instant he crossed the finish line, the examiner pressed the stopwatch, precisely announced the assessment time, and recorded the result truthfully.

"Governing the military with strict discipline means measuring with one yardstick all the way to the end." Walking off the examination ground, the brigade commander said firmly: leading cadres must lead by example, extending this strict and solid work style (严实作风) of daring to be exacting and uncompromising and refusing special treatment from the training ground and examination ground to every aspect of military construction and combat readiness training.

When a Mission Launches, Don't Get Held Up by "One Sheet of Paper"

■ Sheng Ziqian, PLA Daily Special Correspondent Li Songyuan

On a high-altitude morning, a long-distance transport mission by a brigade of the Tibet Military District got underway in an atmosphere of tension. From the application for vehicle dispatch to the formation's departure, the entire process was smooth and efficient, meeting the requirements of actual combat.

"Now all the procedures are streamlined and standardized—no more running back and forth over form signatures and extra paperwork. We can put our whole heart into combat readiness support!" In conversation, an organ cadre recounted a previous experience.

At the time, a neighboring unit had suffered a vehicle scraping accident. Although it caused no major losses, it sounded an alarm for high-altitude driving safety.

"High-altitude road conditions are complex and the environment is harsh—vehicle safety cannot tolerate the slightest negligence." A brigade leader reminded everyone that vehicle control work must be grasped strictly and practically, the military's safety bottom line must be firmly held, and he suggested further adjusting and improving work procedures. In order to implement the leader's instructions and ensure safety work was foolproof, the deputy brigade commander responsible for safety work, holding the idea that "one more lock means one more measure of safety," went beyond existing regulations and, together with several cadres, researched and formulated supplementary detailed rules, adding 10 new control measures.

For a time, strict regulations loomed high. However, grassroots officers and soldiers found them difficult to implement. For example, relevant regulations clearly stipulated that only hierarchical approval and vehicle condition inspection were required, yet now multiple levels of signatures and final review by the duty leader were required; before dispatching a vehicle, a "five-post verification (五岗核验)" was required; even driving speed and the frequency of parking inspections were increased accordingly.

Over time, this cumbersome process had no obvious effect on reinforcing the safety barrier, but instead easily encroached on officers' and soldiers' normal training and living time, and also pushed some officers and soldiers toward the other extreme of "preferring complexity over simplicity, preferring strictness over leniency."

These problems were exposed all at once during one combat readiness mission.

Late one night, heavy snow suddenly fell on the high plateau and temperatures plummeted sharply. Upon receiving an urgent logistics resupply mission, officers and soldiers of a certain company responded to the order immediately, preparing vehicles and inventorying supplies through the night. At a critical juncture in the mission's progress, the cumbersome approval process hit a snag: the duty leader responsible for the final approval signature was attending an important meeting and could not advance the approval in time.

The wind and snow grew fiercer and fiercer, vehicles stood by in the bitter cold for an extended period, and the officers and soldiers on duty were burning with anxiety: "The mission deadline is right before us, and we're stuck on 'one sheet of paper'!"

The situation of this mission quickly came to the attention of the brigade Party committee. At a special analysis meeting, participants, in connection with the deepening of political rectification training, placed this matter on the table as a typical case. A grassroots representative frankly stated: "Some of the control regulations lack a legal and regulatory basis and constitute excessive layering-on (过度加码) at the subjective level. They appear to set higher standards and finer management, but in reality they are divorced from the actual combat needs of the grassroots and are a manifestation of formalism (形式主义)."

Recognizing where the problem lay, the deputy brigade commander took the lead in reflecting and making a self-criticism: "Strict management cannot be strict outside the law. I failed to abide by the basic principle of law-based military governance, mistakenly equated 'more procedures' with 'stricter gatekeeping,' and one-sidedly pursued absolute safety, issuing local policies and local regulations (土政策、土规定), ultimately resulting in management overreach and loss of control calibration. This is both a manifestation of insufficient capacity to perform duties and, more importantly, a reflection of weak rule-of-law awareness and an unrealistic management work style…"

To rectify this chronic problem at its root, the brigade decided to launch a month-long activity of studying laws and regulations, organizing cadres at all levels to systematically study the military's various laws and regulations, and firmly establishing the management philosophy of being strict within the law and performing duties according to regulations; to conduct a comprehensive review and sorting of all rules and regulations, resolutely abolishing any add-on provisions that exceed the scope of laws and regulations, maintaining safety standards without relaxation, adhering to the actual combat bottom line without slackening, eliminating ineffective control links, and optimizing approval processes; and to improve contingency plans and measures for handling dangerous high-altitude roads, regulating drivers' physical and mental condition, and conducting emergency logistics delivery in extreme weather, driving safety management work back onto the track of rule of law.

Recently, the brigade executed a heavy equipment transfer mission, with officers and soldiers assembling swiftly and deploying efficiently. Witnessing this scene, the deputy brigade commander felt a deep sense of reflection: "Law-based military governance must first firmly establish rule-of-law awareness. With laws and regulations providing guidance, we can hold the safety bottom line for high-altitude driving and continuously enhance our combat readiness and warfighting capabilities."

Original Chinese
编者按依法治军、从严治军,是我们党建军治军的基本方略,也是建设强大军队的内在要求。军队各级领导干部作为依法治军的组织者、参与者、实践者,其一举一动、一言一行都对广大官兵有着示范表率作用。领导干部只有带头尊法用法,严格依法办事,才能感召带动广大官兵共同推进法治军营建设。本期,我们通过西藏军区某旅领导干部的两段经历,感受部队依法治军、从严治军的新风貌。 考核领导,要用“一把尺”衡量 ■解放军报特约记者 李松原 前段时间,西藏军区某旅组织首长机关体能考核。旅里调整执考模式,不再由机关人员全程组织评判,而是从基层连队挑选官兵担任专职考官。 考核当天,寒风阵阵。随着口令下达,参考人员迅速投入考核。高原缺氧环境下,一圈考核下来,不少参考人员额头上布满汗珠,脸色微微泛白。 冲过终点线,旅长停下脚步扶着一旁栏杆,大口喘着粗气。现场执考的年轻战士在他过线那一刻按下秒表,盯着表盘上的数字,一下子有些为难:旅长用时比大纲规定的及格线慢了几秒。 看着眼前疲惫不堪的旅长,这名战士心里不禁有些犹豫:高原体能考核本就比平原艰难许多,领导年龄偏大,平日里还要统筹全旅各项工作,能拼尽全力完成全部考核课目已然十分不易。若是如实上报登记,难免会让领导很没面子,自己身为基层战士,怎好意思不懂“规矩”。 “首长,就差几秒,可以算及格。”这名战士划掉原本的计时数字,准备在成绩栏写下“及格”。旅长见状连忙摆摆手:“不及格就补考,不能弄虚作假。考场上你关照我,上了战场谁来关照我们?如果领导干部的成绩都不实,又怎么严格要求基层官兵?” “我明白了首长!”这名战士瞬间感觉脸颊发烫,匆匆登记实际成绩,回到岗位连续执考。 考核结束,相关人员立即复核考核影像、核对计时数据,发现有几名干部的登记成绩与实际考核情况不符。 问题很快摆到旅党委面前。一班人结合深化政治整训,围绕这件事展开剖析讨论,深挖背后潜藏的作风隐患:治军贵在从严,更难在一视同仁。规章制度稍有松懈,部队就容易出现管理宽松、作风虚浮、执纪偏软的问题,一旦这类思想偏差滋生蔓延,法规纪律的刚性权威就会逐渐弱化,凭主观意志行事、脱离制度执纪的问题也会悄然抬头。 “个别基层官兵讲人情变通,问题根子还是在领导机关。”讨论中,旅长主动检视反思,“纪律规矩面前不分职务高低、没有特殊例外,从严治军就要从每一次考核、每一处细节严起。平日里我们严作风、抓训练,总是自觉把严的标准对准基层、对准官兵,轮到自身却总想放宽尺度留有余地,就会滋生严人不严己、严下不严上的思想偏差,这本身就是对从严治军要求的背离。” 反思中,旅长主动提出,按照考核标准重新参加补考,全程不搞任何特殊安排、不打一丝折扣。 会后,机关重新明确了考风考纪,对参考人员加强纪律教育。那名执考战士受到批评教育后,也坦诚认错:“我没能坚守考官职责,差点违反考核纪律。今后一定坚守原则、依规办事,绝不搞人情变通。” 补考当天,训练场格外安静,风气监督员全程参与。“准备,开始!”口令下达,旅长迅速调整状态,再次全力投入考核。冲过终点线的瞬间,考官按下秒表,精准报出考核时长,如实填写成绩。 “从严治军,就要一把尺子量到底。”走下考场,旅长坚定地说,领导干部必须以身作则,把这种敢于较真碰硬、不搞特殊的严实作风,从训场考场延伸到部队建设和战备训练的各个方面。 任务出动,别被“一页纸”卡住 ■盛子乾 解放军报特约记者 李松原 高原清晨,西藏军区某旅一项长途运输任务紧张展开。从申请出车到编队出发,整个流程顺畅高效,符合实战要求。 “如今各项流程简洁规范,不用为表格签字、额外手续来回跑腿,能全身心扑在战备保障上!”交谈中,一名机关干部说起此前一段经历。 当时,友邻单位发生一起车辆剐蹭事故,虽未造成重大损失,却给高原行车安全工作敲响了警钟。 “高原路况复杂、环境恶劣,车辆安全容不得半点疏忽。”一名旅领导提醒大家,必须从严抓实车辆管控工作,牢牢守住部队安全底线,并建议进一步调整完善工作流程。为落实领导指示,确保安全工作万无一失,负责安全工作的副旅长抱着“多一道锁就多一分安全”的想法,在现有规定之外,又带几名干部研究制订了补充细则,新增了10项管控措施。 一时间,严规高悬。然而,基层官兵执行起来却犯了难。比如,相关法规明确只需层级审批与车况核查即可,如今却要多级签字、值班领导终审,出车前要“五岗核验”,就连行驶速度与停车检查频次也相应增加。 久而久之,这种冗长的流程对筑牢安全屏障并没起明显作用,反而容易挤占官兵正常的训练和生活时间,还让一些官兵走向了“宁繁勿简、宁严勿松”的另一个极端。 这些问题,在一次战备任务中集中暴露。 一天深夜,高原突降大雪,气温骤降。接到紧急物资补给任务,某连官兵闻令即动,连夜备车清点物资。就在任务推进的关键节点,繁琐的审批流程出现阻滞:负责终审签字的值班领导正在参加一个重要会议,审批无法及时推进。 风雪越刮越疾,车辆在寒风中长时间待命,执勤官兵心急如焚:“任务期限就在眼前,我们却卡在了‘一页纸’上!” 这次的任务情况,很快被旅党委了解。专题剖析会上,大家结合深化政治整训,将此事作为典型案例摆上台面。有基层代表坦言:“个别管控规定缺少法规依据,属于主观层面的过度加码。看似标准更高、管理更细,实则脱离基层实战需求,是形式主义的表现。” 意识到问题所在,副旅长带头反思检讨:“从严管理不能严在法外,我没有恪守依法治军基本准则,错把‘流程多’等同于‘把关严’,片面追求绝对安全,出台土政策、土规定,最终造成管理越位、管控失度。这既是履职能力不足的表现,更是法治意识薄弱、管理作风不实的体现……” 为从根源纠治顽症痼疾,该旅决定开展法规制度学习月活动,组织各级干部系统研学军队各项法规条例,牢固树立严在法内、依规履职的管理理念;全面复盘梳理各项规章制度,对超出法规范畴的加码条款坚决废止,严守安全标准不放松,紧扣实战底线不松懈,剔除无效管控环节,优化审批流程;完善高原险路处置、驾驶员身心调节、极端天气应急投送等预案举措,推动安全管理工作回归法治轨道。 近日,该旅执行一次重装转运任务,官兵集结快捷,出动高效。看到这一幕,副旅长心中感慨:“依法治军首先要树牢法治意识,有法律法规护航,才能守住高原行车安全底线,持续提升备战打仗能力。”