Overview

On December 29, 2025, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) launched what it called “Justice Mission 2025,” a large multi-service exercise around Taiwan that included elements consistent with blockade rehearsal and precision-strike messaging. Beijing framed the operation as a warning to “Taiwan independence” forces and “external interference,” while Taiwan described it as coercive pressure that threatens regional stability.

Beyond cross-strait deterrence, the drills arrived during a tense domestic backdrop for China: a prolonged property downturn weighing on growth and household confidence, rising public frustration over economic stress, and continued leadership uncertainty inside the PLA amid sweeping anti-corruption purges. Analysts often argue that major external shows of force can serve multiple audiences—signaling abroad while shaping narratives at home.

What “Justice Mission 2025” Looked Like

Reporting describes the exercise as a broad joint operation involving the PLA’s air and naval assets and other capabilities operating across multiple zones around Taiwan. The military’s messaging emphasized combat readiness, “joint operations,” and a deterrent posture meant to demonstrate the ability to pressure Taiwan from more than one direction.

From a military planning perspective, the most consequential feature is the implied focus on sea and air control around key approaches to the island. Scenarios that resemble blockade practice are strategically meaningful because they test coordination, logistics, and escalation control—skills that are difficult to generate through routine training alone.

Domestic Economic Stress: Why Property Matters Politically

China’s property sector has been a pillar of household wealth, local-government finance, and construction-linked employment. When housing demand weakens and developer balance sheets deteriorate, the shock transmits quickly into consumer sentiment and local budgets. Policymakers have pledged to stabilize the housing market, but the prolonged slump has remained a drag on growth and confidence.

In such an environment, leaders face a narrative problem: citizens living through slowdowns, stalled projects, and wealth effects from falling housing prices may become less receptive to upbeat economic messaging. A large, dramatic national-security story can crowd out economic anxiety in the public information space—especially in a tightly controlled media environment.

Public Discontent and the “Pressure Valve” Logic

When economic expectations reset downward, everyday grievances become harder to contain. Citizens may blame local officials for lost jobs, unfinished housing, or shrinking savings. Even if protest activity is suppressed, the leadership still has to manage confidence and social mood. In authoritarian systems, visible displays of state power can be used to project competence and momentum—an attempt to convince the public that the center remains fully in control.

This does not mean domestic distraction is the only driver of military activity. But it helps explain why large exercises can be politically convenient when leaders want to dominate the news cycle, unify elite messaging, and redirect public attention toward external threats.

Elite Insecurity: PLA Purges and Command Confidence

China’s continuing anti-corruption campaign has reached deep into the PLA’s senior ranks. Independent analysis notes that repeated removals of high-level officers can create uncertainty inside command structures, complicate trust networks, and incentivize risk-avoidance among remaining leaders.

Paradoxically, this environment can increase the appeal of choreographed exercises. Big drills demonstrate loyalty and readiness in a controlled setting, allow new or reshuffled commanders to prove “political reliability,” and generate official propaganda outputs that reinforce the message of unity under central control.

Regional Constraints: Japan, the First Island Chain, and Signaling Limits

China’s pressure campaign around Taiwan also intersects with a harder strategic reality: Japan sits at key maritime chokepoints and has expanded its focus on southwestern defense and the broader first-island-chain concept. Recent incidents around disputed islands have kept public friction high between Tokyo and Beijing, and Japan has shown increasing willingness to state its security concerns in explicit terms.

For Beijing, friction with Japan creates a second signaling front. Even if China escalates exercises around Taiwan, it still must manage the risk of a wider coalition response. This can produce a pattern of “loud” demonstrations meant to intimidate, paired with careful calibration to avoid triggering uncontrolled escalation.

Why Beijing Might Choose a Record-Scale Exercise Now

Putting these factors together, “Justice Mission 2025” can be interpreted as a multi-layer message. Externally, it aims to deter Taiwan and signal capability to complicate U.S. and allied intervention. Internally, it reinforces an image of strength during a period when economic and elite-political headlines are potentially destabilizing.

The key risk is that repetition normalizes escalation. If each cycle must be bigger to achieve the same psychological effect, the region can drift toward a more volatile baseline—where accidents, miscalculation, or domestic political incentives on any side can produce crisis.

Implications for Global Markets and Supply Chains

Large-scale Taiwan Strait exercises are not only security events; they are market events. Disruption of air and sea routes, insurance costs, and increased geopolitical risk premiums can affect trade and investment decisions. Even when markets remain calm day-to-day, repeated drills raise the perceived probability of future disruption, encouraging firms to diversify supply chains and adjust contingency planning.

For the United States and its partners, the strategic objective is to maintain credible deterrence while keeping regional commerce stable. That means strengthening readiness with allies, communicating clear red lines, and making it costly for coercion to become a “routine tool” of statecraft.

Sources