The outpouring of anger in China over the death of coronavirus doctor Li Wenliang poses a serious challenge to the Communist Party and to "people's leader" Xi Jinping.

Censorship means many may not know that the Chinese authorities were already aware that the coronavirus infected human beings in early December. But following Dr Li's death, they do know that a cover up has allowed the virus to get out of control.

They know that, despite having had to deal with Sars and the avian flu viruses in the previous two decades, the Chinese government did not act promptly to contain and destroy the new virus when it first emerged at Huanan Market in Wuhan City.

People are furious because their government’s approach – to suppress reporting for over two weeks in January in order not to spoil meetings and banquets important to the Communist Party – put their health, safety and wellbeing at risk. Many have also seen pictures of senior officials wearing high specification protective masks while medical staff have to make do with surgical ones.

Dr Li died in the front line fighting the virus without adequate protection while top leaders live in the safety of Beijing with masks to spare. These waves of anger could destabilise the system and threaten their hold on power.

This will not come to pass. Public anger will not be allowed to transform into a social movement precisely because the threat is so serious to the powers that be.

There are some within the Communist Party who dislike the direction of travel for the country under Xi. Some might cherish the prospect that the coronavirus fiasco could weaken Xi and force him to change tack. But they themselves are at risk, too. The party is in charge of everything everywhere in China. They have too much of a vested interest to risk that authority being challenged.

As a strongman, Xi cannot afford to appear weak. Accommodating public anger or dissenting voices within the party is a sign of weakness. As he made clear when he came to power in 2012, he did not become General Secretary to preside over the demise of Communist Party rule in China.

Xi will not allow public grief for Dr Li to be used in a way similar to the mourning of the relatively liberal former leader Hu Yaobang in 1989, which was the trigger for massive demonstrations, ended only by the Tiananmen Square massacre. Xi’s intention is reflected in the composition of a committee he appointed to take charge of the crisis. While one member out of nine has responsibility for public health, most of the rest are propaganda or security experts.

It will be a while before Xi can win his "people’s war" against the coronavirus. But he will lose no time in seizing the narrative over Dr Li’s death. Anyone who chooses to grieve over Dr Li will be required to do so "patriotically".

Let us pray that Xi finds a better way to contain the virus than tightening control. Until then, the price Chinese citizens and others have to pay will mount.