Beijing’s new economic strategy reflects a broad shift from market-driven growth toward state-directed technological and geopolitical competition.
In a nutshell
- China is prioritizing security and resilience over rapid growth
- AI and advanced manufacturing are becoming instruments of state power
- Beijing aims to reshape global supply chains around Chinese standards
- For comprehensive insights, tune into our AI-powered podcast here
In late January 2025, the global technology sector was jolted by the sudden release of DeepSeek R1, an advanced artificial intelligence model developed by a relatively unknown Chinese start-up. DeepSeek did not just match the capabilities of Western AI giants; it reportedly did so using a fraction of the computing power and capital, bypassing the stringent U.S. export controls on high-end Nvidia semiconductors. The release triggered a trillion-dollar panic in Western stock markets.
However, the true significance of DeepSeek was not merely technological – it was deeply political. For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), DeepSeek was an immediate vindication of their state-directed industrial policy. It proved that China could achieve technological self-reliance despite Western chokeholds. When users tested the DeepSeek chatbot on politically sensitive topics like Taiwan or the events of 1989, it rigidly adhered to the CCP’s official narratives.
DeepSeek perfectly encapsulates the logic of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030). The goal is not innovation for the sake of free-market disruption, but innovation that strictly serves the party and state. The economy is not an independent sphere of human activity; it is politics by other means.
The supremacy of politics over economics
The 15th Five-Year Plan, formally approved by the National People’s Congress in March 2026, is a blueprint for national survival in an era that the CCP leadership describes as one of “changes unseen in a century.”
Unlike the earlier reform era, when economic growth was the primary source of the party’s legitimacy, the current leadership under President Xi Jinping has redefined legitimacy in terms of national security and resilience.
The plan’s core objective – “high-quality development” – is a political euphemism for an economy that is highly controlled, technologically autonomous and insulated from Western pressure. The target for gross domestic product (GDP) growth has been set at 4.5 to 5 percent, the lowest since the 1990s. This lower target is a deliberate political choice. The CCP is willing to sacrifice short-term, debt-driven expansion to build an economic fortress that serves the party’s long-term strategic interests.
The inclusion of the concept of “New Quality Productive Forces” (NQPFs) in the plan reflects Beijing’s effort to shift China away from scale-driven growth and toward technologically advanced, strategically autonomous industrial development. The state is directing huge amounts of capital into AI, quantum computing and advanced manufacturing. However, the ultimate goal is not purely commercial profitability, but rather the creation of an “intelligent technology economy” that ensures China’s strategic autonomy and military-civil fusion. The economy is thus weaponized as a tool for statecraft and deterrence.
The sidelining of dual circulation
To understand the 15th Five-Year Plan, it is equally important to examine what Beijing has de-emphasized: the dual circulation strategy.
Introduced with great fanfare in the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025), dual circulation aimed to balance a robust domestic consumer market (internal circulation) with international trade (external circulation). The strategy was meant to insulate China from global volatility while still leveraging global markets.
However, in the drafting of the 15th Five-Year Plan, the phrase “dual circulation” has lost its luster, appearing far less frequently than before.
Has the strategy been abandoned? Has it failed? Or has the CCP simply changed its view?
The reality is a mix of failure and evolution. The internal circulation component has largely failed to materialize as envisioned. Despite repeated pledges to boost domestic consumption, Chinese household spending remains anemic. The CCP has proven unwilling to implement the radical structural reforms required to truly empower consumers – such as an extensive transfer of wealth from the state to households, or a complete overhaul of the fiscal system that currently incentivizes local governments to over-invest in infrastructure rather than in social safety nets. Empowering the consumer fundamentally requires relinquishing a degree of centralized state control over capital, a trade-off the CCP is unwilling to make.
Instead of abandoning the concept entirely, the CCP has adopted a more defensive, security-oriented posture. The 15th Plan moves beyond dual circulation and toward a strategy aimed at positioning China as the architect of global supply chains
The focus is no longer on participating safely in globalization, but on reconfiguring the global system so that other nations become dependent on Chinese standards and green technologies, while China eliminates its own dependencies on the West. The failure to stimulate domestic demand means China must continue to export its industrial overcapacity, turning trade into a geopolitical weapon.
Domestic stability at all costs
Domestically, the 15th Five-Year Plan is an exercise in crisis management. The real estate sector, once a primary engine of growth, has been relegated to a stabilizing role rather than a speculative one. The CCP recognizes that the old growth model is politically unsustainable.
However, the pivot to advanced manufacturing and high-tech industries presents a severe political dilemma: These capital-intensive sectors cannot absorb the millions of young graduates entering the workforce each year. Youth unemployment remains a potent threat to social stability. The party’s response, as outlined in the plan, involves expanding public services and strengthening social welfare provisions to mitigate discontent. Yet the fundamental tension remains: The state’s focus on strategic, capital-intensive industries does not align with the immediate employment needs of its populace.
More by Henrique Schneider
This tension is managed through heightened political control. The plan calls for tighter regulation of local governments and a crackdown on “involution” (destructive internal competition). The center is reasserting authority over the provinces, ensuring that local economic activities strictly serve the national strategic agenda rather than localized, debt-fueled growth.
Scenarios
For the world economy, China’s 15th Five-Year Plan signals a prolonged period of structural friction. By doubling down on manufacturing dominance and clean-technology exports (such as solar panels, electric vehicles and batteries), China is effectively exporting its domestic overcapacity. This is not an accident but a feature of the plan: Maintaining an extensive industrial base serves both domestic employment and geopolitical leverage.
Foreign businesses operating in China face a bifurcated landscape. While the plan speaks of “high-level opening up,” this is highly selective. Opportunities will exist in sectors where China still requires foreign expertise or capital, but the overarching trend is toward import substitution and the preferential treatment of domestic champions.
Most likely: The fortress economy succeeds
In this scenario, the CCP successfully manages the structural slowdown. State-directed investments in New Quality Productive Forces yield tangible breakthroughs in AI, semiconductors and green technology, much like the DeepSeek example. The state’s control over capital prevents a systemic financial crisis, and targeted subsidies keep the domestic market just stable enough to prevent social unrest.
Politically, this solidifies President Xi’s doctrine. The party proves that its model of state-directed capitalism can out-compete Western liberal democracies, particularly in deploying technologies at scale. While overall GDP growth remains sluggish (around 4 percent), the quality of growth aligns with the party’s security objectives. China becomes resilient to external sanctions, and its dominance in global supply chains for critical minerals and green tech forces even hostile nations to maintain economic ties. The economy functions perfectly as a political shield, securing the CCP’s domestic legitimacy and international leverage.
Somewhat likely: The employment crisis fractures stability
This scenario envisions a failure to reconcile the structural economic shift with domestic social needs. The transition away from real estate and low-end manufacturing happens too quickly, while new high-tech sectors fail to create sufficient employment for the millions of university graduates. The failure of the internal circulation strategy becomes a critical vulnerability.
The resulting chronic youth unemployment breeds deep social resentment, challenging the CCP’s core narrative of providing prosperity in exchange for political compliance. To manage the unrest, the CCP is forced to divert resources away from strategic technological investments to unproductive public works or expanded welfare programs, undermining the core goals of the 15th Five-Year Plan.
In response to internal pressure, the state becomes even more authoritarian, increasing domestic surveillance and potentially adopting a more aggressive, nationalistic foreign policy (such as escalating tensions over Taiwan) to distract from domestic economic failures. The economy becomes a political liability.
Least likely: Global backlash and economic isolation
In this scenario, China’s aggressive export of its industrial overcapacity – particularly in EVs, batteries and legacy semiconductors – triggers a severe, coordinated global backlash. The United States, the European Union and key emerging markets (such as Brazil and India) simultaneously impose harsh tariffs and trade barriers against Chinese goods, recognizing that its exports are heavily subsidized tools of statecraft.
Because the domestic consumer market remains too weak to absorb the surplus production (the ultimate failure of dual circulation), the closure of the international market proves devastating. The resulting industrial bankruptcies lead to a localized financial crisis within China. The CCP is forced to retreat from its ambitions for technological supremacy and must undertake painful, politically damaging structural reforms, including a significant devaluation of the yuan. Beijing’s assertion that its political control yields superior economic outcomes is fundamentally discredited, leading to internal factional struggles within the CCP leadership over the country’s future direction.
Contact us today for tailored geopolitical insights and industry-specific advisory services.
Sign up for our newsletter
Receive insights from our experts every week in your inbox.
