Follow us on social

Dangerous China-Philippine clashes could be expanding

Dangerous China-Philippine clashes could be expanding

Serious incidents in the South China Sea are spreading well beyond the Second Thomas Shoal, pulling the US in deeper

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

Just when it looked like we could take a breather in the South China Sea, it turns out we cannot. Three new collisions were reported between Chinese and Filipino coast guard vessels on August 19. Two Filipino craft were damaged in the incident, with any effects on the Chinese ships as yet unknown.

Predictably, China and the Philippines accused each other of being responsible, with Manila also threatening to lodge a case.

The latest incident was not as bad as the clash on June 17, when Chinese vessels attacked vessels carrying Philippine sailors delivering supplies to their fellow soldiers stationed precariously on a rusting ship on the contested Second Thomas Shoal. In that clash, Chinese coast guard personnel forcibly boarded Philippine craft and eight Philippine naval crew were injured, one seriously.

The June 17 incident led to bilateral talks and a “provisional” agreement between Manila and Beijing. This turned out to be only a temporary respite. Barely had the ink dried on the deal, when its details were disputed by both sides. The agreement was followed by a incident-free resupply mission, but interpretations of this success too differed sharply. Most recently, Manila stated that the agreement could be reviewed.

Beijing has consistently insisted that while the Philippine military position on the Second Thomas Shoal (known as Ayungin Shoal in the Philippines and Renai Reef in China) could be supplied with “living necessities,” any materials or equipment to strengthen the beached ship could not be permitted. Manila, with a 2016 international tribunal ruling at the Hague in its favor, has maintained its absolute legal right to unimpeded access to the shoal and surrounding waters.

China’s obsession with restricting Philippine activity in the tiny Second Thomas Shoal is provocative, irrational, and hard to explain.

The current clash took place not at the Second Thomas Shoal, but near Sabina Shoal, located nearly 30 nautical miles closer to the Philippines shoreline. The two Philippine craft were laden with supplies to troops based in the Lawak and Flat islands, which are under Manila’s military control. The Sabina Shoal clash was preceded by another incident, this time involving aircraft, over the skies of Scarborough Shoal, another long-disputed feature, and the site of a tense 2012 standoff.

Thus, while the Second Thomas Shoal remains central to China-Philippines tensions and Scarborough Shoal has always been in play, serious incidents are now occurring elsewhere as well. In the coming weeks and months, similar clashes could spread further, perhaps even near places such as Thitu Island, where a much larger Philippine military contingent guards a small civilian population.

But expanding geography is only one sign that the test of wills in the South China Sea may not ease anytime soon. Manila, having long accused Beijing of environmental destruction in its waters, is now seriously considering lodging a second case at the Hague tribunal against China. While Beijing boycotted and heavily criticized the 2016 case but did little else, this time may be different.

The Philippines is also debating lifting a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the waters (though reports it had already done so were subsequently denied.)

Meanwhile, Washington, while correctly backing its oldest ally in Asia in the latest incident, is expanding its military footprint in the Philippines in ways that raise Chinese insecurities on Taiwan, a core issue for Beijing. The United States is also joining up with a raft of allies, including those beyond the region such as Canada, to conduct joint military patrols in the fraught seas. But it is in nobody’s interest for the already worrying bilateral contest to escalate into a great power crisis.


Soldiers stand guard as they wait for the arrival of government officials at the Pagasa Island (Thitu Island) at the Spratly group of islands in the South China Sea, Palawan province, Philippines, 16 May 2024. Matrix Images/Mark R Cristino

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Nato Summit Trump
Top photo credit: NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Donald Trump, at the 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague (NATO/Flickr)

Did Trump just dump the Ukraine War into the Europeans' lap?

Europe

The aerial war between Israel and Iran over the past two weeks sucked most of the world’s attention away from the war in Ukraine.

The Hague NATO Summit confirms that President Donald Trump now sees paying for the war as Europe’s problem. It’s less clear that he will have the patience to keep pushing for peace.

keep readingShow less
Antonio Guterres and Ursula von der Leyen
Top image credit: Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

UN Charter turns 80: Why do Europeans mock it so?

Europe

Eighty years ago, on June 26, 1945, the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco. But you wouldn’t know it if you listened to European governments today.

After two devastating global military conflicts, the Charter explicitly aimed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” And it did so by famously outlawing the use of force in Article 2(4). The only exceptions were to be actions taken in self-defense against an actual or imminent attack and missions authorized by the U.N. Security Council to restore collective security.

keep readingShow less
IRGC
Top image credit: Tehran Iran - November 4, 2022, a line of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps troops crossing the street (saeediex / Shutterstock.com)

If Iranian regime collapses or is toppled, 'what's next?'

Middle East

In a startling turn of events in the Israel-Iran war, six hours after Iran attacked the Al Udeid Air Base— the largest U.S. combat airfield outside of the U.S., and home of the CENTCOM Forward Headquarters — President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire in the 12-day war, quickly taking effect over the subsequent 18 hours. Defying predictions that the Iranian response to the U.S. attack on three nuclear facilities could start an escalatory cycle, the ceasefire appears to be holding. For now.

While the bombing may have ceased, calls for regime change have not. President Trump has backtracked on his comments, but other influential voices have not. John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, said Tuesday that regime change must still happen, “…because this is about the regime itself… Until the regime itself is gone, there is no foundation for peace and security in the Middle East.” These sentiments are echoed by many others to include, as expected, Reza Pahlavi, exiled son of the deposed shah.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.