China’s Military Encirclement of Taiwan: A Strategic Warning to Separatists and External Powers
Diplomatic Correspondent
With barely two days remaining before the close of what has been one of the most geopolitically volatile years in recent history, global attention has turned sharply towards East Asia. In particular, China’s large-scale military exercise encircling the island of Taiwan has become the focal point of international strategic scrutiny. The exercise, officially designated “Justice Mission 2025,” marks one of the most comprehensive demonstrations of Chinese military power conducted around Taiwan in recent years.
At a time when great-power competition is intensifying across the Indo-Pacific, Beijing’s decision to execute a multi-domain military operation around Taiwan sends a signal that extends far beyond routine training. It is a calibrated message aimed simultaneously at Taiwan’s pro-independence political forces and at external actors—primarily the United States and its regional allies—who are increasingly involved in Taiwan-related security dynamics.
Scope and Command Structure of the Exercise
According to official statements released by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the exercise was conducted under the command of the PLA Eastern Theater Command, the formation responsible for military operations related to Taiwan and the East China Sea. The patrols and manoeuvres commenced on 29 December, involving coordinated participation from the PLA Navy, Air Force, Ground Forces, and the Rocket Force.
PLA Eastern Theater Command spokesperson Shi Yi confirmed that the operation constituted a high-readiness combat patrol rather than a symbolic exercise. The deployment featured a combination of surface combatants, combat aircraft, long-range strike assets, and missile units, all operating in synchronised fashion across multiple axes around Taiwan.
The exercise zones encompassed the Taiwan Strait, as well as maritime and airspace sectors to the north, southwest, southeast, and east of Taiwan, effectively forming a strategic ring around the island. This configuration is significant, as it mirrors potential operational scenarios associated with blockade enforcement, joint firepower strikes, and maritime interdiction operations.
A Clear Political and Military Message
Beijing was explicit in articulating the strategic intent behind “Justice Mission 2025.” In an official communiqué, Chinese authorities described the exercise as a “stern warning” to so-called Taiwan separatists and to external forces interfering in China’s internal affairs. The statement reiterated that the operation constituted a legitimate and lawful action aimed at safeguarding China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
This framing is consistent with Beijing’s long-standing position that Taiwan remains an inseparable part of China and that any attempt to alter the status quo through unilateral declarations of independence will be met with decisive countermeasures.
From a strategic communication perspective, the naming of the exercise itself—Justice Mission—is instructive. It reflects Beijing’s effort to frame its military posture not as aggression, but as enforcement of international norms as defined by Chinese interpretations of sovereignty and non-interference.
Emphasis on Long-Range and Precision Strike Capabilities
One of the most notable aspects of “Justice Mission 2025” was its emphasis on long-range strike operations and joint precision firepower. PLA Air Force bomber formations reportedly participated in operations east of Taiwan, a sector of particular importance given its proximity to the island’s strategic depth and potential reinforcement corridors.
The exercise prioritised the integration of intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), command-and-control systems, and strike assets to test the PLA’s ability to conduct coordinated precision attacks against distant and dispersed targets. Such capabilities are central to China’s evolving anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy, which seeks to complicate or deny intervention by external militaries.
Additionally, the drills included assessments of coordination mechanisms in remote and peripheral operational zones, suggesting a focus on sustaining complex operations under conditions of contested communications and electronic warfare—an increasingly critical dimension of modern conflict.
Second-Day Operations: Escalation in Complexity
The exercise continued into its second day on 30 December, expanding its operational focus to include targets in the northern and southern approaches to Taiwan. The PLA Eastern Theater Command reportedly deployed large naval platforms, advanced fighter aircraft, and supporting assets to simulate a wide range of combat tasks.
These included target identification, warning and deterrence actions, simulated strikes, maritime assault operations, air defence drills, and anti-submarine warfare (ASW) scenarios. The inclusion of ASW is particularly noteworthy, given the importance of undersea dominance in any Taiwan contingency and the increasing presence of foreign submarines in the region.
By rehearsing these scenarios in an integrated manner, the PLA demonstrated its intent to achieve full-spectrum operational dominance, encompassing surface, subsurface, air, missile, and information domains.
Diplomatic Reinforcement from Beijing
Parallel to the military dimension, China’s diplomatic apparatus reinforced the messaging associated with the exercise. Speaking at a press briefing on 29 December, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated that the drills constituted a “resolute punishment” against attempts by Taiwan separatists to pursue independence through military means.
He emphasised that the operation was a necessary measure to defend China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity, warning that any provocative actions exceeding China’s red lines on the Taiwan issue would be met with firm countermeasures.
This dual-track approach—combining military signalling with diplomatic warnings—underscores Beijing’s preference for coercive deterrence: shaping adversary behaviour through the credible threat of force without necessarily resorting to open conflict.
Symbolism and Psychological Warfare
Adding a psychological and informational dimension to the operation, the PLA Eastern Theater Command released an official poster themed “Justice Hammer: Blockade and Disruption.” The imagery and language used in the poster were unmistakably confrontational, reinforcing the message that China possesses both the capability and the resolve to impose severe costs on any actor challenging its position on Taiwan.
Such symbolic actions are an increasingly prominent feature of PLA operations, designed to influence not only adversary decision-makers but also public opinion within Taiwan and the broader international community.
Strategic Implications
From a defence and security standpoint, “Justice Mission 2025” reflects several critical trends in China’s military posture:
First, it demonstrates the PLA’s growing confidence in conducting large-scale, joint, and multi-domain operations under realistic conditions.
Second, it highlights the increasing normalisation of encirclement-style manoeuvres around Taiwan, suggesting that such operations may become a routine feature of the regional security environment.
Third, it reinforces Beijing’s intent to deter both internal and external challengers through graduated escalation, maintaining pressure while avoiding actions that could trigger immediate military confrontation.
For Taiwan, the exercise underscores the narrowing strategic space available to manoeuvre between deterrence and provocation. For regional actors, including ASEAN states and Indo-Pacific stakeholders, it raises fresh concerns about stability, miscalculation, and crisis management mechanisms in an increasingly militarised theatre.
“Justice Mission 2025” is not merely a year-end military exercise; it is a strategic communiqué delivered through force posture and operational rehearsal. It signals that Beijing views the Taiwan issue as approaching a more decisive phase—one in which patience is increasingly conditional and deterrence increasingly demonstrative.
As 2025 draws to a close, the message from Beijing is unambiguous: any attempt to alter the status quo on Taiwan—whether through domestic separatism or external intervention—will be met with comprehensive, coordinated, and forceful responses. For policymakers and defence planners across the Indo-Pacific, the exercise serves as a stark reminder that the Taiwan Strait remains one of the world’s most dangerous and consequential flashpoints.