Follow us on social

China Sandy Cay

China, Philippines both plant flag on reef, escalating Maritime tussle

Washington will need to nuance its response as it gets drawn in as Manila’s treaty ally

Analysis | QiOSK

The Philippines-China maritime tussle just edged up a notch this past week, with Chinese television reporting a Chinese flag-planting operation in a tiny cluster of sand banks in the South China Sea known as Sandy Cay.

Chinese personnel left after their operation, which apparently took place earlier in the month. The Philippines responded in kind soon after the announcement, with a combined team of its navy, coast guard, and police mirroring the Chinese action. The incidents took place in the backdrop of the major U.S.-Philippine annual exercise Balikatan, which began on April 21.

The situation in the South China Sea has been deteriorating since late 2023, when clashes between Manila and Beijing escalated dramatically. A limited agreement in July 2024 on the most dangerous flashpoint, the Second Thomas Shoal, has held up until now. Manila has been running resupply missions without incident to the tiny contingent of Philippine troops perched there since then. But as we predicted in August 2024, clashes have indeed spread to new geographies, keeping the overall tensions high.

Manila, which has named the West Philippine Sea its EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) as, might worry that Beijing’s show-of-sovereignty operation is designed to eventually occupy it and build military structures, similar to what China did at nearby Subi Reef about a decade ago.

But the operation was likely not just about possession of the reef — but about pushing the question of maritime rights and jurisdiction over the surrounding waters. In 2016, an international tribunal ruled these waters as being indisputably a part of the Philippine EEZ. But Sandy Cay, referenced as a high-tide feature in the ruling, is likely entitled to a territorial sea of 12 nautical miles, overlapping with Chinese-militarized Subi Reef. (The tribunal explicitly refused to rule over the sovereignty of Sandy Cay and determined Subi Reef to be a low-tide elevation generating neither a sovereignty claim nor its own territorial sea or EEZ.)

Sandy Cay is also very close to Thitu island where Manila maintains a military base. Thitu is also the only Philippine-controlled island with a permanent civilian population.

Chinese maritime coercion and illegal intrusions are increasingly of concern, not just to the Philippines, but also to wider Southeast Asia. The United States has been getting more involved in the imbroglio, deepening its commitment to its treaty ally, the Philippines, including with new U.S. military sites on the Philippine mainland.

If the current simmer boils over, U.S. troops could be exposed to risks over tiny features in the ocean that are arguably not a U.S. vital interest. A nuanced approach will be required of the alliance to both deter Chinese behavior and avoid stumbling into armed conflict at the same time.


Top photo credit: You Tube /Taiwan Plus News
Analysis | QiOSK
Iran
Top image credit: An Iranian man (not pictured) carries a portrait of the former commander of the IRGC Aerospace Forces, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, and participates in a funeral for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, Iranian nuclear scientists, and civilians who are killed in Israeli attacks, in Tehran, Iran, on June 28, 2025, during the Iran-Israel ceasefire. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto VIA REUTERS)

First it was regime change, now they want to break Iran apart

Middle East

Washington’s foreign policy establishment has a dangerous tendency to dismantle nations it deems adversarial. Now, neoconservative think tanks like the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and their fellow travelers in the European Parliament are openly promoting the balkanization of Iran — a reckless strategy that would further destabilize the Middle East, trigger catastrophic humanitarian crises, and provoke fierce resistance from both Iranians and U.S. partners.

As Israel and Iran exchanged blows in mid-June, FDD’s Brenda Shaffer argued that Iran’s multi-ethnic makeup was a vulnerability to be exploited. Shaffer has been a vocal advocate for Azerbaijan in mainstream U.S. media, even as she has consistently failed to disclose her ties to Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR. For years, she has pushed for Iran’s fragmentation along ethnic lines, akin to the former Yugoslavia’s collapse. She has focused much of that effort on promoting the secession of Iranian Azerbaijan, where Azeris form Iran’s largest non-Persian group.

keep readingShow less
Ratcliffe Gabbard
Top image credit: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA director John Ratcliffe join a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and his intelligence team in the Situation Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025. The White House/Handout via REUTERS

Trump's use and misuse of Iran intel

Middle East

President Donald Trump has twice, within the space of a week, been at odds with U.S. intelligence agencies on issues involving Iran’s nuclear program. In each instance, Trump was pushing his preferred narrative, but the substantive differences in the two cases were in opposite directions.

Before the United States joined Israel’s attack on Iran, Trump dismissed earlier testimony by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, in which she presented the intelligence community’s judgment that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.” Questioned about this testimony, Trump said, “she’s wrong.”

keep readingShow less
Mohammad Bin Salman Trump Ayatollah Khomenei
Top photo credit: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (President of the Russian Federation/Wikimedia Commons); U.S. President Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr) and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei (Wikimedia Commons)

Let's make a deal: Enrichment path that both Iran, US can agree on

Middle East

The recent conflict, a direct confrontation that pitted Iran against Israel and drew in U.S. B-2 bombers, has likely rendered the previous diplomatic playbook for Tehran's nuclear program obsolete.

The zero-sum debates concerning uranium enrichment that once defined that framework now represent an increasingly unworkable approach.

Although a regional nuclear consortium had been previously advanced as a theoretical alternative, the collapse of talks as a result of military action against Iran now positions it as the most compelling path forward for all parties.

Before the war, Iran was already suggesting a joint uranium enrichment facility with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Iranian soil. For Iran, this framework could achieve its primary goal: the preservation of a domestic nuclear program and, crucially, its demand to maintain some enrichment on its own territory. The added benefit is that it embeds Iran within a regional security architecture that provides a buffer against unilateral attack.

For Gulf actors, it offers unprecedented transparency and a degree of control over their rival-turned-friend’s nuclear activities, a far better outcome than a possible covert Iranian breakout. For a Trump administration focused on deals, it offers a tangible, multilateral framework that can be sold as a blueprint for regional stability.

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.