How China’s Military Parade Indicated Authoritarians in Sync, Might on Display, and the U.S. on Edge?

The 3rd of September has been witnessed by the world as the curated gallery of powerful missiles by China and the gathering of authoritarians in line. Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Belarus’ President Alexander Lukashenko, and Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian, along with more than 26 other foreign leaders, were spotted. The guest list increasingly features non-Western nations, especially from Asia, Africa, and the Global South, reflecting China’s growing alliance system beyond the West.

The absence of Western representation was just as telling. Japanese and European leaders, most of whom did not attend and half of them sent low-level delegates, delineate how China perceives them and how it wishes to shape its future relations with them. It was not only a domestic show of power, but a crafted geopolitical message to the world.

Moreover, the high-profile and geopolitically charged attendance of China’s chosen partners from across the world has triggered severe reactions across the West. European scepticism, coupled with Washington’s unease, was evident. Even Donald Trump’s remarks mixed praise with insecurity, his words laced with characteristic ranting — a sign of how the parade rattled the American political psyche.

Coming back to China’s hard power display, new nuclear strategic weapons, the DF-5C ICBM, the DF-61 ICBM, and the JL-3 ICBM, were unveiled. Together, they all show the country’s land-sea-air-nuclear triad that is seminal for its geopolitics and superpower aims. Some hypersonic and anti-ship missiles were also observed, including YJ-series anti-ship missiles, HQ-16C and HQ-10A. These defensive missile systems were crafted to intercept threats and naval engagements. Further, laser weapons and underwater drones, as well as robot wolves, are all advanced autonomous and directed-energy systems which remained part of the parade show.

The parade was geopolitically and strategically signalled. The intent was clearer than at any time in history; the preparedness of China was exhibited fearlessly. The nuclear triad completion, along with the country’s shift towards modern technology, drew both awe and alarm. The networked warfare, it indicated, has created ripples around the world. The political symbolism has not remained hidden; a clear message to the world, especially to Taiwan, the US, and the Indo-Pacific allies, has been communicated without words: the country is unapologetically assertive.

Besides, the date was not accidental, but it was decided to mark the 80th anniversary of World War II and the defeat of Japanese militarism. It was deeply ingrained in the national psyche of China. Beijing was all set to portray itself as the guardian of the new world order as well as the heir of the wartime sacrifice. The country, moreover, has always remained deeply interested in building narrative through parades; these are always ceremonial displays. It was lucid that China rose from foreign domination; it stood to guard the world and take hegemony through technological advancements and alliance strengths, and is self-reliant to dominate the world.

It also draws on the tradition of authoritarianism, where the Soviet-style parades used to project power; China has redefined the model.

Moving ahead, Western reactions were seen with anxious undertones, uneasy, and unsettled. Additionally, Washington viewed the display as a reminder of China’s growing parity in nuclear and advanced weapons. European nations, caught between trade with Beijing and NATO’s security imperatives, expressed muted scepticism. Japan went further, issuing warnings and reinforcing defence commitments, a sign that the parade resonated most sharply in the Indo-Pacific.

It fortified relations between India and China, the two rivals sharing conflictual histories. The bilateral ties between them are seen as improving with time as higher officials are paying visits and signing agreements together while reassuring each other to work mutually on the benefits. On the other hand, the Global South is capturing a new world order that must be a counterbalance to the US hegemony. A new bloc-building around authoritarianism is anticipated.

After discerning all this, the question arises whether all of this is just an image-building, image-management exercise or a real strength. It is so obvious that displaying all the missiles and defence systems is a clear-cut sign of portraying readiness to attain hegemony of the world and challenging the current status quo of the US. Further, partnerships cannot be trusted as eternal, as they bring shifts more often. The waves in geopolitics come and go, and they are inevitable, but the risks of authoritarianism in solidarity are more evident than ever. The recent unity of authoritative regimes to counterbalance the superpower is enough to frighten the world, as well as the internal weaknesses and fragility in alliances, which are pellucid and can storm the world later.

As victory in politics is rarely absolute, it is always necessary to prepare oneself for the disasters that might cross the path. The US and its allies might recalibrate, and China, with its allies, might get a setback. Whether this moment marks the dawn of a new authoritarian bloc or a temporary spectacle, the world cannot ignore that Beijing has placed itself firmly at the centre of the global stage. The question of the decade remains whether China, with its coalitions, will be able to capture the hegemony and maintain support.