A view of the Lujiazui area in Shanghai Photo: VCG

The 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) started its fifth plenary session in Beijing on Monday morning. Understanding the significance of such a session requires, in the first place, grasping a fundamental key to China's political system: the relationship between the Party and the state.

In China, the CPC is not viewed merely as an organization that wields power, but rather as the structure that provides strategic direction, organizes political and human resources, and seeks to ensure the implementation of national priorities. 

From this perspective, state governance begins long before a public policy reaches the administrative apparatus; in fact, it begins with the very construction of the Party itself. In China, this process is one of the political infrastructures through which such governance is organized, which helps explain the continuity, coordination and capacity for mobilization that characterize the Chinese model.

The first dimension of this organizational premise is the challenge of governing China, which is extraordinary given its demographic, territorial, economic and administrative scale. In this context, the CPC's leadership of plays a structuring role. Its presence at the different levels of the political system facilitates coordination among institutions, the definition of common objectives, and the mobilization of resources around priorities deemed strategic. Medium- and long-term planning, national campaigns, and officials' evaluation mechanisms form part of this architecture.

Academic research has highlighted that centralized policy design can improve the coherence of decision-making, even though general guidelines must be adapted to local circumstances.

This capacity for strategic direction is particularly significant in areas such as the industrial modernization, the infrastructure development, the energy transition, and the poverty reduction. When a priority attains strategic status, the system has at its disposal political and administrative instruments to implement it across various territories and sectors. 

The second dimension is the CPC's organizational development and, in particular, the training, selection, promotion, and evaluation of its officials. In the Chinese system, the management of political human resources is not an internal matter separate from the state administration. It is also one of the mechanisms connecting the leadership's priorities with the day-to-day work of the state.

Organizational hierarchy, internal discipline, political and professional training, and evaluation systems make it possible to assign responsibilities and communicate objectives. An official's career trajectory can be linked to his performance in areas such as economic development, the provision of services or the fulfillment of specific priorities. 

A distinctive feature of this model is its ability to combine centralized political direction with scope for local administrative initiative. 

The quality of the organization depends not only on discipline but also on the ability to identify actual outcomes, acknowledge errors and correct decisions.

The third dimension concerns the comprehensive and rigorous governance of the Party. The fight against corruption, disciplinary inspections and internal oversight serve as tools to safeguard the organization's integrity, prevent the private appropriation of public resources and strengthen the implementation of political decisions.

Year after year, official figures illustrate the scale of this apparatus and the breadth of its oversight activities. This shows that discipline can help deter corrupt conduct, reinforce officials' accountability, and narrow the gap between policy directives and their implementation.

The Chinese model's effective oversight translates into a greater capacity to prevent abuses, ensure consistent procedures and address the structural causes of corruption.

What lessons can be drawn outside of China?

The Chinese experience invites reflection on the importance of cohesive organizations, sustained strategic objectives, well-prepared officials, effective evaluation mechanisms and oversight systems capable of enforcing accountability. 

Ultimately, the Chinese experience raises a fundamental question: To what extent does the quality of a government depend on the organization that leads it?

The loss of trust is a common denominator across Western party systems. The CPC - the world's longest ruling communist party - has built an architecture that closely links political leadership, management of officials, discipline and state administration. Understanding this connection helps explain a significant part of its capacity to secure support, mobilize society and ensure continuity.

Strategic vision serves as a cornerstone of the CPC's governance. It is not the result of "magic formulas," but rather the product of an ongoing process of experimentation, evaluation, and adjustment. The ability to adapt to changing circumstances has allowed the CPC to combine long-term objectives with a concept of stability that goes beyond mere order, incorporating a diverse range of social interests.

Added to this is an ideological cohesion that seeks to combine firmness of principle, a rejection of dogmatism, and openness to learning. Internal discipline and moral rigor complete this model, while underscoring that political inconsistency erodes public trust.

Taken as a whole, the CPC has developed a distinctive Party culture and a form of legitimacy whose rationale has evolved from revolution to development and, more recently, toward an "efficacy," understood as the capacity to demonstrate tangible results through effective governance.

The author is the founder and an emeritus adviser to the Spanish Observatory of Chinese Politics. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn